Narratives
The most worrisome aspect of today’s poisonous political dialogue, and that dialogue’s threat to the proper functioning of a democratic society, is the objective of the participants. Elected officials, those running for office, journalists and those who disseminate opinions for a living share the blame. Almost none of them are searching for a good idea from the other side or looking for possible areas of compromise. Almost nobody is seeking the truth. The objective is to create or advance a narrative. My prime example currently in the news is the case of General Michael Flynn.
The left narrative is that he is a crook who should be punished. He lied to the FBI and pleaded guilty to that charge. He should go to jail forthwith.
The right narrative is that the FBI and the Justice Department engaged in egregious prosecutorial misconduct in service of a political agenda. The folks who should be in jail are the agents and attorneys who ran the trap.
My attempt to look the facts straight in the eye leads me to believe that both narratives are wrong because both are half right. Flynn committed a crime and so did the prosecutors.
Flynn and his son made a lot of money lobbying for Turkey. They neglected to register as foreign agents. That is against the law. It is a law widely honored in the breech in the swamp that is K Street, and prosecutions are infrequent, but it is a law. Mueller’s team induced Flynn to plead guilty to a lesser crime (lying to the FBI) in return for his help in getting the goods on Trump. The alternative was to charge him and his son with foreign agent violations. The result would have been financial ruin and jail for both of them. Flynn copped a plea to save himself and his son. Mueller’s lawyers offered the plea because they thought Flynn could provide evidence of collusion between Trump and Putin. They didn’t get any such evidence from him.
At the direction of very senior civil servants with widely documented histories of animus toward Donald Trump and his presidency, FBI agents set out to trap Flynn. They neglected to notify White House Counsel of their intent to interview Flynn (a long established prerequisite to interviewing anyone on a President’s staff). Pius James Comey acknowledged the oversight publicly, saying that he could not have pulled off such an interview if the White House had not been so disorganized. The agents neglected to issue the usual warnings about an interview that could result in charges. Instead, they sold their visit as an informal chat. One of the agents at the interview did an FD-302 (the standard report). That report was edited by an avowed partisan in violation of long established and invariably followed FBI procedure. 302s are not supposed to be edited. The original report seems to have been filed in the same safe as Hillary Clinton’s and Lois Learner’s email. The whole thing stinks and probably involves criminality.
William Barr should be held in high esteem for following the recommendation of the prosecutor he assigned to review the matter. If Flynn is charged, it should be with violation of the laws he violated.
The spotlight of indignation should be shined on the abuses of lobbyists who advocate for foreign governments, often to the detriment of American interests, and get paid a great deal of money to do so. That is a swamp that needs draining.
The most important reform called for is a crying need for the FBI to clean up its act. If the FBI is perceived to be a partisan tool, the rule of law is threatened. Democrats are the party of more government. Therefore it is natural that those who work for the government should be happier when Democrats are in power. However, civil servants are obligated to leave their political opinions at home. They are paid to execute the laws passed by, and executive orders issued by, whomever the voters have selected. Failure to do so should be promptly and severely punished.
