Also, could you respond in full e.g. "Flynn was pardoned by Trump, meaning that..." so I don't have to guess what you mean.
EDIT: ok it was done, thanks. Although I'd add he was caught not disclosing talking to an ambassador (he is afaik allowed to do so), and then accused of lying about it to the FBI.
Per my post, there was a lot of politicking in that incitement that by itself would have justified the pardon.
TBH, I just don't know - which is what I mean by "politicking"; The more I read the more I feel I'm either missing something, or fed mis-information or a skewed perspective.
There was a whole thing about altered or manipulated notes during the Flynn incitement - yet Wikipedia page for Flynn barely mentions it, or McCabe, and McCabe's page mention his firing (which he says was based on an attempt to discredit him) but barely mentions Flynn..
Was that important? Was the DOJ justified in dropping charges, or was Barr corrupt? Was the Pardon justified given the FBIs shady tactics (although shady tactics might be their modus-operandi..), or not? Or maybe the pardon was more motivated by Flynn being "inner-circle" than anything FBI or Russia based. I just don't know.
What politicking there is, on a active and retired US military travelling to Russian since 2013, having high level contacts with the Russian government, and then lying about it, to its own country Law enforcement?
Again, these characterisations are easy. They are made on both sides. I can construct a similar line about the FBI incitement, casually throwing in disputed or hard-to-verify facts.
I'd pick you up on "lying about it" - I consider the FBI to be heavily politically active, esp in the Trump/Comey times, so describing them as "law enforcement" in these situations is misleading.
I added detail to my previous comment, but I don't really trust the outcome of an incitement where the FBI held all the cards - you get the same thing when people accept one-sided plea deals from the police - "they even admitted they did it".
There's a whole lot of context around this. For example, you can characterise the FBI as simply "Law enforcement", but you could characterise the DOJ-under-Barr the same. If you have reason to doubt/discredit the DOJ, them you should equally allow for the same wrt the FBI-under-Comey.
In 2015 Flynn was on RT, a Russian state-controlled international television network, funded by the federal tax budget of the Russian government. He advocated
for the US foreign policy actions across the world to work closely with Russia.
He was paid $45,000 for his appearance, but again "forgot" to report that income. What is the US bar for the word "treasonous"?
