RUSH: One year ago on this program I offered up opinions/feelings about some of the stuff going on. At the time, one year ago, Michael Flynn was the big thing. And now we’ve got the news that on the day that Trump was inaugurated, Susan Rice was frantically creating a paper trail — an email paper trail and an email paper trail timeline — designed to protect Obama. We find out from Byron York the FBI didn’t think Mike Flynn had done anything wrong!
Do you know that Comey testified to Congress that he didn’t think Mike Flynn had done anything wrong, didn’t think he had lied? And yet that investigation was pursued, and now we’ve got this indictment from Mueller where a plea deal and people say, “If he didn’t do it, then why did he settle?” ‘Cause they were driving him bankrupt! Flynn was broke. He was worried about the effect this was having on his family. But we’ve got on the Congressional Record that James Comey of the FBI told members of Congress on a committee that Flynn had not lied to anybody.
It takes us back to the actual FBI interview of Flynn anyway. It was not set up as an interview. Flynn is the incoming national security adviser. That means there’s frequent contact with the FBI and the CIA. They called over to the White House and said they wanted to come talk to Flynn. Flynn said, “Okay, come on over.” He thinks it’s gonna be a consultation. Instead it turns out to be a full-fledged interview that he wasn’t aware of. But Byron York in the Washington Examiner has a really, really great piece today on all of this, and I just want to kick it off with my comments on this from one year ago almost to the day.
RUSH: Not a big deal. It’d be standard operating procedure. We’re talking about the Russian ambassador here, and the new administration reaching out, familiarizing themselves with various representatives of other countries. It wasn’t just the Russians that Flynn was talking to. The Russian ambassador, remember, was being surveilled. Standard operating procedure. Also, we wiretap foreign officials. This guy’s phone call to Flynn therefore Flynn was unmasked. Susan Rice, hi! Flynn’s unmasked. It’s reported what he and Kislyak talked about, and, bammo!
Flynn is destroyed. Byron York, Washington Examiner: Flynn is destroyed. Byron York, Washington Examiner: “In March 2017, then-FBI Director James Comey briefed a number of Capitol Hill lawmakers on the Trump-Russia investigation. One topic of intense interest was the case of Michael Flynn, the Trump White House national security adviser who resigned under pressure on February 13 after just 24 days in the job. …
So in March, lawmakers wanted Comey to tell them what was up. “And what they heard from the director did not match what they were hearing in the media. According to two sources familiar with the meetings, Comey told lawmakers that the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn did not believe that Flynn had lied to them, or that any inaccuracies in his answers were intentional. As a result, some of those in attendance came away with the impression…”
After hearing from Comey, these members of Congress “came away with the impression that Flynn would not be charged with a crime pertaining to the January 24 interview” with the FBI. “Nine months later, with Comey gone and special counsel Robert Mueller in charge of the Trump-Russia investigation, Flynn pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the FBI in that January 24 questioning. What happened?
“
“The questioning in that January 24 interview apparently revolved around the Flynn-Kislyak phone conversations,” but Flynn was not told he was in an investigation-type interview. “The first thing to remember is that it appears Flynn did nothing wrong in having those” conversations with the Russian ambassador. “As the incoming national security adviser, it was entirely reasonable that he” would be having such discussions.
As I pointed out, even “the Washington Post reported” more than a year ago “that the FBI had reviewed the” transcripts of those phone calls and found Flynn did nothing illegal. So what happened here? Why did he end up pleading guilty to one count? Why has the sentencing been delayed until May? According to Byron York, indeed it appears the FBI did not think Flynn had done anything wrong in the calls.
If you take the Flynn thing out of this, if Comey’s assessment and transcripts of the phone call show that Flynn did nothing wrong, does this investigation ever really get going? And I don’t think it does. I think… Folks, we are living in the midst of one of the most gigantic political scandals of our lifetime.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, I want to reiterate. We’ve got two different sources — and one of them official. James Comey, at the time the director of the FBI, testifying on Capitol Hill to the various congressional committees that the FBI, in its January 24th interview with Michael Flynn, determined he did nothing wrong and did not lie. Comey told members of Congress this under oath. The Washington Post got hold of transcripts of the phone call between the Russian ambassador, Kislyak, and Flynn, and they read the transcripts.
And they’ve lied about that, and they’ve put that out there, and there isn’t any evidence of it. Flynn said he did not say that, and Comey backed it up, said he didn’t lie. And the Washington Post transcript investigation said that Flynn didn’t do it. So yet despite that, the guy has had his life destroyed. Despite that, the guy has been rendered practically bankrupt because of this special counsel investigation and pleaded guilty just to end it, apparently.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: And I am well-known radio raconteur, Rush Limbaugh. And I’ve been doing this a long time, and I am telling you that we are in the midst of one of the biggest political scandals of our lifetimes here. Okay. So stay with me, folks. I’m unpacking all of this and leading to a crescendo today that has been provided by Victor Davis Hanson.
But first, back to Flynn, why plead guilty when Comey had told Congress that he had not lied. And the Washington Post examines transcripts of a phone call between Kislyak, the lunching Soviet ambassador, and Flynn, and found that Flynn didn’t break any laws and didn’t give up any secrets, didn’t do anything wrong, and they published that.
He was the director of the Defense Intelligence Agency during the Obama administration, the military’s version of the CIA. He ran that. You won’t find a more loyal, patriotic American than Michael Flynn, and this guy is the numero uno target at the outset of this investigation for supposedly giving up secrets or making promises to undo Obama’s sanctions on Russia in a phone call to the Russian ambassador. None of it happened.
Well, there’s another figure in this. And guess who it is? According to this great piece by Byron York, it’s none other than Sally Yates, the disgraced former acting attorney general that Trump mistakenly didn’t get rid of after he was inaugurated. She’s an Obama holdover. She was the one who was working diligently in the Department of Justice to undermine Trump’s travel bans.
Well, it turns out she was fired for insubordination for failing to implement the directives of President Trump. Insubordination. But it was Sally Yates who advocated the theory that Michael Flynn had violated the Logan Act. Nobody has ever been charged under the Logan Act, and nobody has ever been prosecuted under the Logan Act. It’s an obscure, long-time-ago law that she dredged up. And all she had to do was call a couple of buddies in the media and plant the seed, “Yeah, he might have violated the Logan Act.”
That’s all it took, and here comes a never-ending Drive-By Media narrative, “Michael Flynn may have violated the Logan Act. This is something of great interest to the special counsel, Robert Mueller.” And off they were. Off to the races they were. And because he had violated the Logan Act, Sally Yates was saying that Flynn might be subject to blackmail by the Russians. But there was no lying to the FBI. None of this sticks.
There is no such thing as a special counsel investigation where nobody did anything. If they have to make up a baseless, specious crime and charge somebody with it, somebody is gonna end up being the fall guy. And it looks like Michael Flynn was the fall guy, but he didn’t know it. Or maybe he did. Which takes us to the next phase of this and that is the discovery of emails that Susan Rice has been writing to herself on the day Trump was inaugurated. And these emails are designed to give plausible deniability to Barack Obama for having his hand in any of this.
Here is — it’s audio sound bite number 2 — Fox last night, Senator Lindsey Grahamnesty appeared with details, highlights of an email that Susan Rice, national security adviser, she’s the woman that made five TV appearances on Sunday shows in one day to spread the lie that it was a video that led to the terror attack in Benghazi. That’s who this is.
Susan Rice was sent out to lie for the Obama administration, for Hillary, went on five Sunday shows claiming that a video was responsible. It was one of the biggest lies in the Obama administration — and that’s saying something — but it was right up there in the top five. She emailed herself about a meeting that occurred. Here’s Senator Grahamnesty explaining this.
GRAHAM: I found an odd and disturbing email from Susan Rice. At 12:15 on January 20th, the day of the inauguration, she emails herself about a meeting that occurred on January the 5th. The president was being briefed by the intelligence community about Russian hacking in the 2016 election, and they had a follow-on brief meeting with Sally Yates, Jim Comey, herself, and Vice President Biden.
RUSH: And here is Senator Grahamnesty explaining what Susan Rice’s email said.
GRAHAM: She quotes what the president said. “President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of the Russian investigation is handled by the intelligence and law enforcement community by the book.” She’s sending herself an email talking about a conversation on January the 5th with the president reassuring herself and I guess the president that this would be done by the book. I think that’s odd and disturbing, because we know that the investigation regarding the Trump campaign was anything but by the book.
RUSH: You talk about transparent, there’s no doubt what this was. They had been doing something. They learned that it might be discoverable, whatever it was, so they write this memo, she writes this email to herself recounting on this January 5th meeting and Obama told everybody in that meeting, our illustrious and wonderful, brave president told everybody to be legal, to go by the book.
Why would he have to tell them that? Why weren’t they doing that as a matter of course? Why does Obama have to tell his staff to go by the book? You would think that would be standard operating, lawful, routine procedure, would you not? But the president, reassuring herself, I guess the president, this be done by the book.
None of this was ever supposed to be known by any of us. If Hillary had won not a shred of this would be in the news. To the extent that they would have pursued a Russian investigation, it would have been to nail Trump and to tell any other outsiders don’t ever try this again; this is what’s gonna happen to you if you do. But we would know none of what we know if Hillary had won.
But she didn’t win. And so now everybody playing in the stacked deck on the Obama team now has to cover their rear ends, because there’s a special counsel out there looking at things. No matter how you stack the deck, things that you never expected to be uncovered are going to be uncovered.
And so Susan Rice is out there once again writing an email that, when discovered, will assure everybody that Obama wasn’t behind any of this. Why, looky here. He told his staff to go by the book. And again, I say, if you have to tell your staff to go by the book, it might mean that they normally don’t.
Two more bites before the break. Judge Napolitano, the human Eddie Munster was on Fox last night, and this is his interpretation.
RUSH: What do you mean, nobody would believe what? Nobody would believe this thing is real? Probably not. “But don’t forget that Barack Obama said I want this done by the book. He said it back on January 5th.” This is so obvious. The judge here must have been knowing what I was thinking before he went out there and made his appearance.
Something happened, something has turned up that they are worried now. ‘Cause remember, folks, this wall that has been built here, these boundaries are all about protecting Obama, and his new portrait. They’re all about that.
Now, here’s Marie Harf, Marie Harf of the Obama administration. She was on Fox this morning. She was over the State Department. She was a spokesperson at the administration over at the State Department. She’s now been hired by Fox. She’s got a Fox gig. Next up will be a book. In fact, she probably has a book too. For a lot of people, a book deal and a Fox gig is the pinnacle of their careers. Everything’s downhill after that. Dreams realized. So she has been hired over there at Fox, and she was talking to Sandra Smith, who’s one of the infobabes at Fox. Smith said, “This email that was written by Susan Rice on Inauguration Day, what does it tell you?”
RUSH: See, my friends, it is entirely normal to send yourself an email on your last day in the Obama administration where you recount a meeting two weeks prior where Obama told everybody, warned everybody, “Go by the book.” Perfectly normal! And if you worked administration you would know this, and she worked in the administration. Now, hang on. This is all part of an unpacking here today that gonna the end up with some conclusions of Victor Davis Hanson.
I really… I’m gonna be interested in your reaction too. I’ll just give you a little heads-up. He’s convinced… The way I’m reading it, anyway. He’s pretty sure that the Democrats are going to have to drop this investigation one way or the other because it’s not gonna end up anywhere near what they want (i.e., getting rid of Trump). He is convinced this thing is in the process of blowing up on them even now.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I should add, by the way, my good buddy Andy McCarthy also wrote about all of this last December, because it wasn’t just Comey who thought that Flynn had not lied; it was Peter Strzok. And that was discovered with some of what we learned between Strzok and Page and all this. But the question — and I just asked this. The question is: Was Flynn told by anybody that Comey and the FBI did not think that he had lied? Remember, the Justice Department, per se, did not file charges against Flynn; Mueller did.
So the question is, “Was Flynn told — were Flynn’s lawyers told — that the people that interviewed him did not think he lied?” You would think that if he had been told that, he might not have accepted a plea. If he had been told by that Comey had testified to Congress and that Peter Strzok thought he had not lied, that might have emboldened him a bit. It might have given him some confidence to resist.
And had his lawyer known that, the lawyer could have said to Mueller, “What do you mean, charging my client here? The director of the FBI told Congress that my client didn’t lie!” This is a huge question, if you ask me. And if Flynn was told and if his lawyer was told that the FBI didn’t think he lied, then the obvious thing there is that they thought Mueller would not stop regardless. Mueller has no limits. Mueller has not even been given a crime to investigate.
Mueller can go manufacture crimes if he wants. He can try to manufacture crimes. He can keep going until somebody commits one. There’s also… Andy has a column coming later today about the judge in the Mueller case and other aspects. The judge who accepted Flynn’s guilty plea was Rudolph Contreras, and just days after taking Flynn’s guilty plea, Judge Contreras recused himself from the case and the press has been remarkably incurious about why.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Now, by the way, it was Peter Strzok who interviewed Flynn. He was the agent who interviewed Flynn who later agreed with Comey that Flynn had not lied!
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: To review very quickly, we have learned today that James Comey told members of Congress under oath while testifying that Michael Flynn had not lied in his interview with the FBI. That interview was conducted by Peter Strzok, who also said publicly that he didn’t think Flynn had lied. The Washington Post reviewed transcripts of the phone call between Flynn and the Russian ambassador, who was being surveilled by U.S. intelligence. That’s how Flynn’s part in it was learned.
And the Washington Post — which wants somebody in the Trump regime to go to jail — said they looked at the transcript, and they didn’t think Flynn did anything illegal in that phone call. And yet Flynn was pursued ’til the end of the earth by Robert Mueller until he pled guilty to one count of misleading the agents. So the question: Did Flynn know that Comey had told Congress that Comey didn’t think Flynn had lied? Did Flynn know that the FBI agent who had interviewed him did not think he lied?
Very odd.
We all know that much of this has been done to cover whatever Hillary and Obama — and primarily Obama, frankly — did to sabotage the Trump campaign. We know that that happened. We know that Hillary was in on it and we know that Obama had to be in on it, and all of this pursuing Trump has really been designed to make sure nobody found out where all of this was actually happening. It wasn’t from the Trump campaign colluding with Russia. It was the Hillary campaign with the full knowledge of the Obama administration.
Now, one thing I want to add here is… I mentioned to you that Andy McCarthy has a column going up at National Review sometime soon. I, of course — as a powerful, influential member of the media — get advance copies of practically everything, sometimes without even asking for it. Andy’s column deals with the aspects of Flynn and whether or not Flynn knew that everybody at the FBI (chuckles) thought he was innocent. But then there’s this: The curious Michael Flynn guilty plea. The judge that handled this case that accepted Flynn’s plea was a judge by the name of Contreras, and he removed himself from the case shortly after the plea.
The bottom line here is this: A judge by the name of Sullivan replaced Judge Contreras. Judge Contreras, after Flynn’s guilty plea was recorded, leaves the case. The judge replacing Contreras, Judge Sullivan, immediately filed an order directing that Mueller turn over to Flynn any information in Mueller’s possession indicating that Flynn is not guilty. So it looks like Flynn did not know. It looks like it had been kept from Flynn that the FBI thought he was innocent. Flynn didn’t know or Flynn’s lawyer, because the judge replacing Contreras filed an order directing that Mueller (the special counsel) turn over to Flynn any information in the special counsel’s files indicating Flynn was not guilty.
Well, all they had there was Comey and the investigating agent, Strzok! Both of them had said Flynn was not guilty. Obviously, Flynn didn’t know. (sigh) It’s not obvious. I shouldn’t say that. We don’t really know. But my gosh, if the judge issues this order… We can’t say for sure what Flynn knew before he pleaded guilty. We don’t know now whether he has grounds to seek to vacate the plea. But this is smoldering interesting. Now, Judge Joe diGenova, who is the husband of the lawyer Victoria Toensing…
That’s the latest on Flynn.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: Durango, Colorado. This is John. Great to have you, sir. Hi.
CALLER: Hello, Rush. How are you today?
RUSH: Just fine, sir. Appreciate that. Thank you very much.
CALLER: I need to apologize. I’m on the tail end of a cold, so I’m gonna sound a little stuffed up today.
RUSH: I always think people with a cold sound wonderful on the phone or on a microphone. I know my voice is always deeper when I have a cold. You actually sound very professional. You sound very good.
CALLER: Anyway, I wanted to talk to you about the Susan Rice email to herself.
RUSH: Right, yeah.
RUSH: I don’t mean to be overly — but the first FISA warrant in April was rejected, and that’s —
CALLER: Yes.
RUSH: — important to remember. The first one that was accepted is October, you’re right. Yeah.
CALLER: Right. And I’d love to see that first one. And eventually I think we’ll see ’em all. But, so the first one was issued October 16th, and then it was renewed 90 days later, right before she wrote that email to herself. And I think, since clearly it’s a CYA email, I think they were CYAing the first renewal warrant, which was just a few days before she wrote her email. And I think because Hillary lost, obviously, the first warrant had been issued and was being acted on, then they renewed it right before the inauguration. I think they just were worried that it was gonna come down on them, and so she wrote the email —
RUSH: Wait, wait. Worried that what was gonna come down on ’em?
CALLER: Well, the whole FISA process and the fact that they had obtained those warrants without proper evidence. I mean, why did the FBI never ask Steele who his sources were? Why did they never ask Isikoff where he got his information? The FBI was just flying blind on purpose. And so they were all in on it, and Susan Rice just decided to write that email.
RUSH: Well, look, you’re on to something here. It’s not that they didn’t ask Steele who his sources were; they didn’t seek to corroborate what Steele told them. They didn’t ask to speak to his sources. And in their FISA applications, John, in their applications, they say that they rely totally on the reputation of Steele because of the —
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: — good work that he’s done with them on prior occasions. Even though he’s out lying to the media, he’s lying to them about talking to the media, they continued to say that our basis for the warrant is that we trust this guy Steele. They didn’t corroborate, didn’t even try to talk to any of his sources.
CALLER: I know. I know. Just absurd. Another point on FISA. Where is John Roberts? You know, he’s the chief judge of the Supreme Court. He oversees the FISA court. Why isn’t John Roberts going ballistic and wanting to know what the heck’s going on in that court?
RUSH: Well, he may be, but if that happened, we’re not gonna see that.
CALLER: I know. I know. Hey, have you ever heard of this person named QAnon? I never hear you mention it on your radio show.
RUSH: Have I heard of a person named QAnon?
CALLER: Yeah, he works the 4chan and 8chan. It’s an anonymous person, and I think it’s General Flynn, to be quite honest. Do a Google search on QAnon, it’s amazing, Rush, what’s going on in the dark web. Military intelligence is coming out. QAnon is a —
RUSH: I know what 4chan is. I know what 4chan is. Yeah, you’ve gotta be careful of this stuff. I cannot imagine Flynn would be doing anything right now given that he’s facing his sentencing in May or his imprisonment in May. We’ll see. Anyway, thanks much.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I want to expand a little bit on our previous caller. His theory on the FISA warrant application, October 16th, it gets renewed every 90 days. So the renewal would have been January 16th, which is five days before the inauguration of Trump. And that’s the day, Inauguration Day is when Susan Rice is writing the email to herself recounting a meeting that Obama had with the outgoing staff, reminding them that they’ve always done everything by the book and they’re gonna continue to do everything by the book.
Now, in this email, slash, memo, this Rice babe wrote, “From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
That’s the end of her quote from her email. “From a national security perspective, however, President Obama said he wants to be sure that, as we engage with the incoming team, we are mindful to ascertain if there is any reason that we cannot share information fully as it relates to Russia.”
Now, bear in mind that Sally Yates, the holdover backup attorney general Trump did not get rid of and who was thwarting his travel order executive memos, Sally Yates testified that she and others sent their evidence of Russian collusion to 17 other intelligence agencies.
Do you remember this? Obama decided that this intel on Russia was so bad that he shared it with the intelligence units and agencies of 17 — well, maybe not 17 other countries, because some countries have more than one intel agency like we do. But there were a number of countries involved, 17 or something like that intelligence agencies that got everything we dredged up on the Russia investigation, which was fake!
There wasn’t anything. That’s how they spread it worldwide. And Sally Yates testified that she and others sent their evidence of Russian collusion to these other intel agencies, including some foreign agencies. So my question is, was Susan Rice covering her rear end about doing that too? This was not by the book. Whatever this is, it is not by the book. To share our intel on how Russia tampered in our election with 17 other intelligence agencies? They’re sending evidence of Trump collusion all over the world. There wasn’t any!
Meanwhile, she’s writing a memo that Obama’s telling everybody as they’re outgoing, “We’re gonna follow the book. We’re gonna go by the book.” And Rice wrote that memo at the exact time Sally Yates was sending all that evidence around. The days go by and we learn more and more about what actually has gone on here. And the American people seem to be getting wise as it continues to unfold.
BREAK TRANSCRIPT
CALLER: I’m doing great, Rush. Thanks for taking my call.
RUSH: Yes, sir.
CALLER: My question is, Rush, I think one way to hasten the collapse of this Mueller investigation is for Congress, Grahamnesty and Grassley, to refer Comey for perjury and then refer Brennan for perjury. They have evidence that they committed perjury in front of Congress. And just don’t wait on Trump’s approval to continue to go up. What do you think?
RUSH: Well, don’t misunderstand. I don’t think that Grassley and Nunes and these guys are waiting for approval numbers on anything. Those numbers are relevant for how the Democrats and Mueller and all are going to deal with their investigation. That’s all those numbers mean. They don’t have nothing to do with Grassley or these Republican investigative committees. I don’t… Look, I don’t know enough to know if Comey were to be ever indicted for perjury, what would have to happen to lead up to that. (sigh) That’s the swamp going after the swamp.
I just don’t see it. But I could be… I understand your thinking on it. We’ve got people lying under oath, apparently, and you and I wouldn’t get away with that. We’d go to jail. Martha Stewart went to jail. Flynn — even though he didn’t lie — now, is going to jail. You and I most certainly would. But look, what was the…? (sigh) Oh, I just have it off the tip of my tongue. There’s example after example on this where no action is taken. They circle the wagons to protect each other.
Related Links