Consortium vs Corporate - The case of Michael Flynn

Michael Flynn popped up in the news this week and corporate media literally stated he was pushing "conspiracy theories". Media Matters also jumped on the bandwagon and decided to push their bias against Michael Flynn as well. So corporate liberal news channels have done their damnedest to poison the wells of discourse in regards to Flynn.

From Yahoo News:

Federal prosecutors are denouncing as a “fishing expedition” a demand by Michael Flynn’s new defense attorneys for nearly 50 categories of information that they contend will undercut the felony false-statement charge the former national security adviser pleaded guilty to nearly two years ago.

CBS:

Resurrecting reports of potential misconduct committed by former FBI Director James Comey, fired FBI employees Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, whom the lawyer characterized as "completely impaired by bias," Powell suggested her client was put at a legal disadvantage because of political differences.

Now we've gone through Russiagate and its origins more than enough so let's go through this once more with Michael Flynn over at Consortium News:

Exclusive: Although no actual evidence was presented, two ex-Obama administration officials destroyed the reputation of retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, portraying him as a liar and a potential traitor, reports Robert Parry.

...

Yet, amid this rush to judgment on Russia-gate, the American public hasn’t had a chance to hear from Flynn or the other Trump advisers who have been portrayed as Russian agents based on innuendo, including the contents of an opposition research dossier compiled by a former British intelligence officer and apparently funded by unknown Clinton supporters.

Robert Parry (RIP) points correctly that this is a witch hunt started by the Clintons in order to attack Trump. Sadly, this also ignores why Flynn was witch hunted...

Michael Flynn had wanted to clean up the CIA

“They’ve lost sight of who they actually work for,” Mr. Flynn said in an interview with The New York Times in October 2015. “They work for the American people. They don’t work for the president of the United States.” He added, speaking of the agency’s leadership: “Frankly, it’s become a very political organization.” Mr. Flynn’s assessment that the C.I.A. is a political arm of the Obama administration is not widely shared by Republicans or Democrats in Washington. But it has appeared to have been internalized by the one person who matters most right now: Mr. Trump.

This made him a target of the CIA director, John Brennan. Now go back to Perry

Though Flynn clearly can be faulted for his judgment, he was, in a sense, a marked man the moment he accepted the job of national security adviser. In summer 2016, Democrats seethed over Flynn’s participation in chants at the Republican National Convention to “lock her [Hillary Clinton] up!”

Then, just four days into the Trump presidency, an Obama holdover, then-acting Attorney General Sally Yates, primed the Flynn perjury trap by coming up with a novel legal theory that Flynn – although the national security adviser-designate at the time of his late December phone calls with Kislyak – was violating the 1799 Logan Act, which prohibits private citizens from interfering with U.S. foreign policy.

But that law – passed during President John Adams’s administration in the era of the Alien and Sedition Acts – was never intended to apply to incoming officials in the transition period between elected presidential administrations and – in the past 218 years – the law has resulted in no successful prosecution at all and thus its dubious constitutionality has never been adjudicated.

Robert Parry goes further in detail than the corporate news ever could. Ignoring vast amounts of context, you won't learn that Michael Flynn was falsely accused by the FBI for their witch hunt against Trump, that Comey and Brennan spearheaded the issue, and other Obama officials were using this for their own ends such as Sally Yates.

But again, the major issue as Parry puts out is the double standard:

While Flynn’s humiliation has brought some palpable joy to the anti-Trump “Resistance” – one more Trump aide being taken down amid renewed hope that this investigation will somehow lead to Trump’s resignation or impeachment – many of the same people would be howling about trampled civil liberties if a Republican bureaucracy were playing this game on a Democratic president and his staff.

Indeed, in the turnabout-is-fair-play department, there is some equivalence in what is happening over Russia-gate to what the Republicans did in the 1990s exploiting their control of the special-prosecutor apparatus in the first years of Bill Clinton’s presidency when interminable investigations into such side issues as his Whitewater real-estate deal and the firing of the White House travel office staff plagued the Clinton administration.

Similarly, Republicans seized on the deaths of four U.S. diplomatic personnel on Sept. 11, 2012, in Benghazi, Libya, to conduct a series of lengthy investigations to tarnish Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s tenure and raise questions about her judgment. Democrats understandably called these attacks partisan warfare in legal or investigative garb.

What I have heard from many Hillary Clinton supporters in recent months is that they don’t care about the unfairness of the Russia-gate process or the dangerous precedents that such politicized prosecutions might set. They simply view Trump as such a danger that he must be destroyed at whatever the cost.

Now make no mistake. Michael Flynn is no hero to the common man or anything else. The issue here is the fact that the CIA can launch a coup against their opponents and have done so against Trump for various reasons such as trying to change the electoral outcome of an election where Hillary lost to a game show host. The Democrats are still corrupt to the point that such corruption should collapse them as a party.

For those that don't look into the victims of Russiagate from whistleblowers to administration, you should truly view what may occur to a progressive that actually attains the White House. The CIA and FBI will target your campaign. They will work to undermine you.

And this can have deadly results as presidents can attest.