Trump CINC (Conspiracy-Nut In-Charge): His Latest Spreads Faster Than Virus

Well-documented: Add following story as #16

(Only 118 days until we end this nightmare)

From The Hill this outstanding article with this headline:

“How conservative conspiracy theories are deepening America's political divide”

Intro from the article: The political *butterfly effect is alive and well in America. A seemingly trivial and misleading disclosure by the Trump administration recently sent the right-wing hysteria industrial complex into overdrive.

*Butterfly effect: When a small change in initial conditions (the weather for example) can lead to large-scale and unpredictable variation in the future state of that system.

The usual mix of pundits, conservative media outlets, and congressional Republicans all piled on, whipping the president's supporters into an election-year frenzy over a non-existent Obama-led plot to undermine Trump. The divisive, conspiracy-mongering fallout of what should have been a minor political development demands a closer look, especially for its long-term impact on political polarization in the United States.

Amid the Trump administration's mishandling of twin national crises and explosive allegations about his presidency, Trump's approval numbers remain inexplicably high. The president's uncanny political resilience must be partially chalked up to the persistence of virulent right-wing conspiracy theories, as well as the echo chambers and information bubbles that sustain them.

The latest iteration of this phenomenon involves Michael Flynn, President Trump's first national security adviser. Just weeks into the Trump administration, the president fired Flynn for lying to Vice President Pence and the FBI about discussions Flynn had with the Russian ambassador to the U.S.

Fast forward to 2020: Despite Flynn pleading guilty to lying the FBI, the Trump Department of Justice (DOJ) moved to dismiss its case against Flynn. This blatantly political abuse of the rule of law – roundly condemned by no fewer than 2,300 former DOJ officials that resulted in the disclosure of notes about a meeting at the Obama White House on January 5, 2017.

At that meeting, Obama asked the FBI director (then James Comey) if his administration should withhold sensitive information from the incoming Trump team. Obama's concerns were rooted in Flynn's calls with the Russian government, which had just mounted a pro-Trump assault on the 2016 presidential election.

While it may seem trivial on its face, the Trump DOJ feigned ignorance about when the notes memorializing the Obama White House meeting were drafted, “claiming that they were written possibly between January 3 and January 5.”

But even a cursory understanding makes it clear that the notes reflect the January 5 meeting and, thus, could only have been written on (or after) that day.

In early January 2017, as the FBI prepared to close a counter intelligence investigation into Flynn's odd financial entanglements with Russia's premier disinformation & propaganda outlet, a different Moscow-related mystery consumed America's top spies and cops.

Following Russia's assault on the 2016 election, President Obama retaliated by imposing sweeping diplomatic and economic sanctions against the Kremlin. But the normally combative Vladimir Putin, always eager to escalate an international crisis, did not respond.

That Putin uncharacteristically tame reaction shocked America's foreign policy, intelligence, and law enforcement communities.

Now this story gets real juicy:

After digging through reams of intelligence, the FBI finally made sense of Putin's behavior: Flynn had convinced Moscow not to respond. His phone calls with the Russian ambassador are what led to Putin's muted reaction.

As we now know, the FBI learned of Flynn's discussions with Russia sometime around January 3, 2017 (Note: days before the Obama meeting with FBI, et al on January 5 discussed above).

The phone calls could well have undercut Obama’s pressure on Russia and allowed Trump to cozy up to Putin just weeks after Moscow's assault on our democracy (e.g., 2016 election) convinced the FBI to carry on with its investigation of Flynn connections to the Russian government.

The next day, on January 4, 2017, FBI agents scrambled to ensure that the Flynn case remained active in the bureau's electronic system.

Flynn's legal team incorrectly claimed that the recently disclosed notes of the January 5 Oval Office meeting were written on January 4, which was the same day FBI agents raced to officially keep the Flynn investigation open.

Ergo: The Flynn legal team timeline mistook and catalyzed an explosion of Trumpian conspiracy mongering.

Conservative media outlets and personalities (see below) all claimed that Obama (and VP Joe Biden) “ordered and directed” the FBI to keep the Flynn investigation open when, in fact, the FBI had already made that decision before the January 5 White House meeting.

The GOP BS conspiracy characters jumped into the conspiratorial free-for-fall.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) claimed that Obama and Biden “devised, managed, and oversaw the FBI investigation into Flynn's calls.”

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) misstated that Obama “directed the probe.”

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) declared that Obama and Biden “kept this investigation going.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) rocketed into the conspiratorial stratosphere claiming that Obama and Biden's supposed “abuse of power makes Nixon's abuses in Watergate pale by comparison.”

Facts:

All of that Republican hysteria is undercut by the timeline above and by those present in the meeting.

For example, and at the time the soon-to-be Acting AG Sally Yates  

recalled: “Obama did not want any additional information on the Flynn investigation,” at the same time outgoing National Security Adviser Susan Rice noted that Obama instructed the FBI “to proceed as it normally would with Flynn.”

The recently disclosed notes also suggest that Vice President Biden mentioned an obscure law that Flynn may have violated during his calls with the Russian ambassador. But the FBI and the DOJ were well ahead of Biden. 

Internal emails make clear that bureau lawyers discussed Flynn's potential violation of the law before the Jan. 5 Oval Office meeting. Moreover, Yates stated that the FBI director was the first to raise it during that meeting.

But how can any facts, as stated above, get out of the way of conservative conspiracy mongering such as those statements and like this one:

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) claimed it “was Biden's idea to invoke [the law] against Flynn.” (I note: The law mentioned is the Logan Act).

Unsurprisingly, conservatives all over the place have echoed this.

Perhaps most importantly, much ink has been spilled over the FBI director's apparent comment that Flynn's phone calls “appear legit.” But, while there were no indications that Flynn “passed classified information to the Russians,” the FBI director also said that he: “potentially had concerns that Flynn spoke so frequently with Russia's ambassador,” and that was according to a Susan Rice memo.

My 2 cents and summary from this story:  It seems that every Republican forgets or pretends they never knew whether or not Flynn did or did not disclose American secrets to Moscow, bit that actually has no bearing on the fact that he lied to senior Trump officials, to the FBI about the content of his calls, and under oath in court.

The bottom line: Continued misstatements of fact such as these, no matter how insignificant on their face, will only perpetuate unfounded hatred of all things Obama (and Biden), ensuring that stark political divisions will plague America well beyond Election Day.

Trump will play every dirty card trick up his sleeve – bet on it. This story is fodder for him and rabid Conservatives like those listed above and many others we see, hear, and read about – wait and see.

Thanks for stopping by.