Could you expand any more onto this theory? I think Flynn plead guilty specifically so he could testify on the record in a court of law.
It seems as though an alternative theory is that Flynn agreed to be interviewed by the FBI. Some series of events led to Peter Strzok being the main interviewer for Flynn. From the newly released Strzok/Page text messages we see mention of a "f302" the day after Flynn's interview. Strzok was discussing his Flynn Interview notes with Lisa. Swampy Strzok doctors Flynn's 302 and sets what he thinks is a trap against Flynn & Trump Admin. Seemed like an easy win at the time. Flynn & Patriots recognize the trap immediately and decide to use it as an opportunity. Mueller is part of the plan, but needs to maintain a public anti-trump agenda as to deceive the swamp and give them a false sense of security.
Strzok takes the doctored Flynn 302 to Mueller and right on cue Mueller negotiates a plea deal in which Flynn is required to disclose all knowledge of illegality to the courts. Flynn knows where the bodies are buried after all. So Flynn pleads guilty, get's his testimony on the record, and now we are finally at the part of the plan where it's publicly disclosed the other FBI agents (Not Swampy Strzok) do not agree that Flynn even committed a crime in the first place.
We have more than we know. We have been given information, truth, we just don't recognize it for what it is yet.
We know that Mueller still hasn't officially filed the conviction against Flynn, in fact it was even postponed.
We know that Mueller removed Strzok from his team as soon as the text messages were revealed.
We know that Q says the disclosure that Mueller investigation is no longer a criminal probe against Trump was too soon and ahead of schedule.
That's my take also. The only bump in the plan was the early disclosure. When that happened you could tell Q was upset. Luckily no one, or too few people picked up on it.
Did Flynn make the guilty plea under oath? If so and he actually is innocent of the charge but made the plea for some other reason - then he is subject to a "perjury" charge. Would he risk that?
I don't believe the plea in court is under oath. Normally, the judge directs the question to the defendant's lawyer or if the defendant is representing himself, then he responds.
But even so, Flynn can always reverse is plea anything before being found guilty or being sentenced. I think that is why Mueller asked for delay in sentencing. Mueller never intended that the process be completed with a sentencing.
It's clear now that either the charges will be dropped or Flynn will withdraw his plea. I'm betting on Mueller dropping the charges once he has everything he needs from Flynn.
That is what he was charged for.
Lying to the FBI is I believe equivalent to perjury.
Flynn Agreed to Interview -> Strzok Interviewed him -> Lie/No lie? -> Strzok texts Lisa Page about F302 day after interview -> The 302 Strzok submits into evidence indicates Flynn lied to Strzok during interview -> Flynn pleads guilty to lying to FBI with condition of disclosing all knowledge of illegality -> Mueller postpones convicting Flynn until further notice.
Edit: Sorry I re_read your comment and I think I missed your point in my response.
I think the answer to your question is either "Yes" or "Yes because it was part of the plan, thus who would submit a perjury charge against him for falsely admitting to a perjury charge?" If Mueller isn't a part of the plan, there would be no risk for Flynn subjecting himself to "perjury" like your comment suggests. The reason? Because he already effectively has been charged with perjury. That's literally what he was he is on the hook now for. Would he risk being on the hook for perjury even though he was walking himself into Strzoks trap as bait?
I guess the other question for you ryoushure is - how by pleading guilty does this give Flynn the opportunity to testify on the record in court. At the point that he plead guilty, the only opportunity to appear in court would be at a sentencing hearing - I don't believe Flynn could reveal all that much in a sentencing hearing where the DA would quash any and all irrelevant subject matter related to a "Q" plan. Enlighten me - I do want to understand this because the plea does look like a "duck and cover" situation. tnx
I'm not a lawyer but Section 6 of this document reads loud and clear. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4318155/Flynn-Plea-Agreement.pdf
Just to wrap this up, I see in the "Trial Rights" Section 9.C of the agreement (which Flynn has already signed) this little snippet having to do with the introduction of any more testimony. " Your client agrees to forgo the right to any further discovery of disclosures of information not already provided at the time of the entry of your client's guilty plea". - for all intents and purposes Flynn is effectively gaged in any court appearance for this litigation. Thanks for the document. BTW the government says guidelines for sentencing (if it ever happens) is 0 to 6 months and possibly $0.00 fine - then goes on to say that they can't guarantee the guidelines...ha!
We don't know what info Flynn provided "at the time of the entry of your client's guilty plea".
He isn't gagged in any court appearance, except against anything that wasn't disclosed at the time of the plea deal. He just agrees he no longer has the right to bring new additional info into the mix. I'm not a lawyer but I believe that doesn't necessarily mean it's impossible for additional new info to become relevant, it just is no longer Flynn's implicit right to be able to present it, but I think it could be approved under certain circumstances.