Did Obama give a tell about Flynn investigation in his last press conference?

In her excellent AT piece on the FBI's recently released debriefing notes on the infamous January 5, 2017 White House meeting, Andrea Widburg begins by noting that the breaking story is so big that both the New York Times and Washington Post promptly ignored it.

Suppression of that sort appears to be a reliable gauge on how damaging the news is for privileged actors in the Democrat Party.  Normally, the NYT will respond with immediate damage control buried somewhere under page one, spinning the news to create the narrative for other news outlets.

But in this instance, the spin cycle is a little more challenging.  This requires some real effort and creativity.

Andrea gave the partisan media their angle for the bombshell of President Obama directing the FBI to ensure that it puts "the right people" on the Flynn persecution: "The phrase 'the right people' also raises the possibility that Obama was not merely ensuring that a delicate project got proper staffing. Instead, it suggests he was making sure a conspiracy stayed within a small group of trusted Deep State operatives."

The narrative for the establishment media has to be that Obama was referring to having the right people in the sense of having true professionals to ensure that everything was done by the book for such a sensitive matter.  Mr. Obama didn't want to come across as being political, let alone directly engaged in a criminal enterprise against the president-elect.

The problem for the narrative is that it is intellectually impossible to make the argument that Obama was ensuring professionalism.  Why?  Because the same FBI debriefing notes show that Director James Comey told Obama that the basis for the Flynn investigation — the Flynn phone calls with Ambassador Kislyak — "appear[ed] legit."

With no legal predicate to "investigate" the incoming national security adviser, the delicate project was making sure that the corrupt Obama administration didn't get caught — not only in its efforts against Lt. General Michael Flynn, but in the overarching plot to destroy and get rid of Trump.

Criminologists will tell you that most criminals give themselves away in one way or another.  They leave signs.  Guilty consciences cause them to make awkward and telling statements.  This brings us to Obama's last press conference on December 16, 2016.  It is a must re-see.

The context of the press conference was within Obama's full knowledge that even with the press having his back, there was a remote possibility that the criminal spying operation to destroy the opposition party's presidential nominee and then president-elect could be exposed in the near future.  Mr. Obama felt compelled to announce that he stays out of the FBI's investigations.  To a spellbound press corps already focused on Russian collusion to explain Trump's victory, Obama confidently proclaimed:

Particularly, in this hyper-partisan environment that we have been in everything is suspect.  Everything you do, one way or the other.  Umm.  One thing that I have done, is, to be pretty scrupulous about not wading into investigation decisions or prosecution decisions or decisions not to prosecute.  Uh, I have tried to be really strict in my own behavior about, uh, preserving the independence of law enforcement, uh, free from my own judgments and political assessments in some cases.  Uh, and, I don't know why I would stop now.

Well, we now know that Mr. Obama did a little more than wade into investigation decisions.  Who could have predicted that the public would become privy to the real reason for the January 5 meeting?

In her excellent AT piece on the FBI's recently released debriefing notes on the infamous January 5, 2017 White House meeting, Andrea Widburg begins by noting that the breaking story is so big that both the New York Times and Washington Post promptly ignored it.

Suppression of that sort appears to be a reliable gauge on how damaging the news is for privileged actors in the Democrat Party.  Normally, the NYT will respond with immediate damage control buried somewhere under page one, spinning the news to create the narrative for other news outlets.

But in this instance, the spin cycle is a little more challenging.  This requires some real effort and creativity.

Andrea gave the partisan media their angle for the bombshell of President Obama directing the FBI to ensure that it puts "the right people" on the Flynn persecution: "The phrase 'the right people' also raises the possibility that Obama was not merely ensuring that a delicate project got proper staffing. Instead, it suggests he was making sure a conspiracy stayed within a small group of trusted Deep State operatives."

The narrative for the establishment media has to be that Obama was referring to having the right people in the sense of having true professionals to ensure that everything was done by the book for such a sensitive matter.  Mr. Obama didn't want to come across as being political, let alone directly engaged in a criminal enterprise against the president-elect.

The problem for the narrative is that it is intellectually impossible to make the argument that Obama was ensuring professionalism.  Why?  Because the same FBI debriefing notes show that Director James Comey told Obama that the basis for the Flynn investigation — the Flynn phone calls with Ambassador Kislyak — "appear[ed] legit."

With no legal predicate to "investigate" the incoming national security adviser, the delicate project was making sure that the corrupt Obama administration didn't get caught — not only in its efforts against Lt. General Michael Flynn, but in the overarching plot to destroy and get rid of Trump.

Criminologists will tell you that most criminals give themselves away in one way or another.  They leave signs.  Guilty consciences cause them to make awkward and telling statements.  This brings us to Obama's last press conference on December 16, 2016.  It is a must re-see.

The context of the press conference was within Obama's full knowledge that even with the press having his back, there was a remote possibility that the criminal spying operation to destroy the opposition party's presidential nominee and then president-elect could be exposed in the near future.  Mr. Obama felt compelled to announce that he stays out of the FBI's investigations.  To a spellbound press corps already focused on Russian collusion to explain Trump's victory, Obama confidently proclaimed:

Particularly, in this hyper-partisan environment that we have been in everything is suspect.  Everything you do, one way or the other.  Umm.  One thing that I have done, is, to be pretty scrupulous about not wading into investigation decisions or prosecution decisions or decisions not to prosecute.  Uh, I have tried to be really strict in my own behavior about, uh, preserving the independence of law enforcement, uh, free from my own judgments and political assessments in some cases.  Uh, and, I don't know why I would stop now.

Well, we now know that Mr. Obama did a little more than wade into investigation decisions.  Who could have predicted that the public would become privy to the real reason for the January 5 meeting?