The Flynn case wasn’t ambiguous, but you got it unambiguously backward. As the DoJ asserted in its filing to dismiss charges against Flynn, there were never legitimate grounds to investigate him. Even one of the FBI agents wrote a note asking if they were being ordered to try to entrap him. https://townhall.com/tipsheet/bronsonstocking/2020/04/29/unsealed-fbi-notes-reveal-fbi-entrapment-plot-on-flynn-n2567895
Flynn was never charged with any underlying Russian collusion crime. The whole Russian collusion narrative was a disinformation campaign. Now those who started it are under investigation by Prosecutor Durham.
Flynn was charged with the process crime of lying to the FBI. Only problem is the agents who interviewed Flynn did not think he was lying. The motion to dismiss the charges declared there was no evidence against him that could meet any legal standard of proof. No tape recording was entered into evidence. The interview forms were exculpatory and they were illegally withheld from Flynn’s lawyers and later disappeared. The charges against him were filed months after his interview. They were filed by Mueller’s team in an effort to extort false testimony by Flynn against Trump. They threatened his son if Flynn didn’t plead guilty. He was wrong to take the plea, but that whole proceeding was tainted by a wide range of prosecutorial misconduct.
The judge who refused to let the DoJ drop the charges is setting a strange precedent. Judges really shouldn’t get to tell prosecutors when they have to file charges or drop charges. Democrats about to be indicted by Durham will soon find themselves on the wrong side of this when they appear in front of Trump-appointed judges.
It is unambiguous. The FBI should not be involved in politically motivated subterfuge entrapping White House officials. The prosecution of General Flynn was a horrible abuse of the law.