The  Mankato Free Press.

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency

Congress, we are pleased to note, appears to be uninterested in the immunity gambit offered last week by Michael Flynn.

Flynn, the retired general who was cashiered as director of the Defense Intelligence Agency during the Obama administration and was forced out as President Trump’s national security adviser in less than a month, is now a central figure in the investigations into whether Trump’s campaign was connected to Moscow’s attempts to influence the 2016 presidential election.

It is too early for congressional investigators to consider offering immunity, much less actually do so.

Flynn, on the face of it, would seem an unlikely recipient of immunity, which is generally granted to secure a lesser figure’s cooperation in targeting somebody higher in the organization. There are few who would outrank Flynn in 2016 Trumpworld.

Is Flynn implying he can connect the president himself to Moscow’s shenanigans? Or is he merely angling for a get-out-of-jail-free card? We sincerely hope it is the latter.

Flynn may (or may not) be in legal hot water over what he did and what he didn’t disclose, but we should all be aware of a truth he — and Trump — mocked during the campaign: A grant of immunity, or even a request for it, does not equal an admission of guilt.

This is Flynn in 2016, speaking about the granting of immunity to some of Hillary Clinton’s aides during the email server investigation:

“When you are given immunity, that means you probably committed a crime.”

This is Trump a few days later on the same topic: “The reason they got immunity is because they did something wrong. If they didn’t do anything wrong, they don’t think in terms of immunity. If you’re not guilty of a crime, what do you need immunity for? Right.”

And this is Trump last week on Flynn: “Mike Flynn should ask for immunity in that this is a witch hunt (excuse for big election loss), by media and Dems, of historic proportion!”

Logical consistency is less common than double standards in partisan politics, but Trump’s conflicting views here are rather remarkable — all the more so because the idea of Moscow manipulating American elections should not be a partisan matter.