[Gratia]

When the government requested a sentence outside the plea agreement, Powell was legally obligated to move to withdraw the plea. Repeat: Powell made the motion because she had to, not because she wanted to.

Powell had said repeatedly she did NOT want to have the plea withdrawn? Why is that? Why not just do back then what she is doing now?

But her prior futile legal maneuvering caused the government to ask for a sentence increase, and thus she trapped herself into doing what she did not want to do.

[Alberta's Child]

There are some Freepers who know the law much better than I do, but I’ve been saying for months that the whole defense of this case has been incoherent. Flynn’s legal team is making arguments now that would have been far more effective if they had been made BEFORE a guilty plea was entered.

Heck ... this week’s circus revolves around the sentencing hearing for a “crime” where the plea deal was made MORE THAN TWO YEARS AGO.

[AndyJackson]

Powell had said repeatedly she did NOT want to have the plea withdrawn?

Becasue the claim is that the guilty plea was obtained through fraud and misconduct by the government, which merits dismissal with prejudice. If the sanction on the government is that Flynn has to go to trial, well that is no sanction at all. That is punishing Flynn for the government's misconduct.

And Powell is in the position that she has new information about government misconduct- that FISA warrants were obtained through fraud without probable cause, which we all now know because the FISA court has grudgingly admitted the fact.