Posted on 12/16/2019 11:22:42 PM PST by knighthawk
A federal judge on Monday rejected Michael Flynn's comprehensive requests for exculpatory information that may have been withheld by the FBI, saying that the former national security adviser had waived his fundamental constitutional rights by pleading guilty to making false statements.
The order from U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan in Washington also set a Jan. 28 sentencing date in the case, and essentially crushed any remaining hopes that Flynn might see his guilty plea tossed. The ruling came just days after Justice Department Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz identified a slew of misconduct by FBI agents investigating former Trump aide Carter Page -- including by a little-known agent who interviewed Flynn at the White House in January 2017.
In his order, Flynn cited prosecutor Brandon Van Grack, formerly a member of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team, as saying, "[B]y pleading guilty in this case [Mr. Flynn] agrees to waive certain rights afforded by the Constitution of the United States," including the right "to challenge the admissibility of evidence offered against [him.]"
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
It is hard to have any sympathy for traitor Flynn. He squandered his credibility once he became a foreign agent. Shame on this not eliminating him from ever getting near the Trump administration.
Reno - Wrongo!
He got chastized by a senior judge this year for pushing climate change propaganda to an official judicial email list.
And then there's this:
Sullivan presided over the 2008 trial of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens, who was convicted of seven felony ethics violations in October. During the trial, the judge refused requests by the defense for a mistrial to be declared, after information was revealed that the prosecution had withheld exculpatory Brady material. Eight days after the guilty verdict, Stevens narrowly lost his reelection bid.
Sullivan is a good little political lawn jockey for the Left who "finds his ethics" AFTER the political assassination is complete...
Fraud on the part of the prosecutor voids his plea.
Perjury trap
It’s more like the FBI waived Flynn’s Constitutional Rights, not the other way around.
So? The effin givernment lies to get him there by excluding all kinds of evidence
I think that a plea agreement that forces a defendant to waive constitutional rights is itself unconstitutional. . . it’s self-serving for the prosecution who uses it to protect itself from error or deliberate misconduct. That cannot be waived. . . Sydney needs to immediately appeal Sullivan’s decision.
The actual outrage in all this is how Powell had made Flynn look like an un-remorseful liar. The judge alluded to the question of Flynn’s seeming assertion of innocence, when Flynn pleaded guilty under oath.
Now Flynn stands as a dishonorable man in the eyes of the court who will sentence him, courtesy of Powell.
I believe Flynn was bamboozled by Powell. Like everyone else, Flynn assumed she knew what she was doing because she wrote a book, was on TV, and agreed with him politically.
I fully realize our side will not allow themselves to see how Powell screwed Flynn, but that is what happened, and is happening.
“I think that a plea agreement that forces a defendant to waive constitutional rights is itself unconstitutional. . . it’s self-serving for the prosecution who uses it to protect itself from error or deliberate misconduct. That cannot be waived. . . Sydney needs to immediately appeal Sullivan’s decision.”
“Sydney” can only appeal after sentencing, and the appeal was waived as part of the plea, which rules out reviewing Sullivan’s decision. And “Sydney” does not want to raise Sullivan’s decision because it credibly accuses her of unethical plagiarism, and otherwise destroys her pretensions in detail.
Contrary to the impression “Sydney” gave to Flynn and the rest of the world, she did not make a valid legal argument in “defending” Flynn, she engaged in political grandstanding which (very, very understandably) inflamed the emotions of many non-lawyers.
Flynn was promised no incarceration. Now he faces incarceration. “Sydney” did that to Flynn.
And waivers of Constitutional rights have been examined literally thousands of times in every court in America. You need to read what the law says about that to understand that it is not a simple matter.
I’ve been saying for a long time that Flynn comes across as a moron in these proceedings. Either that, or he’s been part of a brilliant plan that still hasn’t come to light.
His “defense” looks like it’s been a train wreck.
I don’t know the law in regard to a guilty plea.
However - the Constitution says our rights are “unalienable,” which means we cannot renounce our rights, even if we sincerely want to.
I had hopes of a brilliant plan until I read Powell’s motion papers. Reading her nonsense made me see there was no brilliant plan.
Trump fired Flynn for lying, and it turns out Trump was right and fair, as usual.
Powell has been flying on the wings of the Stevens case (did you know she wrote a book about it Powell reminds us at every turn you can buy?) which was utterly irrelevant to Flynn’s case, but that is something most people would not understand.
The sorry thing is how easily people on our side are bamboozled by anyone who validates our opinions. Our sense of gratitude outweighs our common sense.
Now, I fear, Flynn will do time he did not have to do.
The judge is helping democrats set up Trump. He hoping the president pardons Flynn so they can find a convoluted excuse to add another impeachment charge.
“I don’t know the law in regard to a guilty plea.
However - the Constitution says our rights are “unalienable,” which means we cannot renounce our rights, even if we sincerely want to.”
That is NOT what unalienable means. People can and do waive their Constitutional rights every day in all sorts of situations. Society could not function otherwise.
It may turn out that the “brilliant plan” was simply to endlessly delay the entire process until after the Mueller investigation was done, and after the Democrats found another nonexistent reason to impeach President Trump. For the life of me, I can’t imagine why a sentencing hearing on a single inconsequential charge would be delayed for MORE THAN TWO YEARS after the original plea deal.
The charges against Flynn were very weak, and could have been defended at trial with a good chance of success.
But Flynn wanted to protect his son from legal jeopardy, something which seems to have been lost in all this.
People object to this “extortion” and understandably so, but that is the system we have until people demand change, and they will never demand change because they are too busy cheer-leading when “extortion” is used against the bad guys.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.