I wonder if Flynn has a “go fund me” page?
It would be an interesting world if we only prosecuted people for doing stuff like robbing a store, punching their neighbor, or defrauding a corporation. Those seem like crimes against society. Bad stuff, worthy of prosecution.
But the government seems focused on process crimes. You filled out your paperwork incorrectly. We interviewed you, and some of your answers were inaccurate. The government just loves to chase people for that sort of thing. Perhaps they shouldn’t.
The order to get Flynn probably came from one of Obama’s winged monkeys!
The so-called deep state, which includes Congress and a good part of the courts, is rebelling against the will of the people. The Flynn skirmish is just one manifestation. How much of what the government does, how much of the control is truly by “consent.” Hell, most people are clueless how government works, and absent understanding, how is consent even possible?
End the bloat. Disband the corrupt law enforcement agencies.
This column is irrelevant. Stevens knew he was not guilty, stood up to the government, and went to trial. The government withheld evidence that Stevens was not guilty. Sullivan was convicted, and then Sullivan overturned the conviction upon learning of the government misconduct. A necessary part of Sullivan’s decision was the assessment of how the withheld evidence affected the conviction.
The situation is 100% different with a guilty plea. That is because, unlike someone who goes to trial, the person has admitted his guilt. In this case, Sullivan reviewed the evidence and decided that the guilty pleas were supported by facts. (BTW, the “fact” that a police officer does not think you are guilty is 100% irrelevant and inadmissible as evidence).
Powell incompetently forced herself into a position she knew she had to avoid - - having Flynn explain the circumstances of his plea. After committing that huge blunder, Powell submitted a “declaration” from Flynn which is a very explicit confession of perjury, as well as presenting facts humiliating to Flynn and totally contradicting his public image.
There is no “I was doing it for my son” defense to committing perjury. To the contrary, “I did it for my son” supplies a motive proving perjury. Powell was so dimwitted, she put Flynn into the position of admitting to far more serious crimes than those in the guilty plea.
Powell has never analyzed the LEGAL implications of the guilty plea, nor has the writer of this column, who truly has no clue what he is talking about. Citing the Steven’s case is a sign of cluelessness.
If people think discovery of chicanery and slimey tactics means guilty pleas are vacated, they are wrong. Sometimes it happens, rarely. But the law in this area discusses how to analyze the facts if one is arguing that government misconduct should result in vacating a guilty plea. Powell incompetently has not done that. Why?
OT but relevant: because the public is being asked to give money for the legal defense, shouldn’t there be a public accounting of receipts and expenditures. What possible reason would there be for not doing so?
This column is irrelevant. Stevens knew he was not guilty, stood up to the government, and went to trial. The government withheld evidence that Stevens was not guilty. Sullivan was convicted, and then Sullivan overturned the conviction upon learning of the government misconduct. A necessary part of Sullivan’s decision was the assessment of how the withheld evidence affected the conviction.
The situation is 100% different with a guilty plea. That is because, unlike someone who goes to trial, the person has admitted his guilt. In this case, Sullivan reviewed the evidence and decided that the guilty pleas were supported by facts. (BTW, the “fact” that a police officer does not think you are guilty is 100% irrelevant and inadmissible as evidence).
Powell incompetently forced herself into a position she knew she had to avoid - - having Flynn explain the circumstances of his plea. After committing that huge blunder, Powell submitted a “declaration” from Flynn which is a very explicit confession of perjury, as well as presenting facts humiliating to Flynn and totally contradicting his public image.
There is no “I was doing it for my son” defense to committing perjury. To the contrary, “I did it for my son” supplies a motive proving perjury. Powell was so dimwitted, she put Flynn into the position of admitting to far more serious crimes than those in the guilty plea.
Powell has never analyzed the LEGAL implications of the guilty plea, nor has the writer of this column, who truly has no clue what he is talking about. Citing the Steven’s case is a sign of cluelessness.
If people think discovery of chicanery and slimey tactics means guilty pleas are vacated, they are wrong. Sometimes it happens, rarely. But the law in this area discusses how to analyze the facts if one is arguing that government misconduct should result in vacating a guilty plea. Powell incompetently has not done that. Why?
OT but relevant: because the public is being asked to give money for the legal defense, shouldn’t there be a public accounting of receipts and expenditures. What possible reason would there be for not doing so?
Sullivan wrote, “The government’s ill-gotten verdict in the case not only cost that public official his bid for re-election, the results of that election tipped the balance of power in the United States Senate.”
And not a damned thing happened to the perps.
L