Can you clarify? Do you mean by withdrawing his original plea?
One of my criticisms of Powell (of many) has been her relentless antagonism toward the government in this case.
Put aside whether the criticism is justified; was it necessary in the way in which it was expressed and how it was expressed? Again, put aside the truth of the matter, where is the common sense in the matter?
At the very beginning Powell insisted she did not want to move to have the plea withdrawn. I heard her say it myself.
Now, there were grave legal and logical problems with her refusal to move to withdraw the plea in the context of her overall argument. There were also grave legal and logical arguments with her complete omission of arguing ineffective assistance of counsel.
Nevertheless, as non-nonsensical as these two aspects were, they made complete sense from a practical point of view. If she moved to withdraw the plea, then Flynn would be required to commit perjury. And if she argued ineffective assistance of counsel, she would invite a devastating refutation which undermined the “public” reasons for the plea.
I predicted several times that her style of antagonism and public airing against the government, as well as her legal position, was going to get the government to drop the support of probation and recommend incarceration. That was not a foregone consequence, it was just common sense which had a good chance of happening.
It happened. And once it happened Powell was LEGALLY REQUIRED to move to withdraw the plea. She did not choose to do so.
And once she moved to withdraw the plea, she necessarily had Flynn confess to perjury. Similarly, she now had to assert ineffective assistance of original counsel, which invited disclosures from the law firm highly damaging to Flynn’s and Powell’s credibility.
BTW, Powell also forced Flynn into making humiliating assertions in his “declaration” which are totally at odds with his public persona. But he needed to humiliate himself in this way in order to support the motion. The analysis of Flynn’s humiliating statements has not been publicly made anywhere, that I have seen, but they are there and it will only take time. This will probably be in conjunction with disclosures from his original lawyers, if they are made.
The last thing Powell wanted to happen is have Flynn and Flynn’s lawyers testify. She at least “got” that part. Now this appears to be exactly what Sullivan is aiming at, hearings, regardless of how he eventually decides the case.
Barr appeared to take Powell off the hook, much to her relief. And IMO Barr wanted to put a stop to Powell’s mishandling of the case by doing so, as her screw-ups could interfere with Durham.
But Powell so jerked the court around with her political statements and lack of legal coherence, that Sullivan as a matter of personal integrity appears to not be letting her off the hook. In that respect, this is on Powell and Powell only.