Posted on 06/10/2020 12:54:26 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
WASHINGTON -- A former federal judge appointed to review the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss criminal charges against President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser Michael Flynn said there was evidence of a “gross abuse” of prosecutorial power and that the request should be denied.
Former U.S. District Judge John Gleeson said in a filing Wednesday that the government “has engaged in highly irregular conduct to benefit a political ally of the President.” He urged the judge handling the case to deny the motion and argued that Flynn had committed perjury.
Gleeson slammed the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case, saying the arguments from prosecutors were “riddled” with legal errors.
“The Government’s ostensible grounds for seeking dismissal are conclusively disproven by its own briefs filed earlier in this very proceeding,” Gleeson wrote. “They contradict and ignore this Court’s prior orders, which constitute law of the case. They are riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact. And they depart from positions that the Government has taken in other cases.”
Sullivan also asked Gleeson to explore whether he should hold Flynn in “criminal contempt for perjury.”
In the filing, Gleeson said it was clear that Flynn had committed perjury and should be punished but that it should be a factor considered at his sentencing, as opposed to additional charges being brought against him.
“This approach - rather than a separate prosecution for perjury or contempt - aligns with the Court’s intent to treat this case, and this Defendant, in the same way it would any other,” Gleeson wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
A judge who thinks he is a prosecutor now.
WTF cares what traitor Gleeson has to say!!
This guy is a member of the legal antifa.
said there was evidence of a “gross abuse” of prosecutorial power
Pop Quiz!
By which ex-President was former U.S. District Judge John Gleeson appointed during his time on the federal bench?
Hint for those who may be playing along at home:
It rhymes with Pill Flynnton
Gleeson is a Bill Clinton appointee. But, Roberts has told us that there are “no Clinton judges, no Bush judges, no 0bama judges. Does anyone with any sense really believe that?
Let’s see if we can sell the sheep a completely inverted view of reality.
Ex judge has lost his mind.
Withholding exculpatory evidence IS prosecutorial misconduct, and ought to be punished by lifetime disbarment and imprisonment. Who the hell do these people think they’re fooling?
” A former federal judge appointed to review the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss criminal charges”
Appointed by whom, under what authority, to do what?
Oh that’s right it’s all just Horseshiite from an Obambi Stooge/Judge.
Ok got it now.
Gleeson was never qualified to be a judge. He’s partisan and dishonest. This filing proves that conclusively.
I still think Roberts is being blackmailed by the Clinton cabal.
So, do people think this case will be officially closed by July 4th? I’ve previously indicated that it won’t be closed until after July 4th. Many said it would be closed before June, but here we are at June 10th.
Because of this increasing abuse, how many more millions can now be collected by the General?
That one was sold to the sheep under the guise of the virus that was going to wipe out the population of the World 30 times over in the next three seconds. They swallowed that one hook, line. and sinker.
Hiring someone, ESPECIALLY a judge, to review a case and author a brief AFTER he’s already published an op-ed with the conclusion you want is so - lame.
I agree; another damned misleading, lying headline. This “judge” was “appointed to review” - just who appointed him? Well, Judge Sullivan, who picked him to help him keep prosecuting the case by making his position to the three member Appellate Court. Gleeson is not, as the headline indicates, an impartial third party judiciously reviewing the merits of the case and being troubled by the DOJ position on it - he is a partisan advocate, picked by a stalling judge who has no legitimate legal case but who wants to push the Flynn case past the date of the presidential election in the hope that they can replace Trump with someone senile. Another damned set of lies from the thieves calling themselves “the press”.
I have a question that I haven’t seen addressed: If Sullivan is such a high powered judge, why does he have to bring in outside lawyers to argue the case for him? If I were on the appeals court panel, I would demand that he present his own arguments. If he can’t explain his case himself, I would rule against him without deliberation.
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.