Posted on 05/13/2020 4:05:39 PM PDT by janetjanet998
Retired Judge Who Will Argue Against Michael Flynn Said Case ‘Reeks of Improper Political Influence’
In an op-ed titled “The Flynn case isn’t over until the judge says it’s over,” Gleeson and two co-authors wrote (original links and emphasis):
There has been nothing regular about the department’s effort to dismiss the Flynn case. The record reeks of improper political influence. Hours after the career prosecutor abruptly withdrew, the department moved to dismiss the indictment in a filing signed only by an interim U.S. attorney, a former aide to Attorney General William P. Barr whom Barr had installed in the position months before.
The department now says it cannot prove its case. But Flynn had already admitted his guilt to lying to the FBI, and the court had accepted his plea. The purported reasons for the dismissal clash not only with the department’s previous arguments in Flynn’s case — where it assured the court of an important federal interest in punishing Flynn’s dishonesty, an interest it now dismisses as insubstantial — but also with arguments it has routinely made for years in similar cases not involving defendants close to the president. And all of this followed a similarly troubling reversal, also preceded by the withdrawal of career prosecutors, in the sentencing of Roger Stone.
Mark should file his own amicus brief.
Judge Sullivan is a tyrant and needs to be dibarred and dimissed.
“The Senate is their Daddy and Linda has the Power to stop this instantly”
Stop it....you’re killing me.
Lindsay....do something....
L
When they were basically holding a gun to his son’s head then it is understandable why he agree to plead guilty.
I think that he did that in the WP. I saw it somewhere, but now I can’t find it.
Did his son actually commit a crime? I’m surprised nobody has looked into that seemingly critical point.
They would if we hung one of the bastards.
_______________________________________________________
I don’t think even that would do it, not that it isn’t a good idea in and of itself.
We are dealing with principalities and powers and I say that as someone who took decades to admit that there might be such things as demons.
They are in a battle for the world and the soul of all humanity. They will never give up. They see zero sum: they win or we lose. That is all there is for them.
Oh come on. If he admitted to threats in front of the judge then the rain would have really poured down upon him. Who knows what the deep state would have done to him and his family.
Was Flynn sitting in front of the judge because he had actually committed a crime? The real criminals were the prosecutors. What has the judge said about them?
They really do want to punish him for winning in 2016 (and hopefully 2020).
____________________________________________________
Maybe initially that was the motive. But now, they want to punish him for existing, along with his entire extended family, his friends and his supporters.
They’ve been forced into showing that they are rabid, unhinged, and demonic.
Look at the prosecutorial misconduct of Weissman in Enron case. Cost 85,000 jobs before completely being thrown out by SCOTUS. I hate to think what he is teaching his students.
...Flynn must know something really, really big that the Deep State cannot allow to be revealed....
_________________________
Rumors abound about CIA (and State Department?) slush funds, black accounts and nefarious doings with US Treasury funds.
I certainly don’t know, but I would not doubt they have all been looting the country wholesale, while selling us out retail.
No, I understand. At this point the Judge has an animus against General Flynn and does not want to let it go.
And Yes, the partisan appointee judge is correct on one point, that there IS a stench of improper political influence within the FBI and DOJ and Previous administration all of who conspired originated this fraudulent prosecution to deprive General Flynn of his constitutional rights.
I have been through a bunch of federal plea hearings as a defense lawyer and every single one was under oath. The INITIAL plea at arraignment was never under oath, but every change of plea hearings absolutely was. (despite all that, I think this entire thing is a travesty, but just commenting on the oath aspect
Every single felony change of plea hearing I have represented a defendant in, federal or state, was done under oath. Every one. No exceptions.
#222 The facts at the time as presented by the Prosecutors were fraudulent. His counsel had a conflict and did not inform him of information they had (agents said he didn’t appear to lie or show signs of dishonesty)
The Prosecution had also violated his very own Brady rules. Hiding exculpatory evidence.
The Judge also had a duty/obligation to know ALL the facts in the case. HE didn’t. He wasn’t in possession or was presented with all the material the DOJ Prosecutor(s) have since brought forth. He still has not been presented with the original 302. The judge said himself “things get lost”. Uh no, the Prosecution has a responsibility to retain and protect ALL evidence in a case. Not just the stuff they want to turn over. Then there was the verbal agreement between Van Greck and His original Lawyers that if he plead guilty they wouldn’t go after his son. The court didn’t know that until 2 weeks ago.
This judge created this shit show.
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.