Criminal law, Politics

Judge Sullivan To Consider Perjury Charge Against Flynn

1280px-Emmet_G._Sullivan_2012Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan has issued a couple of extraordinary orders in the case of former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn after the Justice Department moved to dismiss the case.  Sullivan has not only decided to allow third parties to argue against an uncontested motion in a criminal case, but he has appointed retired judge John Gleeson to argue against dismissal and address whether Flynn should face a perjury charge from the Court itself. I have practiced in front of Judge Sullivan for many years.  I have repeatedly praised him and expressed my respect for his demeanor and directness. However, these orders raised deeply troubling questions of judicial overreach and enmity.  Despite my admiration for Judge Sullivan, I believe he is moving well outside of the navigational beacons for judicial action and could be committing reversible errors if he denies the unopposed motion or moves forward on this perjury claim.

I was critical of Judge Sullivan’s earlier order allowing the filing of amicus briefing in this case. There is no rule allowing for such third party briefing and Judge Sullivan previously rejected such briefing.  He was right then and wrong now.  While common in civil cases, such third party arguments raise troubling concerns in criminal cases as courts allow the public to argue for enhanced punishments or other measures.  It is particularly troubling when the Justice Department itself not only found evidence of prosecutorial abuse but concluded that it cannot ethically proceed with the prosecution.  Sullivan is effectively creating a dispute in a case where the defense and prosecution agree that a case should be dismissed.

My concerns have deepened with the latest order:

“Upon consideration of the entire record in this case, it is hereby ORDERED that the Court exercises its inherent authority to appoint The Honorable John Gleeson (Ret.) as amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss,” the judge wrote.  “[I]t is further ORDERED that amicus curiae shall address whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 401, Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 42, the Court’s inherent authority, and any other applicable statutes, rules, or controlling law.”

The suggestion that Flynn could be charged with perjury for seeking to withdraw a plea is highly disconcerting. As a criminal defense attorney, my concern is that such a claim could be made in thousands of cases where defendants have sought to withdraw such pleas or allegations of prosecutorial abuse have been raised for dismissal.

The use of Gleeson both to argue against the motion and review possible perjury charges.  One role is as an advocate while the other seems to be something like a quasi-special master.  Gleeson is also a troubling choice given his public criticism of the Administration over the Flynn case.

The perjury charge would be based on 18 U.S.C. § 401, which states:

A court of the United States shall have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both, at its discretion, such contempt of its authority, and none other, as —
(1)Misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice;
(2)Misbehavior of any of its officers in their official transactions;
(3)Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command.

Sullivan knows that such a charge would not be prosecuted by the Justice Department. However, Criminal Procedure Rule 42 states that such cases are to be prosecuted by the government “unless the interest of justice requires the appointment of another attorney … If the government declines the request, the court must appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.”

Such an extraordinary action would occur in the context of an already troubling record. Judge Sullivan was previously criticized for suggesting that Flynn could be charged with treason, including an earlier blog column here. He is now allowing third parties to make arguments in a criminal case on an unopposed motion and exploring a charge that he might be able to bring against Flynn.  Judge Sullivan would not only ignore the agreement of the parties, the judgment of the Department of Justice, but effectively create a new case of his own making. At some point, the court risks the appearance of assuming both prosecutorial and judicial functions.  A perjury charge leaves the appearance of a court imposing its own notion of justice through a dubious judicially-mandated criminal charge.

 

510 thoughts on “Judge Sullivan To Consider Perjury Charge Against Flynn”

  1. Flynn Should Welcome Sullivan’s Willingness To Review Case

    The court has institutional interests at stake here, as well. Judges have an interest in ensuring that parties, including the U.S. government, are not abusing the judicial process. Here, the government has abruptly switched sides and now disavows factual and legal arguments it made for two years. Given the ongoing concerns about Attorney General William P. Barr’s politicization of the Justice Department, the circumstances are suspicious. The judge is not required simply to serve as a rubber stamp and thereby become a possible accessory to prosecutorial misconduct.

    It is likewise reasonable for Sullivan to explore holding Flynn in contempt. If Flynn now claims he didn’t lie to the FBI, it would mean he lied under oath to Sullivan during his plea. The judge can have no confidence that this Justice Department would pursue a perjury investigation, but he does have the inherent power to punish anyone who lies to him through contempt of court.

    The fact that Sullivan is seeking a full airing of these issues does not indicate what he will ultimately do. He may well end up granting the government’s motion. Besides, if Flynn and his allies are correct that his prosecution was a miscarriage of justice, they should welcome a judge’s scrutiny. Perhaps it will showcase the FBI’s alleged misconduct and how Flynn was “set up” by a deep-state conspiracy. But the strident opposition by Flynn and his supporters to the court gathering more information suggests that they have something to hide. Let’s hope Judge Sullivan gets to the bottom of it.

    Edited from: “The Judge In The Flynn Case Has Taken Some Unusual Steps. Here’s Why They’re Appropriate”

    Today’s Washington Post

    1. Peter – Sullivan is attacking Flynn, not the DoJ. Flynn is now a political prisoner.

      1. Paul, this last paragraph is key:

        But the strident opposition by Flynn and his supporters to the court gathering more information suggests that they have something to hide. Let’s hope Judge Sullivan gets to the bottom of it.

        1. The court has no business getting to the bottom of anything. The two parties to the action have come to a shared decision and there is nothing left for the court to do but a ministerial duty to approve.

          1. Young, ‘court’s have no business getting to the bottom of anything’..???

            That sounds like a laugh line from a sitcom; something Archie Bunker might have said.

            1. Anonymous:
              Courts are not roving commissions or knights errant scouring the countryside “getting to the bottom” of every uncomplained of wrong. They are forums for resolution of disputes. No dispute and their job is over, unless of course their ego gets in the way and they decide to lord over their citizens litigants ’cause ‘it’s their courtroom.” Ah, sorry judge, you’re just the temporary occupant.

              1. Mespo,

                At least half the country thinks Barr is functioning as Trump’s personal lawyer. Barr’s interference in the both the Flynn and Stone cases looks like what it is: an effort to whitewash a deeply shocking scandal.

                Michael Flynn, Roger Stone, Paul Manafort and Micheal Cohen are all what Chicagoans call ‘Men On The Make’. Or ‘Pocket Stuffers’, as famed columnist Mike Royko might have termed.

                The fact that 4 Men On The Make got that close to Trump is alarming in itself. It shows poor judgement on Trump’s part. Why would he surround himself with men of that caliber? ..Because that’s Donald Trump..!!

                1. “At least half the country thinks Barr is functioning as Trump’s personal lawyer.”
                  ****************************

                  Fifty percent of Americans can name four characters from “The Simpsons,” but only two out of five can name all three branches of the federal government. 33% of the country believes in Big Foot and that we never landed on the moon. One in four Americans do not know that the U.S. declared its independence from England. One in three cannot name a single branch of government. Three in four don’t know why the Civil War was fought. Two-thirds of millennials and four in 10 Americans overall don’t know what Auschwitz was. Six in 10 young adults can’t find Iraq on a map of a Middle East. 75 percent can’t identify Iran or Israel.

                  Still wanna use half the country as your benchmark for refined and nuanced thought?

                  1. Mespo– Add to that one congresswoman, Shirley Jackson Lee, thinks we landed on Mars and Congressman Hank Johnson is worried Guam will tip over, and Obama assures us he has been to 57 states. Oh yes, was it Don Lemon of CNN who thought the missing Malaysian plane flew into a black hole?

                    Even the Baylon Bee can’t keep up with this Master Level Stupidity.

                    4. I forgot to mention Swalwell, The Farter, makes a chipmunk look like a physicist.

                    5. Young – I am going to give Swalwelll a pass on the farting. Once you reach a certain age and your cholesterol reaches a certain level, your GP will give you pills to control it. That causes you to fart uncontrollably, usually an the most inopportune time.

                    6. Paul– Okay, Swalwell can’t control his explosive farts: not his fault. But like a true Democrat he lied about it even when the evidence was there for all of us to hear, and smell if you were in the studio.

                      Can you really trust any politician who lies about his farts?

                    7. Young – come on, who owns up to his/her own farts? 😉

                  2. Mespo, one could easily flip your logic and say that Trump supporters are the very stupidest Americans. And one could point to Exit Polls that show Trump supporters are more likely to lack college degrees. They’re also more likely to live ‘away’ from urban regions.

                    Therefore these numbers you’re tossing about could be weaponized by liberals to dismiss every Trumper. So it’s hard to grasp why that didn’t occur to you.

                    1. Who says that a college degree is a sign that someone is not stupid compared to a mechanic or plumber or heating and air guy?

                      Some of the stupidest people I know have college degrees.

                      Squeeky Fromm
                      Girl Reporter

                    2. Will Kane:

                      “Therefore these numbers you’re tossing about could be weaponized by liberals to dismiss every Trumper. So it’s hard to grasp why that didn’t occur to you.”{
                      ******************************
                      The point — whose tip you avoided or didn’t understand — was that citing half the population as believing something is no basis for the assertion made. Some of us call it the ad populum fallacy.The basis for the argument are the facts in support and the numbers on a popularity poll is about the sheerest fact you can come up with. That’s why I don’t say half the people favor Trump unless it’s germane like an approval poll where the beauty contest actually translates into votes.

                    3. John Russel
                      John Elder
                      Will Kane

                      They are all the same person and I believe link up to Paint Chips (Seth Warner). There are many more.

                      This is the type of trash we must deal with on this blog.

                    4. I disrespect Trumpsters because I cannot fathom how anyone can support a former reality TV star who bankrupted several businesses, who cheats contractors, who has cheated on all 3 wives (so far), who is a racist, misogynist, liar and narcissist. He cheated to “win the victory”. He is petty, vindictive and lacks leadership. This was known before he started smelling up the White House.

                      Then, there’s the fact that the disciples keep supporting this person who has decimated the robust, booming economy he inherited from Barak Obama. Then there’s the pandemic. He threw out the playbook left by the Obama administration, he did not replenish the national stockpile, he ignored warnings from the WHO and China about the pandemic, he called it: 1. a hoax; 2. said there’s just one person coming from China–as it turns out, in NY at least, the strain of COVID-19 came from some European who probably visited China. Nevertheless, Trump keeps praising himself for saving lives by restricting travel from Chinese nationals. Despite this ban, 400K people still entered the US from China; 3. he said 15 cases would soon be 0 cases; 4. said anyone who wants a test can get a test; 5. at briefings, and he keeps hovering over medical professionals, trying to muzzle them and control the message about what should be done to prevent more illness and deaths; 5. he supports protesters who demand that states allow businesses to re-open even though the states don’t meet the CDC requirements; 6. he refuses to set a good example by wearing a face mask; 7. he said there would be a vaccine “very quickly”. He tried to lie and bluff his way out of this pandemic. As a result, America has more COVID-19 cases than any other country. People have gotten sick and died because of Trump. That doesn’t faze the faithful.

                      That’s just for starters. Social scientists say that Trump supporters overlook all of the death and economic destruction he has caused and still fervently support him because he represents to them a backlash against women and minorities who are educated and successful, as exemplified by Barak and Michelle Obama, which is everything they are not. So, it’s not about politics, it’s not about results, it’s not about leadership–it’s about personification of the resentment of the accomplishments of women and minorities by non college educated whites who feel disenfranchised, who feel they are superior as in decades ago, but who aren’t. Those sentiments do not deserve my respect.

                    5. Natacha – how can we trust you when you have not given us your BMI, GRE, and LSAT scores, as promised.

                    6. And I disrespect you Natacha because you are a habitual liar and a fool and an obsessive who comes here to Turley’s blog every day insulting him. Which means you are an ingrate on top of it all.

                      You get the “worst habitual poster by far” Red Star for the day

                    8. Natacha — did you notice that #Obamagate has MAGA in it? Yeah baby.

                      ObaMAGAte

                      Trump 2020! Booyah!

                2. Judge Sully wants you to Meet the Fokker’s. Ain’t gonna fly. Somebody tell the Judge!

              2. Courts are not roving commissions or knights errant scouring the countryside
                ______________________________________________
                When Sullivan does start scouring the countryside you may complain.

                Right now the judge is trying to get to the bottom of why the prosecution and defense came into his court with the same agreed upon lie and wasted 2-1/2 years of his courts time with this fraudulent story and then suddenly both sides are trying to get him to drop it just as he is about to pass sentence.

                1. jinn – Sullivan accused Flynn of treason, so you need to back off.

                2. jinn:

                  Oh, I’ll complain now. It was a lie but one never agreed upon. It was believed by one side and coerced on the other. As I explained, the Judge isn’t an investigator, rather his job is to hear evidence the sides present. Not that he uncovers lest his venneer of impartiality evaporates no matter what he finds. Oh, he can do a referral for investigation but that’s not his role. Roy Sullibean needs to stay in his own lane and accept the motion. He knows it’s his only choice and getting a parting shot on Flynn just shows how small a man our “judge” really is.

                  1. mespo – Obama leaks a phone call about perjury, two days later Gleeson writes an op-ed in WaPo to have a special prosecutor, voila, Gleeson is appointed special prosecutor aka The Witchfinder General.

                    1. Paul:
                      “Obama leaks a phone call about perjury, two days later Gleeson writes an op-ed in WaPo to have a special prosecutor, voila, Gleeson is appointed special prosecutor aka The Witchfinder General.”
                      ********************
                      All mere coincidence, my dear Alice: “So many out-of-the-way things had happened lately, that Alice had begun to think that very few things indeed were really impossible.” (Chapter 1, “Down the Rabbit Hole”). All coincidence.

                  2. Oh, I’ll complain now. It was a lie but one never agreed upon. It was believed by one side and coerced on the other.
                    ____________________________________________
                    The recent revelations show that it was known to be a lie by both sides and both sides concealed evidence from the court that would have made it known to the court that the statements contained in the plea deal were false.
                    This is what Judge Gleeson is going to investigate.

          2. There is only one party now – Trump allies. The DOJ is continuing to be gutted by an AG loyal to the president and his cronies, not the justice system, the nation, or the department he supposedly heads and which he is systematically undermining in the name of supposed civil rights for presidential cronies. This is “draining the swamp”?

            1. GOP is now fully Trumpian? Good. It’s effective to have unity and leadership.

              Foot dragging saboteurs inside the Republican party have been disciplined. Errant bureaucratic rogues embedded like ticks inside the various agencies are next.

              1. Oh yeah, those hi principles of Trump really has you psyched, huh Kurtz?

                What are they again?

            2. Book: “The DOJ is continuing to be gutted by an AG loyal to the president and his cronies”

              My God, finally I hope Bug Boy is right about something!

        2. Peter – did he ask to be briefed on destroying the DoJ?

        3. Indeed July, the President and his stooges should welcome a more complete airing of what they incorrectly think or cynically claim is a slam dunk scandal.

          1. should welcome a more complete airing of what they incorrectly think or cynically claim is a slam dunk scandal.
            ________________________________________________

            It is a slam dunk scandal, but it looks like there is considerable misbehavior on both sides of this case. Your hero Mueller is not going to come out of this smelling like a rose.

    2. Quoting the Post? Now if that isn’t falling for partisan hackery with the same level of leftist TDS, it is hypocritically laughable, why waste serious time posting such useless intellectual flotsam.

      1. The post makes a good point.

        For years Flynns supporter have been claiming that the govt is doing him wrong and close look at the facts would reveal that he has been wronged.
        Now the court wants to examine the facts and Flynn’s supporters are horrified. What’s up with that?

    3. Really ?….. quoting the partisan WAPO gives you ZERO credibility. At that rate you will be quoting fatboy Brian stelter of CNN like he’s some reliable source. Give us a break with that drivel already .

      1. Phergus, considering how stupid your name looks, I’ll believe The Post

  2. Now there is a report that Flynn’s former lawyers, Covington et al, are also coming back in to Sullivan’s court.

    If true, this is getting more bizarre by the moment. Whom will Covington represent? The former client who doesn’t want them anymore? The judge’s made up prosecution team?

    What purpose can they possibly serve?

    Sydney Powell now has a whole new, very strange, issue to brief and action to oppose.

    This is getting to the point that I would not be surprised if the Court of Appeals or Supreme Court intervened sua sponte to put an end to the nuttiness.

    I am so looking forward to seeing what Professor Turley has to say about this. His mouth probably dropped open to hear of the spectacle.

    Better, I am watching with even more interest for Sydney Powell’s response.

  3. Excerpt follows. Thank God for Bill Barr!

    “By their fruits you shall know them.”
    – Gospel of Saint Matthew 7:20

    https://www.crisismagazine.com/2020/bill-barr-the-unsung-hero-of-covidtide

    Bill Barr: the Unsung Hero of Covidtide

    Arguably, Mr. Barr’s faith has made him more sympathetic to religious folks than his immediate predecessors. Just this year, according to the Justice Department’s website, Mr. Barr’s agency has supported a Kentucky photographer who was sanctioned after refusing to work at a same-sex marriage on religious grounds. The Justice Department also has urged the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn the Blaine Amendments, the anti-Catholic laws adopted in the 19th century to prohibit public funding for parochial schools, and has backed federal guidelines allowing wider latitude for prayer in public schools.

    But Mr. Barr isn’t looking out for Christians only. The Justice Department has also spoken in favor of the right of Hindu leaders in Georgia to challenge land-use regulations cited by a local government to deny a building permit for their new temple; advocated on behalf of a Muslim prisoner who sought religious accommodation for the length of his beard; and trumpeted the federal indictment of a machete-wielding New York man accused of hate crimes in attacking Jewish worshipers last year at a rabbi’s home.

    Moreover, with Mr. Barr’s blessing, the Justice Department in March conducted a week-long training session on religious freedom. According to The New York Times, the department noted, “Religious liberty is a core American value and a top priority for the department.” Justice officials further pointed out, “We pledge to protect the free exercise of religion when we take our oath to ‘support and defend the Constitution.’ We do so out of respect for the conscience of our fellow citizens and to preserve the civil society in which our liberal democracy can flourish.” The Times observed that “no religion was prioritized over another during the training sessions.”

    Putting faith in action has earned Mr. Barr the opprobrium of liberals, Catholic and secular alike.

    After Mr. Barr made a controversial defense of religious liberty last October at the University of Notre Dame, a columnist for Commonweal wrote, “Coming from someone eager to advance the agenda of a president who is a model of licentiousness and moral chaos—a president who claims he has never asked God for forgiveness—Mr. Barr’s moral preening is almost surreal.” Similarly, the left-wing magazine The Nation characterized Mr. Barr as a “paranoid right-wing Catholic ideologue who won’t respect the separation of church and state.” Such hyperbole, by design, plays on widespread historical ignorance, as neither Mr. Barr nor anyone else is calling for the United States to adopt an official, government-approved religion. Meanwhile, The Nation obviously believes in civil liberties for me but not for thee. With such comments, the publication glosses over the fact that the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion. Public officials like Mr. Barr as well as everyday Americans have the right to enter the public square to challenge efforts that undermine their faith by government fiat, which, as the attorney general phrased it, represents an “unremitting assault on religion and traditional values.”

    We should take a charitable spirit toward local and state officials, and think that they really have the public’s best interest at heart in limiting gatherings to block the spread of Covid. But our nation cannot remain on perpetual, indefinite lock-down. And when our elected leaders sidestep a fundamental underpinning of America’s constitutional history and exceptionalism—as Gov. Murphy admitted doing—Catholic clergy and laity who are willing to put faith over fear should be grateful that the Justice Department, under Bill Barr, is there to remind them that matters spiritual and eternal also cannot be bound into perpetuity.

  4. Judges are not supposed to be Circus clowns either but this is what Judge Sullivan is turning himself into.

  5. What would the factual basis for the perjury charge be? That Flynn lied when he told the court at the time of plea that his decision to plead guilty was not the product of coercion? That Flynn lied when he told the court he committed the crime of false statements (despite the element of (lack of) materiality as articulated by the government’s motion is not only a legal determination but based on evidence (Brady material no less) that was withheld from disclosure by the Government and was unknown to Flynn at the time of plea?

    Last, punishing a motion to set aside a plea in the fact of Brady violations seems patently retaliatory and punitive of Flynn’s substantial right to move to withdraw the plea and the Government’s right to throw in the towel upon discovering FBI misconduct and a probable pack of materiality in view of the pre-interview decision to close the case.

    Flynn should be removed from the case for bias by the court of appeals before this gets any worse.

    1. What would the factual basis for the perjury charge be? That Flynn lied when he told the court at the time of plea that his decision to plead guilty was not the product of coercion? That Flynn lied when he told the court he committed the crime of false statements … that was withheld from disclosure by the Government and was unknown to Flynn at the time of plea?

      You got the first part right, but not the second part. The exculpatory evidence was known by Flynn

      On its face, it is absurd to contend that Flynn did not know he told the FBI the truth.

    1. Ford, why should Judge Sullivan be impeached. ..’For irritating Trump’..?
      Your comment represents cult-like thinking.

      2. It seems that Paint Chips has adopted several new aliases. I thought the prior John Russel was Paint Chips and if he was then July Johnson is as well. (Past names include Peter, Hill Shill, Seth Warner and a whole host of others to lengthy to repost here)

        July, do you have long nails and do you have problems with regard to your sexuality?

        1. Allan– That’s what I thought to. The zany, fashion-conscious troll has returned with a new outfit.

            2. I thought they is gays. Always writing gay stuff. What’s wrong with them??

            3. Anonymous is now a gay basher. I hope he isn’t targetting Young or myself. I’m married.

              1. Allan: married to ‘who’, you old queen?? Quit cruising this site.

                1. “Allan: married to ‘who’, you old queen?? Quit cruising this site.”
                  *********************
                  Okay, I’ll call it. Anonymous has officially rolled over. Allan with a TKO.

            4. for chrissakes why don’t you comment on Judge Sullivan’s lawlessness instead of wasting space on personal attacks on anonymous blog commenters? holy mackerel you dum dums….

              1. Says Anonymous calling folks ‘dum dums’.

                I don’t mind, but it is funny don’t you think?

      3. For violating the separation of powers in the Constitution: the power to prosecute(or not) is held within the executive branch, not the judiciary. Use your brain, honey.

      4. If anyone sounds like a cultist POS…it’s yellow dogs like you. The goobermint prosecutors and the corrupt first law firm Gen. Flynn had absolutely held Brady material and made a deal against his interests. And clownheaded Sullivan want’s this discredited circus to go on ?….. WTF ?.

  7. Question – If Flynn took a plea deal after originally declaring he was not guilty and they are looking into perjury charges wouldn’t that open ‘Pandora’s Box?’ It is known that 97% of federal and 95% of state cases end in plea deals. Some were guilty and many were not. Does that mean that Brian Banks will be tried for perjury?

    1. Vicki Henry – it is like Sullivan doesn’t know how the game is really played.

  8. This is ridiculous. The FBI abused General Flynn. How could he have committed perjury when he was not under oath? The FBI agents themselves decided they did not believe he purposely lied. There was nothing wrong with his phone call, which he knew was transcribed. Flynn felt he had to abandon his defense because he had become bankrupt, and they were threatening his son.

    That’s not justice. This judge appears to be suffer from political poisoning. Dangerous in a judge.

    Some in the media breathlessly reported that Flynn wanted to keep secrets. He was the incoming NSA. It was his job, and entirely usual, to speak with diplomats. The Atlantic is still embarrassingly claiming that Russia got Trump elected and that there was collusion. The latest tinfoil hat conspiracy theory is that Mueller could not find evidence that Trump colluded because it was Flynn organizing it, and lying about it. Patently absurd. Calls to diplomats are recorded.

    How can you reason with people who engage in this kind of savage trench warfare? Who are just fine with lawless behavior targeting Americans, just as long as it helps Democrats.

    1. This is ridiculous. The FBI abused General Flynn. How could he have committed perjury when he was not under oath?
      _______________________________________________________
      That is pretty simple to answer. He was under oath when he told the judge that he lied to the FBI.He did it not once but on two occasions.
      The second time Flynn lied to the judge the judge was close to begging Flynn to say that the FBI tricked him into lying.

      What many people are missing here is that the prosecutors also lied to the judge. The prosecutors knew that Flynn has never told the FBI that he had not discussed sanctions with Kislyak. but the prosecutors lied to the judge and told him that was the crime Flynn had committed.

      1. Using your logic, no one could ever withdraw a guilty plea as that would be perjury. Seems dumb.

        1. Using your logic, no one could ever withdraw a guilty plea as that would be perjury. Seems dumb.
          ________________________________________________
          Both the prosecution and the Defense knew that what Flynn was pleading to was a lie. This whole plea deal was a fraud. Both parties were lying to the judge and concealed from the judge the clear facts of the case.

          But more to your point many a defendant is sitting in prison because they cannot withdraw their guilty plea. In general the courts do not tolerate being jerked around like that

          1. jinn – you every work in criminal law? Do you know what a plea deal is? Get a grip. It is a game. Everyone lies to the judge.

            1. Paul – The voice of experience. I wonder if they now think someone who is guilty is committing perjury when he pleads ‘not guilty’? Wouldn’t surprise me.

              2. The voice of experience. I wonder if they now think someone who is guilty is committing perjury when he pleads ‘not guilty’?
                _________________________________________________

                Of course you are being ridiculous. Flynn has the right to say he is guilty or not guilty without any legal peril.

                The problem here is that the Prosecution presented a statement of facts that were false. Flynn on two occasions under oath told the judge that the facts presented by the Trump DOJ were true and correct. The prosecution attorneys, Flynn’s attorneys and Flynn himself all knew that the statement of facts presented to the judge was false.

                The judge did the right thing in trying to get to the bottom of why all the parties had been lying to the court.

            2. Everyone lies to the judge.
              _________________________________________
              Not everyone but maybe some do and for those that do that is a dead end road. They don’t get to walk back their lies.

              but their is a lot more misbehavior going on than Flynn’s misbehavior

    2. How can anyone reason with a Fox News disciple with acute and chronic TDS? It is a FELONY to lie to the FBI. You don’t need to be under oath. Flynn is a lawyer. He knew that.

      There is no such thing as a “perjury trap”. No one can force anyone to lie. FLYNN LIED, admitted he lied, both in writing, and orally in open court. He pleaded guilty to this lie as part of a plea deal to dismiss charges for not disclosing he was a paid agent for Turkey while acting as national security advisor. Flynn was CONVICTED of the felony of lying to the FBI. Now, he says he was lying when he said he lied. So–which lie is Judge Sullivan supposed to believe? Judge Sullivan, who takes his oath to uphold and defend the Constitution seriously, isn’t going to just stand idly by and allow people appearing before him to just lie their way into some result they want because of politics, nor should he. He is not required to dismiss the charges because Trump prevailed on his personal fixer, Billy Barr, to do his bidding. Judge Sullivan is a judicial officer, duty-bound to uphold the rule of law. The whining and bitching on Fox News isn’t going to change this, and nothing in the newly-released documents changes the fundamental fact that Flynn lied to the FBI, he admitted to doing it and was convicted. Dismissal is not automatic, or there wouldn’t need to be a motion for leave to dismiss. Everyone knows the motion to dismiss is motivated by politics, not the law. Trump fired Flynn for lying, and is now claiming he was “exonerated” and is an “American hero”. Then again, Trump lies about everything, every single day.

      Russia DID help Trump get elected. His campaign fed sensitive insider polling information about voters in key swing states and districts who could be vulnerable to turning against Hillary Clinton if they were told certain lies, which Russia did via a social media campaign. These were not random voters in random precincts. These were selected precincts Trump’s campaign knew could be swayed by lies. Trump’s campaign DID collude with Russia to help him “win the victory.” The majority of Americans voted against Trump who cheated his way into the White House, and now, 3 1/2 years later, has yet to capture even a 50% approval rating. America has more COVID-19 cases than any other country because Trump tried to bluff and lie his way out of this crisis. and did little to nothing to stop the spread for months. To this day, he downplays the recommendations of public health physicians, he refuses to wear a mask, he pushed for a dangerous, unproven medication, and he fires doctors who don’t go along with his politics. People are dead and the economy is in shambles because of Trump’s incompetence, arrogance and lack of leadership. Nevertheless, the faithful disciples keep believing.

      1. FLYNN LIED, admitted he lied, both in writing, and orally in open court. He pleaded guilty to this lie as part of a plea deal to dismiss charges for not disclosing he was a paid agent for Turkey while acting as national security advisor.
        ______________________________________________________

        fraid it is you that is lying

        Flynn didn’t lie to the FBI and he was not a paid agent for Turkey while acting as national security advisor

  9. This is from Judge Sullivan’s order:

    “The Court exercises it’s inherent authority to appoint the Honorable John Gleeson as ;amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss.”
    United States v. Fokker

    The inherent authority in United States v. Fokker is narrow — to protect a defendant against prosecutorial harassment when the government moves to dismiss and the defendant objects. Alluding to schemes where prosecutors repeatedly bring and dismiss charges to harass the defendant in number of ways.

    Fokker doesn’t grant inherent authority where the defendant does not object.

    Can you be tried for lying in court when you so mangle the cite of a case that everyone can see you don’t have the kind of authority you claim the case gives you?

    1. Fokker doesn’t grant inherent authority where the defendant does not object.
      ________________________________________________
      Why is the defendant not objecting to a review of proprietorial abuse?

      Here is the fundamental problem: both the prosecutors and the defense lied to the judge and now both the prosecutors and the defense want the whole thing swept under the rug and dismissed.

      The judge has for a long time suspected something is fishy here and good for him for trying to get to the bottom of this fraudulent plea deal.

      1. jinn – the problem is that he is holding the defendant as a political prisoner and not doing anything to the prosecutors.

        2. the problem is that he is holding the defendant as a political prisoner and not doing anything to the prosecutors.
          ____________________________________________________
          Please provide your evidence that the defendant is held hostage or being treated any different than the prosecution.

          Please, try making a claim that has some basis in reality

          1. jinn – the defendant has possible perjury charges plus amicus on the motion to dismiss. There is nothing about prosecutorial misconduct, etc.

            1. the defendant has possible perjury charges plus amicus on the motion to dismiss. There is nothing about prosecutorial misconduct
              __________________________________________
              If turns out there is nothing about prosecutor misbehavior it will be a gross miscarriage of justice.

              My guess is the judge may just want to expose the fraud that both sides participated in and expose it to the light of day in the hope that will discourage it from happening again in his court, but he might also take punitive action. It may depend on how much dirt Gleeson uncovers.

        3. In case I forget with everything going on here, I had Levin on in the back ground & he noted that the Bill of Rights, like the 4th that the DOJ/FBI/Dr Fauci/etc…, use as Toilet paper is part of the USC, but Judge Sullivan is just a salutatory position.

          I needn’t say nasty things about Judge Sullivan, his own actions have already shown everyone he has done far far worst then the worst things most anyone else has done.

          What Shame he should feel!

  10. Pingback: USAdroit

  11. I think the doctrine of judicial sovereignty may no longer be tenable. Far too much indiscipline and misbehavior for that now. How can we trust a system where the Judge can hop down from the bench and slide into the prosecutor’s seat?

    1. How can we trust a system where the Judge can hop down from the bench and slide into the prosecutor’s seat?
      __________________________________________________________

      Well the prosecutors are in hiding and the judge did not jump down from the bench and do anything. He appointed a neutral party to look into the matter.

      1. jinn – the neutral party wrote an op-ed signed as The Witchfinder General. He is anything but neutral.

        1. After all the Domestic Enemies of the USA , got the wink/nod/directions from Obama a day or so before.

          I’ll likely post a Barnes update/opinion later after it shows up on Banned.video

          The Coup Against our US/Trump continues on multiple fronts.

              1. Oky1 – watching Barnes now. Nice to see him on a good camera instead of that potato cam he has with Viva Frei.

          2. The Coup Against our US/Trump continues
            _____________________________________________
            No
            What continues are BS stories that there is a coup against trumpbut
            the stories are always BS.

            The Flynn flam fraudulent story that Flynn lied to the FBI was part of the BS story that there is a coup going on. Judge Sullivan is not at all happy that his court room was used to promote this false BS story.
            The false BS stories that always fall apart are designed to create the false appearance that there was a coup going on. Now we have the fake Obamagate story. That is the latest in the endless series of fake-gate stories that never go anywhere. They all end up being nothing burgers.
            Judge Sullivan is putting his foot down in the hope that his court will never again be used to promote one of these fake-gate stories.

        2. the neutral party wrote an op-ed
          ______________________________________________
          So what?
          The op-ed said we need to see the evidence.

          You morons do not understand what neutral means.
          You think if someone is not blatantly on your side they are not neutral.

          1. jinn – the fact that The Witchfinder General wrote that judges have the power to do what Sullivan is doing is enough for me to see The Witchfinder General is on the Hunt.

            1. the fact that The Witchfinder General wrote that judges have the power to do what Sullivan is doing
              ________________________________________________
              Of course judges have the power to do this. Your idea that it is perfectly OK for both the prosecution and defense to come into a court and lie to the judge is preposterous. Of course the judge can do something about it.

              1. jinn – there is a new 9-0 SC case that says The Witchfinder General and Sullivan are waaaaaaay out of line.

                1. there is a new 9-0 SC case that says The Witchfinder General and Sullivan are waaaaaaay out of line.
                  ______________________________________________
                  LOL

  12. Misbehavior and disobedience? I don’t see that as Flynn like. Nope.

  13. What is it with Liberals these days? They simply must go against the established grain, no matter the damage or how dumb. Is it safe to say that they now wipe with their left hand because those devil Conservatives don’t?

  14. “Someone needs to tell Judge Sullivan that Article III doesn’t give him prosecutorial powers.

    Sorry, Barack Obama, you’re wrong. AG Barr isn’t undermining the rule of law—Judge Sullivan is.” -Sen. Tom Cotton

    1. Agree. Barr isn’t undermining the rule of law but Obama made a hell of a mess of it.

  15. This is to delay and make it go into the Biden era where it will be chopped into the dumpster

  16. This is to delay and make it go into the Biden era where it will be chopped into the bin

  17. Somehow I think that the Deep State fell into a very Deep Trap of their own making.

    1. Word is Baker, former FBI counsel, has flipped, along with others. They are now ratting on each other.

  18. I see zero basis for any charges against Flynn relating to treason (where is the aid, comfort, or adherence to enemies of the United States?), much less perjury (is reversing a plea in the face of new evidence now a crime?).

    I’m particularly curious, however, how a judge APPOINTS an “amicus curiae”. To my understanding, these are independent motions filed by third parties of their own volition – can I now expect the possibility, however slim and remote, that a federal court order could appear on my doorstep ORDERING me to write an amicus brief in a matter to which I have no direct involvement?

    The fact that this move comes hard after Barack Obama publicly opposed the charges against Flynn being dropped – while mischaracterizing the charges as “perjury” in order to make the claim that dropping the actual charges would be “unprecedented” – gives exactly the appearance of political interference that Judge Gleeson asserts should not be tainting these proceedings.

  19. Lindsey Graham Rejects Trump’s Call To Summon Obama Before Committee

    President Trump on Thursday urged Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) to call former president Barack Obama to testify about what Trump alleges without evidence was a conspiracy involving his predecessor — a prospect Graham promptly rejected.

    In recent days, Trump has sought to amplify an “Obamagate” conspiracy theory that has taken root on the right that falsely suggests Obama and former vice president Joe Biden oversaw an effort to spy on Trump’s campaign to delegitimize his presidency.

    “If I were a Senator or Congressman, the first person I would call to testify about the biggest political crime and scandal in the history of the USA, by FAR, is former President Obama. He knew EVERYTHING,” Trump said in a tweet in which he urged Graham to “just do it.”

    “No more Mr. Nice Guy. No more talk!” the president wrote.

    Trump has called the alleged scandal “worse than Watergate” and has kept up a drumbeat of accusations that Obama committed a crime, though he declined to offer specifics when asked to explain the extraordinary charges during a Rose Garden news conference Monday.

    Asked about Trump’s latest tweet on the issue, Graham told Politico that he has no intention of summoning Obama to Capitol Hill.

    “I don’t think now’s the time for me to do that. I don’t know if that’s even possible,” Graham said, adding: “I understand President Trump’s frustration, but be careful what you wish for.”

    Edited from: “Senator Lindsey Graham Rejects Trump’s Call To Testify On Alleged “Obamagate’ Conspiracy”

    Today’s Washington Post

  20. The defendant could plead guilty to misleading a federal agent, then learn there was no predicate crime when the files or facts are disclosed late and subsequently legitimately withdraw the plea. The two are not necessarily inconsistent. You can mislead an agent and it not be a crime because it is not material to one.

    1. There doesn’t need to be any “predicate crime” to prosecute Flynn for LYING to the FBI. That is just Fox News fabrication. The lies Flynn told don’t have to be material to a crime, And, just because Trump’s fixer, Barr, says there isn’t a predicate crime to relate the perjury to, doesn’t make it so. Nothing in the recent documents changes the fact that Flynn admitted to lying, and don’t forget he was represented by counsel throughout.

      Then, what about not registering as a foreign agent while serving as acting national security advisor? What’s the spin on that one? That charge was dropped in exchange for the plea bargain on the lying to the FBI charge, for which Flynn was convicted.

Comments are closed.