General Flynn completely exonerated

Flynn committed perjury and his guilty plea of lying to FBI should not be dismissed as DOJ requests, court-appointed expert finds

Michael Flynn committed perjury and his guilty plea of lying to the FBI should not be dismissed, a court-appointed counsel told a federal judge Wednesday, calling the Justice Department’s attempt to undo the conviction “a gross abuse of prosecutorial power.”

In a formal briefing to the judge overseeing Flynn’s case, former New York federal judge John Gleeson argued that though Flynn committed perjury by first admitting under oath to lying to the FBI about his Russian contacts and then seeking to rescind his guilty plea, Trump’s former national security adviser should not face a contempt hearing but instead be punished as part of his sentence.

“Flynn has indeed committed perjury in these proceedings, for which he deserves punishment, and the Court has the authority to initiate a prosecution for that crime,” Gleeson wrote in an 82-page opinion. “I respectfully recommend, however, that the Court not exercise that authority. Rather, it should take Flynn’s perjury into account in sentencing him on the offense to which he has already admitted guilt. 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.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mick
Flynn's a traitorous POS. I'm surprised he doesn't have a statue in Mississippi yet.
 
Flynn committed perjury and his guilty plea of lying to FBI should not be dismissed as DOJ requests, court-appointed expert finds

Michael Flynn committed perjury and his guilty plea of lying to the FBI should not be dismissed, a court-appointed counsel told a federal judge Wednesday, calling the Justice Department’s attempt to undo the conviction “a gross abuse of prosecutorial power.”

In a formal briefing to the judge overseeing Flynn’s case, former New York federal judge John Gleeson argued that though Flynn committed perjury by first admitting under oath to lying to the FBI about his Russian contacts and then seeking to rescind his guilty plea, Trump’s former national security adviser should not face a contempt hearing but instead be punished as part of his sentence.

“Flynn has indeed committed perjury in these proceedings, for which he deserves punishment, and the Court has the authority to initiate a prosecution for that crime,” Gleeson wrote in an 82-page opinion. “I respectfully recommend, however, that the Court not exercise that authority. Rather, it should take Flynn’s perjury into account in sentencing him on the offense to which he has already admitted guilt. 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.”

Experts have also found that the entire prosecution of Flynn was irregular. Seems like justice is served by moving on.

It's particularly ironic in this era of "defund the police" that clear prosecutorial misconduct early on is being completely ignored in outrage that Flynn might get off. Amazing how hate of Trump wins over any semblance of principle.
 
Experts have also found that the entire prosecution of Flynn was irregular. Seems like justice is served by moving on.

It's particularly ironic in this era of "defund the police" that clear prosecutorial misconduct early on is being completely ignored in outrage that Flynn might get off. Amazing how hate of Trump wins over any semblance of principle.

Are you suggesting that the court-appointed expert opined without principle?
 
Nope, just you.

The judge was chosen because of the principles he already holds.

Wait. Huh? I reposted an article verbatim... and by your logic that makes me unprincipled? SMH. For the record, I've supported prosecuting any R's or D's who've engaged in illegal behavior. And, yes, if you or I lied to the FBI, we'd have to pay the piper, so nobody's above the law in my view.
 
Last edited:
Wait. Huh? I reposted an article verbatim... and by your logic that makes me unprincipled? SMH. For the record, I've supported prosecuting any R's or D's who've engaged in illegal behavior. And, yes, if you or I lied to the FBI, we'd have to pay the piper, so nobody's above the law in my view. So, in fact, it's your view that lacks principle.

my comment about you was in jest.

my comment about principle is that many of the "defund the police" crowd also ignores the wrongdoing by prosecutors to get Flynn in the first place. If one is against bad behavior of law enforcement then they should be against it consistently, not just when it matches their political leanings. The original prosecutorial effort against Flynn was a trainwreck. That matters in deciding what if any punishment he should receive.
 


Say It Ain’t Strzok! New Discovery of FBI Agent’s Notes ‘Highly Exculpatory’
...
Just the News reports that a source directly familiar with the document said the notes are “highly exculpatory” and are believed to be from around January 4, 2017. January 4th is the date Strzok had relayed a request from the FBI to the lead agent in the Gen. Michael Flynn case asking him not to end its investigation.
Previously released documents showed the FBI agent running the investigation had determined there was “no derogatory” evidence that Flynn had engaged in any criminal activity, and after five months, suggested shutting down the probe. Until January 4. “Strzok relayed a message from the ‘7thfloor’ leadership of the FBI to hold off closing the case, leading to a controversial decision to seek an interview with Flynn that eventually led to criminal charges and a plea deal,” Just the News lays out.
...
 

VN Store



Back
Top