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.Any idea why Bunker Boy is too frightened to just go ahead and give Flynn a pardon?
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.
Gee, We Wonder Why She Has Social Anxiety?
29 minutes ago
6 comments:
Several theories that this route provides a way to clear Flynn without explicit involvement of Donnie, whereas a Pardon is over his signature. A dismissal also plays into Donnie’s made-up allegation fantasy defense. It’s also suggested that Flynn will not take a pardon unless the case is still dragging out and Donnie loses in November, and only then because he would be exposed to prosecution under perjury charges by a new Administration. How that plays into the dismissal now, since I’m not sure that would clear the perjury charges threat, I’m not clear.
If the judge goes ahead and sentences him for what he's already plead to, and the appeals court fails to intervene, look for the pardons of Flynn and Stone to come in the lame duck if Fergus loses, and just any old time if he wins, as the personal political implications disappear either way.
-Doug in Sugar Pine
A pardon leaves them both open to further investigations and potential prosecutions in other venues.
Flynn would rather be exonerated than pardoned.
0_0 said, "Flynn would rather be exonerated than pardoned."
If that's the case, then pleading guilty was an unwise strategy.
Pete
Pete, have you read why he pleaded such?
Ever heard of anyone else taking a plea when innocent? Ever?
Post a Comment