The thing is that he was coerced with threats of contrived charges against his son. Any good father would take a bullet for their son. I don't see those pleas as legitimate and neither does the prosecution. If we are transitioning to a judiciary who can prosecute directly then lets encode that into the Constitution. Short of that the Judge's actions are highly inappropriate for someone who is supposed to be impartial. This is nearly over. Flynn will reenter his life, be gainfully employed and likely get some help on many levels. He is to be restored to Good Standing
People have many excuses for pleading guilty.Flynn plead guilty...twice.If he is innocent than he is guilty of the crime of perjury for lying to the court which the judge should charge him with.
I will point out again that the lefterrhoids are churtling and praying that the case will go to the full appeals of up the Supreme Court because there are so many dem appointed judges/justices waiting there. Big mistake to assume that. The controlling case law is the supreme court case of U.S. v. Sinengen-Smith where the justices lashed out at the lower court for using the amicus process to try to find new shiite on the defendant- the very thing that Judge Asshole did or attempted to do until he was stopped. Take not of two factoids in regard to Sinengen case: 1) it was 9-0 decision- that's right you heard me. and, 2) the decision was written by Ruth Bader Ginsberg. And yes we know that it is the job of every litigant to show why their case is different than the caselaw but let's just say that to appeal this thing upward does not necessarily get them into some kind of dem heaven. To the contrary, the appeals court judges are probably sitting there thinking, "holy fuck, why do I want to get involved in this one knowing the it will be appealed to the Supreme Court where there is agree-upon disgust for this type of judicial behavior. Of course, they may want to get involved just to help kill it too. The point being that the lefty assumption that there is a dem heaven above the three judge panel is a risky assumption.
I think it has happened before on Netflix or that other channel, what's it name?, that features Movies.
I agree. It is a risky assumption.It is most likely that the en banc panel will make a decision sans politics. My guess is that the decision of the en banc panel will reverse because of the implications for future cases of the three judges' decision. Frankly, the future for Flynn, or Barr for that matter, doesn't look very bright at this juncture. If Trump wins in November they will all get a "Get Out of Jail Free Card." Otherwise it's gonna be two weeks on vacation hell in Nassau for all of them.. (or potentially much worse.)
Current situation is that there is an order to Sullivan to dismiss. I have no further interest in churning what the appeals court will do until they take up the case. For others, I will offer into the discussion the following: One of the things that gets under-discussed is that the Court acknowledged that the brief and arguments presented by the DOJ included a substantive presentation of newly discovered evidence that was exculpatory for flynn and which seriously undermined the government's case but was not available at the time Flynn was charged because it had been withheld from the court and the defendant. The lefty media and Sullivan and the leftytards here like to spin a scenario where the only thing that is new and different is that Barr has come along and just decided he wanted to drop the case. Not so, Barr appointed an special counsel just to review the government's handling of the Flynn case and to report back. The special counsel did that and reported that the government had lied to the court and lied to the defendant when it said that the investigators had 302's saying that they thought that Flynn lied. Further, the special counsel identified all sorts of documents that should have been released to the court when Sullivan ordered the DOJ to turn over all excupatory info. So Barr released all of that. So the appeals court is looking at a case where the government has clearly addressed the issue of "what's new and different such that you want to drop the case." As I said the appeals panel acknwledged that Barr had included such info in his filing. So the appeals court is in a position where it sees the government trying to drop a case based on a finding of misconduct on the part of its own prosecutors, and a judge who apparently has a boner to still prosecute Flynn when in fact he should be outraged at the original DOJ prosecutors who failed to provide exculpatory evidence when he provided made a specific order- twice- to do that. But no, Judge Asshole is okay with that instead of being outraged because he is rooting for Flynn to be sentenced. Take home message: Don't be surprised if the full appeals court hears it that they are outraged by the conduct of both the original doj prosecutors and Judge Asshole. This case should have been dismissed long ago. Not saying that the full court will hear it. They may not have any interest in even touching it and they know that the Supreme Court has already ruled in this area and they do not like shady prosecutors or shady district judges.
I read both the Opinion and Wilkins Dissent. I found the Dissent to be Powerful and Compelling in comparison to the Opinion. I, of course, have no idea what the view of the remaining eight Appeals Court Judges will be. It is possible that if Judge Sullivan were allowed to proceed in the regular order he would dismiss the case with Prejudice. How will he dismiss it now. I suppose he could dismiss it without Prejudice. That would not be in Flynn's interest. The possibility of an en banc review remains as well.