Will Flynn's plea be tossed Monday by federal Judge Sullivan, and he set free?

[bigsly]

Congress has been trying to get to the bottom of this question for months upon months. In February, senators Charles Grassley and Lindsey Graham requested the DOJ inspector general, Michael Horowitz, conduct a comprehensive review of potential misconduct in the Russia investigation and specifically asked Horowitz to answer these questions about the Flynn interview and the 302s:

“Did the FBI agents document their interview with Lt. Gen. Flynn in one or more FD-302s? What were the FBI agents’ conclusions about Lt. Gen. Flynn’s truthfulness, as reflected in the FD-302s? Were the FD-302s ever edited? If so, by whom? At who’s direction? How many drafts were there? Are there material differences between the final draft and the initial draft(s) or the agent’s testimony about the interview?"

Horowitz has yet to answer these questions, but the special counsel’s office now has federal judge Sullivan inquiring as well. Sullivan made history a decade ago when he ordered an independent investigation into “the systemic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence,” he discovered during the government’s prosecution of the now-deceased Ted Stevens, then the senior senator from Alaska. The DOJ’s misconduct in the Stevens’ case led Sullivan to enter a standing order in all criminal cases on his docket.

The most recent iteration of Sullivan’s standing entered in the Flynn case required Mueller’s office to produce “any evidence in its possession that is favorable to defendant and material either to defendant’s guilt or punishment.” The order further required the government to submit to the court any information “which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes not to be material.”

Flynn referenced some of these materials in his sentencing memorandum, specifically the FR-302 from August 22, 2017 and a memorandum apparently written by McCabe and dated January 24, 2017—the same day as Flynn’s interview. Now Sullivan wants to see those documents and ordered Mueller by Friday afternoon “to file on the docket FORTHWITH the cited Memorandum and FD-302.” Sullivan further ordered “the government to file on the docket any 302s or memoranda relevant to [Flynn’s interview.]”

What motivated Sullivan is unclear, but his experience in the Stevens’ case was a likely trigger. In that case, the government withheld 302s, didn’t include exculpatory statements in the 302s, and did not create a 302 for an interview that “didn’t go very well,” from the prosecution’s standpoint. Sullivan likely wants to assure himself that the Flynn case isn’t a copycat of the political targeting of Stevens from a decade ago.

Once the government dockets the evidence, Sullivan should be able to resolve two outstanding questions: First, what, if any, changes were made to the 302s? Second, did Strzok and his fellow FBI agent express a view on whether Flynn was lying?

https://thefederalist.com/2018/12/1...ynns-sentencing-just-dropped-major-bombshell/

Judge Sullivan has demanded this info by tomorrow (Friday). He is scheduled to issue Michael Flynn's sentence Monday.

 

[bigsly]

According to both Flynn's legal team and the newly released documents, FBI agents in his case deliberately did not instruct Flynn that any false statements he made could constitute a crime, and decided not to "confront" him directly about anything he said that contradicted their knowledge of his wiretapped communications with former Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

“Before the interview, McCabe, [redacted] and others decided the agents would not warn Flynn that it was a crime to lie during an FBI interview because they wanted Flynn to be relaxed, and they were concerned that giving the warnings might adversely affect the rapport,” the 302 report said.

Over the weekend, Comey admitted that he personally made the decision to send a pair of agents to interview Flynn in 2017, and acknowledged the arrangement was not typical for dealing with a White House official.

Asked to describe how two FBI agents ended up at the White House to interview Flynn in January 2017, Comey, speaking to MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace during a forum discussion Sunday, said flatly: “I sent them.”

Comey went on to acknowledge the way the interview was set up – not through the White House counsel’s office, but arranged directly with Flynn – was not standard practice. He called it “something I probably wouldn't have done or maybe gotten away with in a more … organized administration.”

Also, in order to correct the erroneous thread title:

Flynn is set to be sentenced next Tuesday -- it's unclear whether that date could be delayed in connection with the new filings. Sullivan technically has the authority to toss Flynn's guilty plea and the charge against him if he concludes that the FBI interfered with Flynn's constitutional right to counsel, although he has given no indications that he intends to do so.

The source is the first one directly addressing today's court order that I found when Googling:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mueller-releases-key-documents-of-fbi-interview-with-michael-flynn

The documents Mueller rendered to the court today plus a Mueller memo about the situation can be read here:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/michael-flynn-interview-documents

The facts that federal law enforcement deliberately conspired to entrap Flynn and intentionally did not read him his Miranda rights troubles me greatly, regardless of the politics of all this. Flynn's looking at 0-6 months in prison, with Mueller recommending no jail time.

 

[bigsly]

Reportedly, the FBI-required 302 compiled by agents after Flynn's initial interview was not among the documents team Mueller was ordered to turn over to Judge Sullivan yesterday by 3pm.

Rather, another 302, covering the now-called "Strzok interview", which served as the basis of the charge filed against Flynn and in which Strzok referenced the initial 302, and which was conducted just 4 days after Lisa Page was fired and days before Strzok himself was fired by Mueller, was submitted to the Judge.

Where is that initial 302 written up by one of the two FBI agents who first interviewed Flynn?

 

[Paul_Chance]

My prediction - no, the charge will not be tossed. The judge is just filling in the alleged gaps in the record. At the end of the day Flynn pled guilty and it's rare for a judge to overturn a guilty plea.

(Miranda only applies when in custodial interrogation, not when voluntarily interviewing, and yes, government agents can lie their asses off to you whether it's an interview or an interrogation. The proper response to "we'd like to talk to you" should always be "and here's my lawyer".)

 

[KeithD]

After Flynn floated the ridiculous notion that he should have been told not to lie to the FBI, I would hope the judge would throw the book at him, regardless of the prosecutors' recommendation, on Monday. Such arrogance.

 

[bigsly]

Judge Sullivan, who's been appointed to benches by both Reagan and Clinton, has case history with prosecutors not turning over documents to the court when ordered to:

Tables Turned on Prosecution in Stevens Case
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/us/politics/08stevens.html

Does that initial 302 include the agents testifying to it that they concluded Flynn was not lying to them?

Reading what Judge Stevens did to Steven's conviction based on similar circumstances, I'm now changing my vote from "No" to neutral.

 

[bigsly]

My prediction - no, the charge will not be tossed. The judge is just filling in the alleged gaps in the record. At the end of the day Flynn pled guilty and it's rare for a judge to overturn a guilty plea.

Is it even more rare that a Judge overturns a conviction for the prosecution failing to submit documents?

 

[Sweet_Cupcake]

(Miranda only applies when in custodial interrogation, not when voluntarily interviewing, and yes, government agents can lie their asses off to you whether it's an interview or an interrogation. The proper response to "we'd like to talk to you" should always be "and here's my lawyer".)

Always important to remember. . . .

 

[someoneyouknow]

Flynn's lawyer seemed to indicate Flynn lied because "he was caught off guard when two agents approached him."

Reading the notes of the FBI agents who interviewed Flynn, one gets the opposite impression:

Overall, Strzok thought Flynn was "bright, but not profoundly sophisticated."

Flynn was relaxed, and even in a good mood.

"Flynn was so talkative, and had so much time for them, that Strzok wondered if the National Security Adviser did not have more important things to do than have such a relaxed, non-pertinent discussion with them," the memo recounting Strzok's recollections said.
​

https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/14/politics/mueller-flynn-sentencing-response/index.html

 

[KeithD]

Judge Sullivan, who's been appointed to benches by both Reagan and Clinton, has case history with prosecutors not turning over documents to the court when ordered to:

Tables Turned on Prosecution in Stevens Case
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/us/politics/08stevens.html

Does that initial 302 include the agents testifying to it that they concluded Flynn was not lying to them?

Reading what Judge Stevens did to Steven's conviction based on similar circumstances, I'm now changing my vote from "No" to neutral.

Flynn has been convicted of lying. Such weak deflection/distraction you're offering up. This isn't the trial phase, dummy, this is the sentencing phase.

 

[bigsly]

Michael Flynn pled guilty to one charge of lying to FBI investigators. There was no "trial stage", and he hasn't been "convicted" of anything.

Ted Stevens was tried and "convicted", yet Judge Sullivan overturned that conviction because of similar to the Flynn case govt prosecutor behavior.

Please try to at least pretend you know what you're talking about before addressing me again?

 

[KeithD]

Michael Flynn pled guilty to one charge of lying to FBI investigators. There was no "trial stage", and he hasn't been "convicted" of anything.

You probably should do more study of the law before posting anything.

 

[HisArpy]

You probably should do more study of the law before posting anything.

*snort*

Open mouth, insert foot...

 

[TarBeach]

He committed crimes as testified..and IMO,should serve time., one way or the other.
Period.
As should Trump, the most capital offender of our system.- One again, just my opinion,..as with many others who dare not say it.!.

 

[KeithD]

*snort*

Open mouth, insert foot...

Yes, I see you doing a lot of that.

 

[doowdniw]

Wouldn't be surprised if Flynn got some token jail time.

 

[doowdniw]

Harshly rebuked by the judge. So much for throwing out Flynn's guilty plea.

 

[Paul_Chance]

Yep, ninety day delay in sentencing granted. Judge slapped him around a bit. (Though, in fairness, this judge also slapped the Mueller team at different times as well, so he is a non-partisan slapper.)

Just FYI - a guilty plea is a conviction. It's saying to the court "no need for a trial, I did it".

 

[Busybody18]

"Judge" should be ashamed!

 

[HisArpy]

Yes, I see you doing a lot of that.

Please try to keep up with the rest of the class.

 

[bigsly]

Just FYI - a guilty plea is a conviction. It's saying to the court "no need for a trial, I did it".

A guilty plea is a defendant admitting guilt, which is completely different than a Judge or a jury convicting a defendant of a crime.

That both instances RESULT in conviction does not negate the complete difference in how that result came about.

The difference is still in the details.

 

[bigsly]

"Judge" should be ashamed!

Can you breakdown Flynn's association with Bijan Kian and Ekim Alptekin and the Flynn Intel group receiving over $500k for their work?

 

[Busybody18]

Can you breakdown Flynn's association with Bijan Kian and Ekim Alptekin and the Flynn Intel group receiving over $500k for their work?

Yes

T Podesta!

 

[bigsly]

Yes

T Podesta!

You're saying T Podesta is as guilty as Flynn? I don't dispute that.

Are you like Sean Hannity who continually bemoans that "a two-tiered justice system" cannot exist if America is to be saved, as if two-tiered justice is anything new in America?

That injust system exists because of nothing else but repugnant partisanship like Hannity's, yours and your political party opposites, who also maintain that winning elections is ONLY about getting the most votes.

 

[Luk]

STFU, eeyore.