Judge Gleeson Comes Right Out And Calls Bill Barr Corrupt
Category: News & Politics
Via: steve-ott • 4 years ago • 99 commentsBy: Joe Patrice (Above the Law)
The Government’s ostensible grounds for seeking dismissal are conclusively disproven by its own briefs filed earlier in this very proceeding. They contradict and ignore this Court’s prior orders, which constitute law of the case. They are riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Judge Gleeson Comes Right Out And Calls Bill Barr Corrupt
That did not go like Barr drew it up.
By Joe Patrice
Jun 10, 2020 at 5:23 PM Shares11k
Attorney General Bill Barr thought he could end the Michael Flynn prosecution by canning all the hard-working Department of Justice prosecutors and having a flunky declare that the government is dropping the case. A case that they'd already won.
That's… unusual.
And it's also the sort of thing that requires leave of the court.
Debevoise partner John Gleeson, a former Eastern District of New York judge, joined the Michael Flynn case at Judge Sullivan's invitation to, in a nutshell, provide an independent answer to the question of whether or not Judge Sullivan should grant leave to allow the DOJ to walk away on the brink of sentencing and, separately, whether or not Flynn should be held in criminal contempt for now claiming that he wasn't telling the truth when he admitted under oath to committing crimes.
So what did Judge Gleeson think about the DOJ's arguments for dropping the case? A little inside baseball here, but the word "pretextual" gets prominent billing and that's not good for the prosecution:
The Government's ostensible grounds for seeking dismissal are conclusively disproven by its own briefs filed earlier in this very proceeding. They contradict and ignore this Court's prior orders, which constitute law of the case. They are riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact.
Twitter is replete with lobotomized non-lawyers (and sometimes just bad lawyers) trying to sell the cockamamie theory that Flynn was entrapped by some sort of illegal government sting operation. The basic tenets of this argument don't hold up to scrutiny — the dates don't even match up in most cases — but they're still bleating about FBI collusion.
Judge Gleeson found collusion alright. But not where those folks think it is:
Rule 48(a) was designed to "guard against dubious dismissals of criminal cases that would benefit powerful and well-connected defendants." In other words, the rule empowers courts to protect the integrity of their own proceedings from prosecutors who undertake corrupt, politically motivated dismissals. That is what has happened here.
Corrupt. Hooboy.
If Trump wants his buddy cleared, all he has to do is pardon him. There's a constitutional process sitting right there! It would still smack of corruption, but there's nothing anyone can really do about it. But instead, Barr cooked up this scheme that ends up failing to accomplish the goal and obliterating the reputation of the Department of Justice in the process. These people are the Wile E. Coyote of politics.
Oh, and what about that criminal contempt claim?
The Court has also asked me to address whether it should issue an order to show cause why Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury. 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.
It was hard for even the most ardent MAGAheads to deny that Flynn's two confessions under oath weren't lies. Prosecutors can put defendants under duress but a sophisticated government official with high-powered Biglaw counsel can't really retreat to the "oh, I had no idea what I was doing" defense.
The good news for Flynn is that Gleeson isn't recommending a separate contempt charge, suggesting that Judge Sullivan just add it to his consideration of the sentence for the underlying crime.
Joe Patrice is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer. Feel free to email any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on Twitter if you're interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search.
Tags
Who is online
424 visitors
And for the full 82 page opinion from the judge, just follow the link:
This episode will join the long list of embarrassing episodes we otherwise know as the Trump administration. Another epic fail by Trump and Barr.
Love the article photo !
I just had a closer look. Yep, that's the look of a man whose balls just shriveled up.
Yep, that's the look of a man whose balls just shriveled up.
Barr has balls???
I dunno . . .
"The bigger they are the harder they fall" Jimmy Cliff
"are" should be "come". Damn thing wouldn't let me correct it. Every time I got near the tool it disappeared. It was only a few seconds. I hate site glitches.
The Edit feature can be 'captured' if you continue refreshing the page and hovering over the area where the wheel should appear - until it holds in place for you to access it (up to ten minutes overall). (Chuckles.)
Warning: META... was told by an authoritative source that when you refresh, your cursor cannot be in the comment you wish to modify
Is that a catch 22?
This has bugged me too for ages, but it is built into the platform.
The trick is to ensure your cursor is not within the edit box when refreshing. The edit icon is unfortunately designed as a toggle. So if you are in the edit box when it is refreshing the toggle gets out of sequence so it behaves exactly the opposite of what you would want.
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Now that is a great insight! I mean this from my heart! Now, I will have to try it out.
Fuck Gleeson for putting politics in front of the law:
Fuck Judge Sullivan for putting politics in front of the law:
The FBI doesn't get to entrap someone; falsify documents; and then withhold information. They even threatened Flynn with prosecution of his son to get him to plead guilty; but just ignore all of that. The only reason the Democrats want to keep this case going is to make sure it is in the news cycle for the elections. They have two Clinton appointed lackeys to make sure it does.
82 pieces of toilet paper have more value than his opinion.
Democrats don't care about the law or enforcing it; just their political version of it.
No, he is just upholding the law as it currently exists. If you want the law changed, then you better get on the ass of YOUR representative and YOUR senator.
Apparently he wasn't entrapped at all--- Flynn pled guilty to lying to the FBI of his own free will!
Apparently he wasn't entrapped at all--- Flynn pled guilty to lying to the FBI of his own free will!
TWICE!!!
Yeah. So after Trump is gone and the nation purges as many of his hinge-men from the federal system will you cry foul? In fact, after Trump's departure it would be nice is all Trump officials resign, because they should go down with their leader. (CB vomits.)
NOTE: I think it is wrong to purge quality people, nevertheless. But Trump officials/supporters are loyal to a man, not the institutions they serve.
The EPA, under Trump, no longer protects the environment.
Perfect, we see it on NT everyday...LOL,
Exactly!
(See comment #6)
BAZINGA! The correct formation to transit links here is: @6. (Smile.)
'Twitter is replete with lobotomized non-lawyers (and sometimes just bad lawyers) trying to sell the cockamamie theory that Flynn was entrapped by some sort of illegal government sting operation. The basic tenets of this argument don't hold up to scrutiny — the dates don't even match up in most cases — but they're still bleating about FBI collusion.'
Sounds like Tacos. Twisting and spinning everything tRump does.
He's acting as a lawyer, and he's going to lose on the merits.
He can't argue the law, or the facts, so he's casting aspersions. This is what desperation looks like.
Haven't liberals realized they always look foolish when they rely on partisan clickbait? How many times are you going to get fooled? Remember how many of you were sure Flynn guilty plea meant he was going to flip on Trump and prove collusion? Whoops!
Actually, Judge Gleeson is acting as 'a friend of the court' and he has no dog in the hunt. But hey, facts don't matter do they Sean?
What are you even talking about? It took you two days to come up with that?
He is acting as a lawyer. Wanna try again?
,. The idea that he has "no dog in this hunt" is belied by his own paper trail. He was selected by an out of control judge precisely because Judge Sullivan knew he could count on him.
Flynn will win on the merits. It's only a question if the DC Circuit wants to embarrass Sullivan and take the rather extraordinary step of granting Flynn's writ before Sullivan even rules, or the DC circuit will wait till Sullivan defies DC Circuit precedent and then overrules him. Sullivan's position has no legal support and is a threat to our system of justice.
Try again. Someday you'll get one right.
Which word don't you understand?
Facts don't have a deadline.
Yes, Judge Sullivan could count on Judge Gleeson to act as a 'friend of the court' and gather the necessary facts.
What 'merits' are those Sean? Please be specific.
No need.
Already have.
He isn't telling us anything we didn't already know.
Trump has not been able to install a 'Putin Style' judiciary as yet.
Does not matter, Flynn plead guilty--twice. Then, Flynn recanted on those pleas. So in essence, Flynn lied when he plead guilty and it is yet to be determined as to whether he lied again when he recanted. Apparently Flynn has not come to appreciate that to be in the Shadow of Trump is not only perplexing, but also downright illegal.
As far as Barr. He is either trying to prove something, which is highly unlikely, or---he is protecting something else that is to close for comfort.
Flynn. I'm guilty. Wait, no I'm not. On second thought I am guilty. On third thought, no I'm not and I don't know why I'm not guilty because I did plead guilty twice.
People plead guilty every day to crimes they didn't commit. And they all tell the judge they really mean it; they aren't being coerced, and so on.
WHY DO INNOCENT PEOPLE PLEAD GUILTY TO CRIMES THEY DIDN’T COMMIT?
If I remember correctly he pled guilty twice. So would he fit into those that pled guilty once, or is he in a whole new category?
Isn't he the person that was chanting in front of large crowds, ''Lock her up''....
Oh, the irony.
30+ years military service, fruit salad up the ass but he had the temerity to work for Trump after he worked for Obama so he is a bad, bad man.
You gotta channel TDS ridden to understand the mindset.
That really doesn't make any difference. I hope you will read the link I gave you and learn how our criminal justice system bullies people into throwing their lives away.
I'm actually quite familiar with what the link claims. Having multiple dealings with cops in Minnesota and in particularly Minneapolis as a minority you get an education in a hot minute.
I completely agree just look at the Generals with decades of service, multiple combat tours and yet Trump attacks and insults them....The classic example of TDS...
And after donald attacks them, his followers follow suit.
It’s good that we agree. Guess we’ll see you stop attacking General Flynn then. Right?
Horseshit
I have seen it, right here on this forum.
I was attacking Flynn, not really it was more like making fun of him, but if you think I was than I'll stop the ''attacking'' when Trump quits attacking the Generals.
Now that's a deal, right?
Oh my, you mean you’ve seen extreme behavior from some on an Internet forum? Stop the presses .....
Nice, the old two wrongs make a right gambit. Classic!
That said, show me where I’ve dishonored a General like you have here with Flynn.
Don’t work too hard though. It ain’t there ....
Too late. The early edition is already underway.
You do realize that he denied talking to Kysliak, then admitted talking to Kysliak but denied saying anything about the sanctions. Right?
Now that the transcripts are available, it is clear that the sanctions are the only thing he talked to Kysliak about.
He plead guilty because he he IS guilty. Plead guilty twice to a very generous plea deal in deference to his rank and years of service.
I have no problem with him pleading guilty one more time when Trump pardons him.
He plead guilty because he was an honorable leader
Flynn is not a military academy graduate and his current behavior is a disgrace to the uniform imho.
Too bad, you’ll just have to accept tomorrow’s news i guess
Different verse
Same as the first
Wow, admitting that Trump is wrong could that possibly be a case of TDS?
I didn't attack Flynn except in your mind. I just used his own words and actions.
I have no sympathy for Flynn lock his ass up.
He is the one who stood on stage and chanted "lock her up" about someone who had already been cleared of criminal charges by the DOJ. He is a disgrace.
Well, it might interest you to know this kind of thing happens to white people every day. Even important white people.
He might not be. If the FBI set him up; if they violated his rights and the law, then legally, he isn't guilty of anything. If he lied about something, it might have been a situation where he actually had a legal right to lie. Either way, what he did - whether he lied about it or not - wasn't a crime. So why do you want to see this guy go to prison so badly?
Lol ..... yeah right. You keep telling yourself that.
Trump is a worthless vat of human excrement.
Lol, if that’s your work John you really need to talk to someone about anger management.
Sooner is better in this case .....
Based on what? DOJ declined to charge him with that crime, so why do you get to say he violated the act?
And yet it didn't. So because he hasn't been prosecuted for what you personally perceive as crimes, you want to make sure he gets punished for something, no matter what it is.
Yeah, it's clear to me that there are some people in the world who just want to lynch this guy, and I would bet it's because of his connection to Donald Trump. Nothing more.
Name them then.
Why do you get to say he committed no crimes?
A Federal Judge could have thrown the case out many times, now seems bent on not throwing out a case in which the defendant plead guilty , twice verbally and twice in writing.
Amazing that Trump hired the registered Democrat with long ties to Obama.
Flynn disgraced his uniform several times.
WHY DO INNOCENT PEOPLE PLEAD GUILTY TO CRIMES THEY DIDN’T COMMIT?
Are Innocent People Pleading Guilty? A New Report Says Yes
Innocent People Who Plead Guilty
Why Innocent People Plead Guilty
Innocence Is Irrelevant This is the age of the plea bargain—and millions of Americans are suffering the consequences.
I can't believe this is news to people.
As do those guilty of a crime.
How Defendants End Up Pleading Guilty to Nonexistent Crimes
Flynn committed a crime according to the law. The issue as I see it is we have too many laws in general and we sure as hell have a lot of bad law. It isn't up to the judges to fix that. It is up to YOUR representative and YOUR senator.
We are not talking about some kid being railroaded by the local police.
The General is no such thing. He has BS in Management Science, A Masters in Business Administrations & Telecommunications. A Masters degree in Military Arts and Science and a Masters of Art in National Security & Strategy. In 2012 Obama tapped Flynn to be the Director of DIA.
Flynn viewed that as being effectively fired & resigned.
You can keep twisting this pretzel all you want.
That is what makes his actions (talks with Russia and lying to FBI) so much worse.
First of all, his interactions with the Russians was a violation of the Logan Act. Second of all, lying to the FBI is a crime regardless of the subject matter.
Not if the sole purpose of the interview with the FBI was to entrap him into perjuring himself. There is some evidence that is exactly what was going on.
I don't think that should be relevant. Everyone has the same right to fair justice. It is clear from the evidence we have seen that there was a team effort to get Flynn somehow. That is more than any one person - especially a non-lawyer - should have to try to navigate on their own.
First of all, his interactions with the Russians was not a violation of the Logan Act. As the "selected" head of intel, it is/was his responsibility to have mutual verbal intercourse with other heads of states/departments of foreign countries.
There is no reason he shouldn't have been talking to Russia.
That's not true. If that were true, he would have been charged with violating the act. He wasn't.
Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001
It is the law. It is a stupid law. It is a law that should not exist, yet there it is.
I once had the FBI threaten me with 150 years of prison. The sentencing guidelines don''t allow that for what I was accused. I told them, "there's the door". It is always best to never talk to police of any kind.
When the law comes to question you, there are 3 things you should do:
Keep your mouth shut.
Keep your fucking mouth shut.
Keep your goddamn fucking mouth shut.
I'm not against you, I'm just trying to point you in the direction of the real problem, and that is the law.
That is absolutely true. Unfortunately, people do talk to the cops in hopes of clearing up whatever their concern is, clearing their name, and so on. Even with the best of intentions, they will likely just make things worse.
I am ALWAYS suspicious of - and I default to disbelieving - any criminal charge that is ONLY either "lying to police" or "resisting arrest." In my experience, those cases are almost always bullshit.
Nonsense. There is nothing wrong with law enforcement trying to get someone to slip up in their story and tell a lie. Law enforcement can even lie to a suspect to get them to lie.
"Many "suspects" in Florida and across the U.S. wonder if it is legal for police to lie when asking questions or interrogating a suspect. The simple answer is yes, they can". The bottom line is that yes, police can lie to someone suspected of committing a crime in Florida, to a certain extent. Whether you call it deception or lying, the purpose of an interrogation is to get an individual to say something or provide information that may not be in his or her best interest."
"The key aspect of entrapment is this: Government agents do not entrap defendants simply by offering them an opportunity to commit a crime. Judges expect people to resist any ordinary temptation to violate the law. An entrapment defense arises when government agents resort to repugnant behavior such as the use of threats, harassment, fraud, or even flattery to induce defendants to commit crimes."
Flynn was not "entrapped", he was not "coerced" into committing a crime, he wasn't set up by some undercover agent who provided him bombs and a target and pressured him to commit a crime. Did they ask him hard questions and act like a tape of the conversation didn't exist thus no corroboration to disprove any lie he might tell them? Yes. Does that mean they forced him or coerced him to lie to them? Of course not, [ Deleted ]
Yep.
There's a wise old saying:
If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
(Something Flynn should've thought of...)
Where did you get your law degree?
How long have you been practicing? Curious minds want to know!
[Deleted]
Uh-uh. It is time to cut this bias nonsense out! People want proper law and order in government and not this 1900's shit about 'sides' winning and controlling other people. It is time we all grow the hell up! Defend the damn truth and not truth as you wish it.
He had yet to be sworn in; therefore, he had no right to make any international policy talks let alone promises.
They did the exact opposite with Flynn. They COULD have nailed him with many more charges. They gave him all the time in the world to cooperate with prosecutors. In fact that is the only reason that he hadn't already been sentenced.
Unless Trump gives Flynn a blanket pardon, the DOJ should nail him with all of the other charges they can come up with. After all, everyone wants him to be treated like everyone else right?
Always figured that there were Russians on the vine and NT.
Sounds like you need to get that figurer checked. It's gone completely haywire.
All he has is spinning and twisting.
Barr, tRump's consigliere, belongs behind bars along with the rest of the tRump criminal enterprise (his administration/cabinet/the gop)
Why did I post this article? While I am no fan of AG Barr, he is not following the law as it currently stands.
Does this mean I think Flynn should go to prison? NO. But he broke the law.
Is the law good? NO.
Thousands and thousands and thousands of people every year plead guilty, because it is the easiest and less punishing way out.
But as the right is so fond of saying, we are a nation of laws, except when one of ours breaks the law.
Now the right is suffering at its own hands. (But don't forget the left and their SUPER PREDATORS, something the right embraced.)
The right so likes to say “We are a nation of laws!” and that we are.
We have so many laws, the DOJ gave up trying to determine how many crimes there are. One attorney wrote a book “Three Felonies a Day”. In his estimation, we have so many laws, that every man, woman and child in this country, commits 3 felonies a day, just by waking up and going about their lives. The only difference between them and Flynn is they don't get prosecuted.
So while you gloat about Flynn going to jail, remember, the same thing can happen to you.
So while you wail about Flynn going to jail, remember, the same thing can happen to you.
So rather than debating whether Flynn should go to jail, the conversation should really be about fixing the law that is sending him, and others who are nameless, to jail.
So ex-Judge Gleeson has an opinion.
B.F.D.
[[Removed. Sweeping Gen]] [- Peter]
[[Removed - Was a response to another removed comment and was also taunting]] [- Peter]