This article is from the source 'washpo' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/court-asks-retired-judge-to-fight-justice-dept-effort-to-drop-michael-flynn-case-and-examine-if-ex-trump-adviser-committed-perjury/2020/05/13/8c0deb0a-9567-11ea-82b4-c8db161ff6e5_story.html
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Version 0 | Version 1 |
---|---|
Court asks retired judge to oppose Justice Dept. effort to drop Michael Flynn case, examine if ex-Trump adviser committed perjury | Court asks retired judge to oppose Justice Dept. effort to drop Michael Flynn case, examine if ex-Trump adviser committed perjury |
(32 minutes later) | |
Michael Flynn’s sentencing judge Wednesday asked a former federal judge to oppose the Justice Department’s request to dismiss the former Trump national security adviser’s guilty plea and examine whether Flynn should face a contempt hearing for perjury. | Michael Flynn’s sentencing judge Wednesday asked a former federal judge to oppose the Justice Department’s request to dismiss the former Trump national security adviser’s guilty plea and examine whether Flynn should face a contempt hearing for perjury. |
The judge asked whether Flynn should face contempt for perjury after he pleaded guilty to a crime of which he now claims to be innocent. | The judge asked whether Flynn should face contempt for perjury after he pleaded guilty to a crime of which he now claims to be innocent. |
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan’s appointment of retired New York federal Judge John Gleeson as comes one day after Sullivan put on hold the Justice Department’s bid to drop charges against Flynn, saying he expects independent groups and legal experts to argue against the move. | U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan’s appointment of retired New York federal Judge John Gleeson as comes one day after Sullivan put on hold the Justice Department’s bid to drop charges against Flynn, saying he expects independent groups and legal experts to argue against the move. |
“The Court exercises its inherent authority to appoint The Honorable John Gleeson (Ret.) as amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss,” Sullivan wrote in a two-page order. | “The Court exercises its inherent authority to appoint The Honorable John Gleeson (Ret.) as amicus curiae to present arguments in opposition to the government’s Motion to Dismiss,” Sullivan wrote in a two-page order. |
“It is further ORDERED that amicus curiae shall address whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury.” | “It is further ORDERED that amicus curiae shall address whether the Court should issue an Order to Show Cause why Mr. Flynn should not be held in criminal contempt for perjury.” |
The unusual order plunges the Flynn case even deeper into uncharted legal waters, in which the Justice Department has taken a posture more common to defense lawyers, the judge has appointed an ex-judge to see if other crimes occurred, and the president’s supporters demand the immediate dismissal of the entire case. | |
The department was already under fire from those inside its ranks and thousands of alumni who felt the institution was being politicized and bent to the will of Trump. Sullivan’s order threatens to unearth even more, potentially unflattering details of how the department’s political leaders came to decide they should walk away from a case involving an ally to the president. | The department was already under fire from those inside its ranks and thousands of alumni who felt the institution was being politicized and bent to the will of Trump. Sullivan’s order threatens to unearth even more, potentially unflattering details of how the department’s political leaders came to decide they should walk away from a case involving an ally to the president. |
As a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn, Gleeson is best known for putting the late mob boss John Gotti behind bars. As a federal judge from 1994 to 2016 appointed by Bill Clinton, Gleeson was not shy about criticizing the Justice Department, and one lawyer who practiced before him called him “a purist.” In a 2013 drug case, he sharply criticized the department’s policies in trying to extract heavy prison sentences as part of guilty pleas, which he called “unsound and brutally unfair” and “the sentencing equivalent of a two-by-four to the forehead.” | As a federal prosecutor in Brooklyn, Gleeson is best known for putting the late mob boss John Gotti behind bars. As a federal judge from 1994 to 2016 appointed by Bill Clinton, Gleeson was not shy about criticizing the Justice Department, and one lawyer who practiced before him called him “a purist.” In a 2013 drug case, he sharply criticized the department’s policies in trying to extract heavy prison sentences as part of guilty pleas, which he called “unsound and brutally unfair” and “the sentencing equivalent of a two-by-four to the forehead.” |
In a commentary article Monday, Gleeson observed the Justice Department has made conflicting statements to the court, which has “the authority, the tools and the obligation to assess the credibility of the department’s stated reasons for abruptly reversing course.” | In a commentary article Monday, Gleeson observed the Justice Department has made conflicting statements to the court, which has “the authority, the tools and the obligation to assess the credibility of the department’s stated reasons for abruptly reversing course.” |
“The law provides that the court — not the executive branch — decides whether an indictment may be dismissed. The responsible exercise of that authority is particularly important here, where a defendant’s plea of guilty has already been accepted. Government motions to dismiss at this stage are virtually unheard of,” Gleeson wrote. | “The law provides that the court — not the executive branch — decides whether an indictment may be dismissed. The responsible exercise of that authority is particularly important here, where a defendant’s plea of guilty has already been accepted. Government motions to dismiss at this stage are virtually unheard of,” Gleeson wrote. |
A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment. | A Justice Department spokeswoman declined to comment. |
Flynn’s defense did not immediately respond to a request for comment. | Flynn’s defense did not immediately respond to a request for comment. |
Former federal prosecutor Randall Eliason said while the order is not a definitive sign of what Sullivan will ultimately do with Flynn’s case, it is the clearest indication yet he is not willing to go along easily with the Justice Department’s request. | Former federal prosecutor Randall Eliason said while the order is not a definitive sign of what Sullivan will ultimately do with Flynn’s case, it is the clearest indication yet he is not willing to go along easily with the Justice Department’s request. |
“I think it’s hard to say what he might ultimately do, but I think it’s clear that he’s not simply going to take the government’s motion at face value, and he wants to probe the reasons for this reversal after two years, and I think that’s completely understandable,” Eliason said. “Judges don’t like to be manipulated.” | “I think it’s hard to say what he might ultimately do, but I think it’s clear that he’s not simply going to take the government’s motion at face value, and he wants to probe the reasons for this reversal after two years, and I think that’s completely understandable,” Eliason said. “Judges don’t like to be manipulated.” |
Eliason said Sullivan’s contemplation of holding Flynn in contempt for perjury exposed what has long been a flaw in Flynn’s argument that his plea should be undone. The former national security adviser admitted in court under oath three times before two different judges that he lied to the FBI. His assertion now that he did not actually do that means he lied to the court. | Eliason said Sullivan’s contemplation of holding Flynn in contempt for perjury exposed what has long been a flaw in Flynn’s argument that his plea should be undone. The former national security adviser admitted in court under oath three times before two different judges that he lied to the FBI. His assertion now that he did not actually do that means he lied to the court. |
“They can’t have it both ways,” Eliason said. “If they’re going to say now he didn’t lie to the FBI, then he lied to the judge. So you could be prosecuted for perjury for that. But presumably Barr’s DOJ is not going to prosecute him for perjury, so another option is the judge could hold him in contempt for lying to the judge.” | “They can’t have it both ways,” Eliason said. “If they’re going to say now he didn’t lie to the FBI, then he lied to the judge. So you could be prosecuted for perjury for that. But presumably Barr’s DOJ is not going to prosecute him for perjury, so another option is the judge could hold him in contempt for lying to the judge.” |
In 2009, Sullivan appointed a lawyer as a special prosecutor to investigate whether government lawyers who won a short-lived conviction in the case of former Senator Ted Stevens should be prosecuted for criminal conduct. At the time, the judge declared he had “never seen mishandling and misconduct” like it from the Justice Department. | In 2009, Sullivan appointed a lawyer as a special prosecutor to investigate whether government lawyers who won a short-lived conviction in the case of former Senator Ted Stevens should be prosecuted for criminal conduct. At the time, the judge declared he had “never seen mishandling and misconduct” like it from the Justice Department. |
Local newsletters: Local headlines (8 a.m.) | Afternoon Buzz (4 p.m.) | Local newsletters: Local headlines (8 a.m.) | Afternoon Buzz (4 p.m.) |
Like PostLocal on Facebook | Follow @postlocal on Twitter | Latest local news | Like PostLocal on Facebook | Follow @postlocal on Twitter | Latest local news |