Attorney John Gleeson, who was appointed by the court, also argued that Flynn should be convicted of lying, including his falsehood in court for admitting his crimes and subsequently denying them.
Gleeson, looking at Flynn’s full history, said the recent Justice Department support for Flynn was so politically advantageous to President Donald Trump and informal to prosecutors that it undermined public confidence in the rule of law.
The Justice Department “resigned from this responsibility” to prosecute defendants without fear or favor, Glesson wrote, “trying to provide special treatment to a favored friend and political ally of the President of the United States,” capturing what many critics of Gen. Prosecutors William Bar and Trump, especially in the legal community, claimed.
“It treats the case like no other and has thus undermined public confidence in the rule of law,” he wrote.
Gleeson made the argument on Wednesday after Sullivan called for an analysis of Flynn’s sworn statements and asked him to support the Justice Department’s request to dismiss Flynn’s case.
Gleeson’s testimony highlights the unusual area in which the Flynn trial and the legal issues Sullivan now weighs. Flynn is also trying to short-circuit Sullivan’s case, asking the DC Circuit Court of Appeals to consider whether Gleeson can weigh the case and whether the case should be dismissed immediately.
Flynn pleaded guilty before two federal judges to lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russian ambassador in late 2016, when he asked Russia not to issue sanctions on the Obama administration for electoral interference and to separate him from the Obama administration. an upcoming UN vote on Israel. He worked for a year in interviews with the Special Adviser’s Office and a major federal jury on his interactions with Russia and his 2016 work, which puts pressure on Turkey, before declaring his salary.
Bar then decided last month to step down in the Flynn category. The Justice Department claimed that Flynn’s lies were not “significant” for an investigation because Flynn should never have been investigated for his interactions with Russian officials.
The case has become a focal point for Trump and his supporters as they continue to criticize Russia’s investigation and the criminal prosecution of Mueller by many of Trump’s associates. He also challenged Barr’s critics, including Gleeson, to argue that Trump had overturned the Justice Department’s legal decisions and that Barr had succumbed to Trump’s political desire to reduce Mueller’s work and overtake his former advisers.
Sullivan, while handling Flynn’s case at trial, was reluctant to drop the charge.
Gleeson said Wednesday that it was not necessary for Sullivan to consider keeping Flynn in custody for forgery. Instead, the judge could help prevent Flynn’s court from serving his sentence.
“Among the smartest defendants”
Gleeson accused Flynn of trying to claim his innocence two years after his agreement was signed.
“The false eleventh rejection of a speech and the reversal of the charge of government misconduct are an obstacle to the administration of justice,” Gleeson wrote.
“Flynn not only sought to withdraw his claim, but also carried out a frontal attack on the integrity of the investigation. This was deliberately obstructive … Flynn’s apparent attempt to manipulate the system is particularly strong given the circumstances,” he added. the story of Flynn as a U.S. Army general and senior intelligence official. “He is ranked among the smartest defendants to come to court.”
Sullivan, who sentenced Flynn – who could face up to five years in prison – would be a way to restore order in the judiciary, Gleeson wrote. Sullivan had previously said he believed Flynn deserved to be imprisoned.
Several supporters of Trump and Flynn – including the Department of Justice, Republican members of Congress and Republican attorneys general – have argued that the court should follow DOJ’s decisions on whether or not a defendant should be prosecuted. They said the case would be dropped quickly without Flynn being convicted.
Some, including the legal defense team, have also publicly asked Trump to forgive Flynn.
Gleeson found that the Justice Department’s actions in the case raised too many questions for the judge who must accept the dismissal.
Flynn is trying to prevent Sullivan from delaying his request to dismiss the Department of Justice by asking for Gleeson’s appointment. A group of three judges at the DC Circuit Court of Appeals will hear arguments as to why or not Sullivan should have his case heard this Friday.
Gleeson has served as a federal judge in the Eastern District of New York for 22 years and is now a New York Associate with the elite defense law firm Debevoise & Plimpton. Prior to his appointment, Sullivan wrote an op-ed to the Washington Post claiming that Sullivan would retain control of the Flynn case, challenging the Department of Justice’s actions.
Democrats in the judiciary are coming out to Bar
Democrats in the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday gave an interview to Sullivan attacking Barr for handling many political charges.
“There may be a perfectly legitimate explanation for the change of heart of government. But the facts that are available to the public today, the Commission and this Court are corrupt,” they wrote. “It is the role of this Court to uncover this truth.”
Democrats also point out how Barr prevented them from investigating him.
“The need for judicial oversight is even greater because Attorney General Barr has lifted congressional oversight at every turn, depriving the House Judiciary Committee of every opportunity to ask Barr about the misrepresentation of the Mueller Report, its role. to the conviction of Roger Stone, or the policies he has implemented to facilitate the inappropriate politicization of the prosecutorial decision-making process, “they write. “Barr is now seeking to sue this court as well.”
Sullivan has not decided
Sullivan wrote on Wednesday that he had not decided what to do with Flynn’s case.
“Despite allegations in the interviews between Mr. Flynn and the government, Judge Sullivan has not decided to reject the dismissal proposal or to conduct a contemptuous investigation. All he has decided is that there can be something to be decided, “Sullivan wrote, informing the DC Circuit before the court heard about his authority.
Sullivan pointed to another politicized lawsuit in his argument to formulate his view: an attempted appeal by Roger Stone, Trump’s longtime friend and political adviser. DC Circuit had denied Stone’s attempt to challenge his order before his criminal trial, and Sullivan claimed on Wednesday that the appellate court’s decision in that case was a reason for Circuit to stay out of the Flynn case now.
The Justice Department and Flynn also made their final arguments at the Circuit on Wednesday, saying the Justice Department holds power in court decisions. Both are asking the DC Circuit to force Sullivan, the judge at trial below them, to drop Flynn’s case.
The arguments, together, reflect how intense the Flynn case has become, especially as it proceeds with the hearing on Friday, with the appellate court hearing questions about the separation of powers and the controls and balances of judges in the executive branch.
This story has been updated with additional developments.