In a rare move, a three-judge panel ordered the presiding judge in the criminal case against Flynn to respond to his attorney’s petition for a writ of mandamus.
New facts in the Michael Flynn case call into question the voluntariness of Flynn’s plea. Judge Sullivan should dismiss the charges to send a clear message: Outrageous prosecutorial coercion will not be tolerated.
Flynn’s case, already of significant interest to conservatives, will now likely have the full attention of the D.C. legal profession and ethics experts nationwide.
Sidney Powell exposed several more troubling details about the prosecution of Flynn, involving both the special counsel team and Flynn’s previous attorneys.
This dispute between the prosecution and the defendant is genuine and passionate and reflects their completely divergent views of the relevant facts.
If there is to be a just result in Flynn’s case, the court must address the question about Covington’s conflict of interest. Flynn shouldn’t be punished for mistakes that are attributable to his counsel rather than to him.
His former lawyer’s latest testimony establishes two facts, both of which benefit Michael Flynn and both of which the media has missed.
In the escalating dispute between government attorneys and former Trump national security advisor Michael Flynn’s new lawyer, the latter has the better argument.
- Media Gunning For Scott Atlas Because He Keeps Exposing Coronavirus Lies'Everything he says is false,' NBC News quoted CDC Direcontinue reading >
- New York Times’ Trump Tax Return ‘Bombshell’ Is A JokeIf this is the big pre-debate 'gotcha' that the Democracontinue reading >
- Washington Post: Mueller Prosecutor Investigated For Misleading Congress About Political Pressure On Stone CaseThat the Post is reporting that three career supervisorcontinue reading >