Appeals court orders judge to dismiss charges in Flynn case
The case is related to the Russia collusion probe
A federal appeals court Wednesday ordered a judge to grant the Justice Department its request to drop charges against former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
A three-judge panel on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, in a 2-1 ruling, said the department’s decision to abandon the case against Flynn settles the matter, despite Flynn having reached a deal with prosecutors from special counsel Robert Mueller’s office to plead guilty to making false statements in connection with a now-discredited FBI probe into whether the 2016 Trump campaign colluded with Russia.
Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general, admitted making materially false statements and omissions in an interview with FBI agents, days after the president’s January 2017 inauguration, about conversations he had during the presidential transition period with the Russian ambassador to the U.S.
However, Flynn’s attorneys withdrew their client’s plea earlier this year, following the release of declassified documents suggesting that the agents broke with protocol in the White House interview.
Attorney General William Barr asked the court in May to allow it to have the case dismissed.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan (Pictured) declined to immediately dismiss the case, seeking instead to evaluate on his own the department’s unusual dismissal request. He appointed retired federal Judge John Gleeson to argue against the department’s position and to consider whether Flynn could be held in criminal contempt for perjury, the wire service reports.
Flynn was the only White House official charged in Mueller’s investigation.
The Justice Department moved to dismiss the case as part of a broader effort by Barr to scrutinize, and even undo, some of the decisions reached during the Russia investigation.
In its motion, the department argued that Flynn’s calls with the Russian ambassador — in which they discussed sanctions the Obama administration imposed on Russia for election interference — were appropriate and not material to the underlying counterintelligence investigation.
The department also noted that weeks before the interview, the FBI had prepared to close its investigation into Flynn after not finding evidence of a crime.
However, Gleeson called the Justice Department’s request a “gross abuse” of prosecutorial power and accused the government of creating a pretext to benefit an ally of the president.
Wednesday’s 2-1 opinion was authored by Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee, and joined by Karen LeCraft Henderson, who had asked skeptical questions of lawyers for Flynn and the Justice Department during arguments earlier this month, the Associated Press reports.
(TLB) published this article with permission of John Solomon at Just the News
Some emphasis and pictorial content added by (TLB)
Click Here to read about the staff at Just the News
Stay tuned to …
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.