Flynn And DOJ Want Their Case To Be Dismissed

The debate on the case of Michael Flynn and the DOJ turned out to be an interesting one when the court denied to their pleads for dismissing the case. Both of them have been found lying to the FBI when they were asked about their conversation with Russian at the time of the President’s transition.

The case has been dismissed, and Sullivan, who has been the head of the hearings, is all set to announce Flynn’s sentence as he has been found guilty and has also accepted the same. Now a lawyer from the third party will be present in the court, and he will be arguing of the sentence that Sullivan will decide for Flynn. The hearing of the case began at around 11 AM with the video conferencing. Sullivan is considered to be a judge whom you cannot predict. He is known for his tough punishments. He has not given any hints on how he will deal with this case but is not going to be lenient in any form. He has also said that he might come up with some good sentences in the heated case. On the other hand, Flynn tried to stay away from the hearing but was unsuccessful in the same.

In a storyline for Flynn in court that started with him turning on President Donald Trump during the Mueller probe into Russian involvement in the 2016 election, it is the latest round — and possibly the final act. In the early days of the Trump administration, Flynn confessed to misleading the FBI during the second hearing. Flynn has narrowly avoided being charged in the three years since then. He has also become a symbol of Trump’s ongoing attempts to sabotage the investigation into Russia and a conduit to challenge the separation of powers between judges and prosecutors. The Justice Department claimed that in January 2017, Flynn should never have been questioned by the FBI and put in the place where he was lying.

But both Republican followers and Attorney General William Barr and Trump opponents were looking for a form of comeuppance in the situation. The hearing on Tuesday offers Sullivan an opportunity to challenge Flynn’s attorneys on his change of conscience, examine Barr’s divisive attempt to unravel Mueller’s team’s plea bargain, and focus on the case’s attorneys in recent months. According to a filing in advance of the hearing, Gleeson suggested Barr’s decision to drop the Flynn lawsuit was corrupt and politically motivated to support a President’s advisor. Flynn’s side has taken to criticizing in their online commentary the FBI officers and former lawyers involved in his case in court and smearing the judge. Though Flynn may never have been interviewed in the Trump White House, the Justice Department claims, citing its decision-making concerns about whether Flynn should be charged.

Lawyers and Flynn’s office have bombarded the court with several documents obtained from the FBI through lawyers during a study of the case commissioned through Barr for several months. In response, by filing them batch by batch, Flynn’s lawyers made those documents public, even after Sullivan told them to keep their fire. They argue the records help explain his innocence by showing how FBI authorities wavered until he was investigated and misled about whether he could face criminal charges. The claims in favor of Flynn have often drifted away from the truth of his situation and into ad hominem assaults or larger right-wing concerns about questioning Trump through the FBI.

Any of the releases contained notes about the FBI trying to terminate the Flynn probe in early 2017. Shortly before the agents heard of his contacts during the Trump transition with the then-Russian ambassador and wanted to question him. Strzok ‘s counsel, AitanGoelman, flagged handwritten notes (of dates) that Mr Strzok did not write on information that Flynn recently sent to court after his team requested it relating to his lawsuit from the Justice Department. If the alteration were meant to confuse the court, the modifications — which apply two dates in handwriting to the initial Strzok notes — would theoretically constitute a serious violation of procedure.

Monday’s creation added yet another twist to Flynn’s court record. It is unclear whether Sullivan will discuss the topic of notes at Tuesday’s hearing. Flynn’s lawyer has argued in court that in a lawsuit promoted by Strzok and Obama-era officials, Flynn is innocent and was wrongly prosecuted for his links to Russia. They have consistently filed FBI agent and leadership letters, meeting notes, and other documentation relevant to the case to add to their narrative, specifically demonstrating Strzok ‘s bias towards Trump and Flynn. One of the Strzok meeting notes stemmed from a meeting on January 5, 2017, recently made public but without a date amongst the Obama administration’s top officials. Last week, when Flynn’s team filed the handwritten notes in court, the paper bore the date 1/4-5/2017. The meeting and its date are key to a right-wing conspiracy theory about the supposed involvement of former President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden in the investigation into Flynn.

Barr has shot down allegations that Obama and Biden have behaved inappropriately or are now under investigation. The elections are coming up in a few weeks, and when on one side, both the parties are trying hard to win, new things are coming to the court and is keeping them occupied. The case of Flynn and the DOJ is one of the most interesting and heated arguments. With Sullivan being a part of the same will make it even more interesting to carry on with the hearings. Though the sentence might take a little time to get implemented because of the pandemic still, Sullivan has hinted that he is not going to be lenient at all. The case is going to be interesting to stay connected during the times when other tensions are also building up. Trump is keeping a keen eye on the investigations and hearings and might also try to fiddle in between.