Did the Flynn Judge Refuse to Toss the Bogus Case Against Him Because of a Washington Post Op-Ed?

|
|
Posted: May 21, 2020 1:10 PM
Did the Flynn Judge Refuse to Toss the Bogus Case Against Him Because of a Washington Post Op-Ed?

Source: AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster

The Democrat-media complex is hard at work trying to spin the Michael Flynn case. The former Obama officials are demanding Attorney General William Barr resign due to political interference. They’re just mad their dirty tricks are being exposed. It’s all the things they thought would vanish under a Clinton presidency. Also, no one cares. They can say whatever they want—it won’t happen. 

The Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss the charges against Michael Flynn on May 7. After new documents showed gross prosecutorial misconduct on behalf of the Obama-run DOJ, it was quite clear that Flynn was another victim in this Trump-Russia collusion myth that had already ensnared Carter Page, a former Trump campaign official, who was spied on by the FBI. The Trump dossier, an unverified, inaccurate, and totally debunked piece of political opposition research funded by the Democrats and the Clinton campaign was the piece of so-called evidence that got the ball rolling regarding this fiasco. The FBI had no evidence in their counterintelligence probe. They have no evidence to interview Flynn but did so anyway because James Comey was out to get Flynn at all costs. 

There is no case now. The prosecutor has resigned. All sides want this to go away, but Judge Emmet Sullivan, who shot his mouth off calling Flynn a traitor, refuses to toss the case. Was it because of a Washington Post op-ed? It’s been floated. We’ll get to that in a second.

There’s been speculation abound regarding why Sullivan has refused to toss the case. One of the main reasons, and it’s not insane, is that Sullivan is possibly looking to drag this case throughout this year in the hopes that a Democrat wins the upcoming election and that DOJ withdraws the motion. Given that the retired judge Sullivan appointed to fight the DOJ motion, John Gleeson will file his brief in June, with the goal of having oral arguments in July—it’s hard to see how Sullivan isn’t trying to keep this circus’ high top from crashing down too quickly. Oh, and he’s allowed for amicus briefs from anti-Trump lawyers to be filed, so you know a tidal wave of insanity is about to crash into the courtroom.

Another interesting tidbit is that Gleeson works for a law firm that represented Sally Yates, the acting AG who was fired for refusing to defend one of Trump’s executive orders. Yates is the first resister and one of the key people who was given marching orders from Obama to protect the FBI investigation into Russian collusion. Flynn was a main concern for the Obama White House upon exiting and Yates offered a warning of what would happen if he were to stay on as President Trump’s national security adviser. In the end, the transcripts of the calls he had with then-Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak were leaked to the press. The anti-Trump deep state went to work and this legal nightmare was born.

The Washington Post op-ed who channeled a Yogi Berra mindset with this case was co-written by David O’Neil, who also works with Gleeson at the same law firm defending DOJ resister-in-chief Yates.  This op-ed dropped on May 11. Sullivan tapped Gleeson to be the ringmaster for this legal circus’ final act on May 13

In the meantime, Flynn’s lawyers, who warned us in October, that new evidence will expose an FBI plot, filed a new petition to dismiss the case. Liberal law professor and lawyer Jonathan Turley said this case has become a total disaster and Sullivan is responsible for it devolving into a debacle. He also added that his overreach could plunge his courtroom into mob rule. 

Editor's Note: Want to support Townhall so we can keep telling the truth about the Russian Collusion Hoax? Join Townhall VIP and use the promo code FISA to get 25% off VIP membership and join us in the fight today!