>>4337396 lb
Grassley would like to know also!
Worth a re-read knowing what we know now. Seems like both Grassley and RR know the ultimate outcome already for Gen. Flynn and are just playing a game to put it out there in the public?
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-06-06%20CEG%20to%20DOJ%20(Response%20to%20Flynn%20Request).pdf
Interesting article from 2/18 regarding Gen. Flynn
I think Tuesday will be an interesting day. I think the Judge either throws the case out and rips Mueller, et al a new one, or Gen. Flynn withdraws his guilty plea.
If it turns out that they had a FISA warrant on Gen. Flynn, could that be the one that brings down the House and not Carter Page's?
"Sidney Powell, a former federal prosecutor and author of “Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice,” writes that Flynn should withdraw his guilty plea and suggests that Sullivan, as “the country’s premier jurist experienced in the abuses of our Department of Justice, . . . is the best person to confront the egregious government misconduct that has led to and been perpetrated by the Mueller-Weissmann ‘investigation’ and to right the injustices that have arisen from it.”
Friday’s order suggests Sullivan is ready to do just that. That order consisted of an updated standing order detailing the government’s obligations under Brady. On the surface, Friday’s order seems inconsequential, but in comparing the December 12, 2017, version to the February 16, 2018, version, one substantive change stood out.
It was subtle, but significant given the posture of this case: The revised version added one sentence specifying that the government’s obligation to produce evidence material either to the defendant’s guilt or punishment “includes producing, during plea negotiations, any exculpatory evidence in the government’s possession.”
The change was significant because it indicates that, if the government did not provide Flynn material evidence during plea negotiations, Flynn has grounds to withdraw his plea. Sullivan’s revised standing order made that point clear, too—well, at least for Flynn’s lawyers. To explain: The Supreme Court has never addressed the question of whether a defendant may withdraw a guilty plea if the prosecution withholds exculpatory evidence during plea negotiations. The lower federal courts are split on this question. In his revised standing order issued on Friday, Sullivan dropped a lengthy footnote, detailing the case law and setting forth his position that, if material exculpatory evidence is withheld during plea negotiations, a defendant is entitled to withdraw his guilty plea.
Flynn’s attorneys now know what to do should Mueller’s team disclose such evidence. After the spanking Sullivan gave the prosecutors in the Stevens case, Mueller is on notice as well."
http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/19/michael-flynns-plea-reversal-uncover-federal-corruption/