Posted on 05/14/2020 2:43:51 PM PDT by Beave Meister
The federal judge overseeing Michael Flynn’s criminal prosecution has directed the law firm that Flynn fired to reappear as an interested party in the controversial proceeding. On Thursday, that firm complied by filing a notice of appearance.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan of the District of Columbia on Thursday ordered the clerk of the court to “add Covington & Burling LLP (‘Covington’) as an interested party in this matter and directed counsel for Covington to file a notice of appearance on behalf of Covington as an interested party.” John E. Hall, the chair of Covington Burling’s global litigation practice, submitted the filing.
The order follows the highly controversial decision by the DOJ last week to file a motion to drop the criminal charges against Flynn, despite the retired lieutenant general having already pleaded guilty to lying to agents from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The DOJ now believes the Flynn case was an inappropriate setup.
Flynn was initially represented by Covington & Burling and attorneys Robert Kelner and Stephen Anthony when he pleaded guilty to charges that he lied to the FBI. However, he fired his legal team soon thereafter and replaced it with a new of team of attorneys led by conservative lawyer Sidney Powell. The new attorneys immediately accused Flynn’s previous legal team of ineffective assistance of counsel.
“Mr. Flynn’s guilty plea (and later failure to withdraw it) was the result of the ineffective assistance of counsel provided by his former lawyers, who were in the grip of intractable conflicts of interest, and severely prejudiced him,” Flynn’s current legal team wrote in a January motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
“That pernicious conflict infected and prejudiced his defense until he retained new counsel in 2019.”
(Excerpt) Read more at lawandcrime.com ...
He's had 3 years to ask that of his lawyers. Now that Flynn has a new lawyer, and the DOJ has dismissed the case, he wants those answers now? Sullivan is a moron, and a crook.
When someone files an ineffective assistance claim, the judge can enter an order allowing the attorney to break attorney/client privilege.
Covington & Burling is CIA. Always have been.
But that has no place in the courtroom at this time. This is about the DOJ's dismissal of the charges. Any argument Flynn has with his old lawyers should be conducted in a different venue, at a different time. Flynn fired his lawyers almost a year ago next month. If the Judge had any questions regarding the reasons Flynn fired them, he should have asked those questions then. It has no place in this courtroom now.
If the judge finds that everything was disclosed to him then he may deny the motion. Or sanction Flynn.
It’s also possible he could sanction the lawyers.
Bingo!!!
Anything to delay justice, and keep the circus going. Keep the general under the gag order.
Shouldn't the Judge have found out whether Flynn's old lawyers had disclosed everything to him when Flynn stated he was firing them? Now he's concerned about it? He obviously didn't care about it a year ago.
I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure Flynn waived his attorney-client privilege with that firm once he cited their "incompetent counsel" as grounds to withdraw his plea deal.
It doesn’t surprise me that he did not raise the question when no one else was doing so. Now they are. But there is no question that this is irregular. I would not put that on Flynn. The whole thing has been a sham from the outset. I would put that on Mueller. Maybe he should call Mueller. That would be interesting.
Blah.
I should the think that by the time this is said and done the General would own Covington and Burley.
If the former AG Holder wasn’t a partner in C&B this prolly would all be over by now.
This has got to stop. That poor man, having to deal with bullying and persecution.
I don't know why people keep parroting that nonsense. On that same thread last night I posted an exact quote from the plea deal that Flynn signed "under penalty of perjury."
Maybe Flynn should go for a jury trial. You think The prosecution dropping the case might constitute reasonable doubt?
What part of the DOJ dropped the case do you fail to understand?
Who is this prosecutor representing?
Not the DOJ because they dropped the case.
This is a federal issue, and not a State issue or jurisdiction.
So again who is the prosecutor representing? By what legal authority?
Answer: There is none. This is just all crap.
The judge should immediately removed from the bench, fired, loss of pension, seize all his assets, arrest him, interrogate and charge him with the maximum penalty.
Torment Flynn, thumb their noses at DJT.
Yes, his initials are BHO and the message was sent by his consigliere Valjar to that mobbed up shyster Holder.
At this point it seems there is no prosecutor, only Sullivan and his amicus buddies. That pretty much is the definition of a tribunal. The Red Queen would be proud.
Ditto
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.