[Alberta's Child]

Very interesting and informative article.

From my vantage point, here's the dilemma in this case as I see it:

1. If Flynn were to fight this case, he would most likely win -- maybe even win so big that the FBI and Mueller's team would be cited for prosecutorial misconduct.

2. If Flynn were to fight this case, Mueller's team would simply drop the charges for lying (since they can't present any of the evidence of his lying -- from the Kislyak wiretaps -- in a court of law).

3. Instead, Flynn would be prosecuted for the more serious Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) violations.

Any Freepers have any insight on this? If you're a lawyer representing a client in Flynn's position, how would you go about dealing with this dilemma?

[treetopsandroofs]

FYI, we have at least one fascist freeper lawyer here who believes the bikers at Waco “got what they deserved”.

[Political Junkie Too]

Instead, Flynn would be prosecuted for the more serious Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) violations.

I'm not a lawyer, but common sense would say that this would be nothing short of retaliation.

Would Flynn even be on the radar for the FARA violation if he had not been entrapped by the FBI? Would Flynn be on the radar if he were not illegally unmasked in the first place?

To me (and hopefully a sympathetic jury), it all is tainted fruit stemming from the Obama administration trying to punish Trump for beating Clinton. Pursuing Flynn for FARA after having his original case tossed out for entrapment would be malicious prosecution of the highest order because the probable cause is tainted by the illegal unmasking and resulting entrapment.

-PJ

[Attention Surplus Disorder]

“here’s the dilemma in this case as I see it:

1. If Flynn were to fight this case, he would most likely win — maybe even win so big that the FBI and Mueller’s team would be cited for prosecutorial misconduct. “

There is no such thing as “most likely win” (meaning, there is no validity to the concept...IMO, of course); because if he were to win, IANAL but I seriously doubt there would be any way in hell for Flynn to seek either damages, actual or punitive, that did not involve a separate 4 year $600K court battle which Flynn cannot mount.

2. If Flynn were to fight this case, Mueller’s team would simply drop the charges for lying (since they can’t present any of the evidence of his lying — from the Kislyak wiretaps — in a court of law).

I don’t think that is true, and in prior posts, you seem to have granted validity to Flynn having lied, unless I misread them. My belief is that Flynn *CAN* and *WOULD* be convicted of lying. It may be a “minor” lie; it may be a “harmless” lie, it may be a raspberry with pecans lie, but he did tell lies.

3. Instead, Flynn would be prosecuted for the more serious Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) violations.

I find that sketchy, but again, any of these things is a well-into-6-figures effort, the result of which is not predictable.

Any Freepers have any insight on this? If you’re a lawyer representing a client in Flynn’s position, how would you go about dealing with this dilemma?

Like it or not, fair or not, Flynn probably has the best deal he’s going to get in hand, right now. That’s my opinion.

[MortMan]

FARA violations have commonly been resolved by post-hoc registration, not by prosecution.

Mueller wants to enforce the law as written, whereas the justice system over the last several decades have relaxed their enforcement. Because of this discrepancy, there are issues with the FARA approach, as well.