1/ This article is full of false and very misleading statements. Let's walk through them.
First, Carter writes that Flynn's lawyer claims a DOJ memo written in January 2017 "exonerates Flynn of any collusion with Russia."
Flynn is charged with lying to the FBI, not "collusion."
First, Carter writes that Flynn's lawyer claims a DOJ memo written in January 2017 "exonerates Flynn of any collusion with Russia."
Flynn is charged with lying to the FBI, not "collusion."
2/ This makes the headline of the piece, "Flynn Hearing Reveals Existence of Bombshell DOJ Memo Exonerating Michael Flynn," false.
Flynn has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. "Exonerating" him would involve disproving that charge, and his attorney's allegations don't do that.
Flynn has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI. "Exonerating" him would involve disproving that charge, and his attorney's allegations don't do that.
3/ That matters legally because Flynn is not entitled to discovery about matters that are unrelated to the crime at issue in the case.
It is also more accurate to say Flynn's attorney *claims* a memo "exonerates" him regarding "collusion." She offered no basis for her claim.
It is also more accurate to say Flynn's attorney *claims* a memo "exonerates" him regarding "collusion." She offered no basis for her claim.
4/ Carter also states that Flynn seeks to have the case dismissed for " ‘egregious’ prosecutorial misconduct" and later she states that there has been "extraordinary misconduct."
In fact, there is no evidence of prosecutorial misconduct that would benefit Flynn in this case.
In fact, there is no evidence of prosecutorial misconduct that would benefit Flynn in this case.
5/ His own attorney's allegations about Comey, Strzok, Page, and others do not relate to what is at issue in his case, which is whether he lied to the FBI. That means her arguments likely won't get off the ground.
Carter makes it seem like "extraordinary misconduct" is a fact.
Carter makes it seem like "extraordinary misconduct" is a fact.
6/ Carter states that "The January, 2017 timeline of the DOJ memo is extremely significant." That's false. There is no reason to believe that the timing of the memo is actually irrelevant to Flynn's case, particularly because the contents of the memo are not relevant to his case.
7/ Carter appears to be saying that Comey's memo is significant to her own theories about Comey and Trump. But the people who read this article are given the impression that somehow this memo matters for Flynn's case. It doesn't.
8/ Carter misleads her readers and the viewers on Fox News into believing that Flynn is innocent, that he was framed by Comey or others at the DOJ, or that the judge will throw out his case.
She has no evidence that those things are true, which is why she deceives instead. /end
She has no evidence that those things are true, which is why she deceives instead. /end
