Thread by @DawsonSField

Thread on the DOJ's response to Sidney Powell's writ do dismiss the case against Gen. Flynn.
DOJ has discretion over prosecution, but one a guilty verdict is found in a court it is no longer simply a prosecution it is a sentencing or a reversal of verdict. scribd.com/document/46396…

Does anyone think DOJ or local prosecutors could take a list of people serving in prison & 'drop their indictment'?
How are people freed after conviction? By a judge finding evidence to vacate or reverse their conviction. But DOJ has not corrected the evidence yet...

You should read my thread on the Sullivan filing before continuing. The DOJ has not corrected or replaced any of the evidence presented by Van Grack over 3 1/2 years claiming Flynn was guilty. That is the evidence that is supporting the conviction.

https://twitter.com/DawsonSField/status/1267577094227271689?s=20

It makes it very difficult to reverse that conviction, if DOJ is still refusing to say that the facts involved in that conviction are wrong. If DOJ really wanted Sullivan to drop it, they would have filed that Van Grack's SCO filings are false but they have not done that yet.

DOJ refers to their motion to dismiss the indictment, but it is no longer an indictment, it is a conviction. A conviction based upon evidence that DOJ submitted to the court. Why hasn't DOJ retracted the 3 1/2 years of lies Van Grack told to the court?

Maybe they want Sullivan to rule that they are lies, so that Sullivan (not Barr) is the finder of fact and the one who initiates prosecution of Special Counsel lawyers. The govt. may 'with leave of the court' dismiss a prosecution. It is not automatic...

As we learned from the Tim Shea filing in the case, FBI had no valid investigation to even conduct the interview of Flynn, had he gone to trial there is no chance he would have been convicted. Which is why Sullivan is investigating Flynn's justifications for pleading guilty...

We do get a big fact drop here! It confirms that the FBI created their own transcript of the Flynn Kislyak call. These are different than the ones Grenell declassified, I have speculated they are very different and were made so by someone working for McCabe.

Huh, @Comey was against notifying the Trump transition team about the transcript but Clapper & Yates pressured him but not hared enough to force him to do it. Meanwhile McCabe worked against him from underneath...

When Yates finally decides to make in at order, Comey has already sent McCabe's agents into the trap.

DOJ keeps hinting that the Final 302 & the revisions that went to create it are suspect. If they said outright that this was a fraud & invalidates the documents relied upon by the court to convict Flynn, vacating the guilty plea would be easy. But they dont' say it...

I think we are going to eventually see that the Final 302, was revised to match up with the FBI version of the transcript which we haven't seen yet. Dems will howl that Grenell's version was inaccurate, when it is likely the FBI version was edited to make Flynn look guilty...

Looks like Yates & McCord took the FBI version of the transcript to meet with VP Pence & others at the White House. Can't wait to see what 'errors' there are in that transcript & who made them...

This is one of the big issues addressed by Judge Sullivan, for 3 1/2 years DOJ submitted documents claiming Flynn made "materially" false statements. DOJ has not retracted these claims yet. So DOJ is still on the record taking both positions. Which DOJ should the judge believe?

Very important.
Sullivan has still not ruled on Powell's January Withdraw of Plea for ineffective counsel (Covington) or her motion to dismiss for government misconduct. Covington & DOJ have not even responded to all of the judges requests for evidence on those 2 filings.

So if the judge dismisses immediately, he does so without finding that Powell is correct that Covington's lawyers screwed Flynn over. It also ends Covington's production of evidence related to proving what they did to Flynn.

More importantly, the judge has not ruled on the Dismissal for Government Misconduct yet either. So he doesn't know if DOJ is asking for a dismissal to avoid the judge ruling on DOJ misconduct in the prosecution.
It would be letting Van Grack & his team off the hook.

So Sullivan appointed the Amicus to gather the facts that Covington & Van Grack stalled on producing from January until the end of May. The facts need to rule that Covington's lawyers failed to represent him & the facts of misconduct by Van Grack & the SCO.

The legal argument is essentially demanding that the court AFTER conviction become a rubber stamp upon DOJ's actions. That is true when there is a "presumption of regularity" in DOJ's actions, but this case is in no way regular. DOJ only dropped 2 of the 3 charges in it too!

DOJ even spells out the principal reason why a court can reject a motion to dismiss. "to protect a defendant against prosecutorial harassment."
While some have focused on the 'with prejudice' dismissal, it only applies to 2 of the 3 charges & not new perjury charges.

In the Fokker case it was the opposite, the judge thought DOJ was being too lenient on the defendant, which is not a judge's call.
But the Flynn case is the opposite, we have evidence that the DOJ conducted misconduct against the defendant.
Is DOJ protecting Flynn or Van Grack?

Per Judge Sullivan's filing, he is not basing his ruling on any of these issues, he has not even made a ruling. His concern is why DOJ has lied to him in this case, lies that harmed the defendant & have already harassed him for 3 1/2 years.

The Dems are arguing that the dismissal is DOJ misconduct. Essentially the issue that will be resolved is can a Swamp creature at DOJ dismiss the charges against a corrupt Washington insider & the court has no say about it after the defendant is guilty.
A good precedent to set!