Judge Gleeson has filed his amicus brief in the #Flynn case, and it opens with some very intense criticism of DOJ. 
Judge Gleeson isn't pulling any punches. He says that there is evidence that DOJ's motion to dismiss the case against Flynn constitutes a "gross abuse of prosecutorial power" and that the govt has engaged in "highly irregular conduct to benefit a political ally of the President"
Most of the commentary that I have seen supporting DOJ's motion to dismiss has been based on separation of powers or prosecutorial misconduct. But DOJ's motion said that it couldn't prove its case against Flynn. Not surprising why that's not the arg folks have supported...
On the question whether Flynn's lies were material, Judge Gleeson takes great pains to show that the materiality argument is both legally and factually unsound.
Judge Gleeson's brief repeatedly highlights that the legal arguments that DOJ is making in the Flynn case are arguments that the Department has routinely and emphatically opposed in other cases.
Yikes! Bad luck that DOJ filed a brief making *the exact opposite* legal argument only three days before filing its motion to dismiss the Flynn case.
This is a key point in the Flynn case. While I have no doubt that innocent people plead guilty, here there is significant evidence to think Flynn is not innocent. The Muller report contradicts Flynn's present claim that he can't remember calls with Kislyak & didn't know he lied
And Judge Gleeson suggests Judge Sullivan might want to get his hands on materials from the Special Counsel investigation to show that Flynn's current claim of not knowing that he's lying isn't credible
Now this seems like it might be an overclaim by Judge Gleeson. It isn't "irrelevant"--at least not in the evidentiary sense of that word--whether the FBI agents thought Flynn lied. The question is simply how *persuasive* that is in the larger scheme of Flynn's mens rea.
I'm not sure how important this point is to Judge Sullivan, but the idea that President Trump could, at any moment, issue a pardon to Flynn does make it seem as though some of DOJ's separation of powers arguments are overblown.
I'm glad to see that Judge Gleeson isn't recommending criminal contempt against Flynn for perjury. But I'm deeply uncomfortable with his suggestion that Judge Sullivan give Flynn a longer sentence on the theory that he lied to the court in attempting to withdraw his plea.
The justice system incentivizes defendants to lie in plea colloquies. We know that innocent people plead guilty, and the courts don't want to allow them to acknowledge it in open court. The idea that they could be punished afterwards for that is perverse.
In any event, for those who are interested in reading Judge Gleeson's amicus in the Flynn case, here's the link: drive.google.com/file/d/1qOr66B…
