[ad_1]
I Investigators of Russia's attempts to subvert American democracy mistreat General Michael Flynn, now found guilty of perjury in connection with the investigation. Some prosecutors themselves should face professional sanctions for their reprehensible behavior.
As the resident advocate of special advocate Robert Mueller on this site, I am forced to insist that investigators abide by the same standards that they would apply to others. Without excusing Flynn's lies with the investigators, an impartial observer may blame an obviously unfair and possibly illegal perjury trap.
Federal District Judge Emmet Sullivan also seems quite disturbed by the latest information on the Flynn case. While Flynn's conviction was imminent, Sullivan suddenly ordered prosecutors to draft all existing memoranda regarding the conduct of the interview in which Flynn had lied.
And for good reason. The investigators' treatment of Flynn, described in a memo filed by Flynn's lawyers with the court, resembles a classic case of an unethical trap.
The interview was established directly via a flynn phone call from Andrew McCabe, then deputy director of the FBI. McCabe, on his own, hinted that it looked like an ordinary national security briefing of the kind that Flynn used to give to the FBI. Even though he clearly knew that Flynn was a potential subject of investigation, McCabe deliberately deterred Flynn from the presence of lawyers.
In addition, when the officers arrived, they and Flynn treated the meeting rather informally, or even "thoughtlessly," and "the agents did not warn General Flynn of the penalties incurred for a false statement. … before, during, or after the interview. "The officers' decision not to inform Flynn was made at McCabe's request, because" they wanted Flynn to be relaxed. "
C & # 39; Absolute scandal.
Of course, it is not certain that the ordinary requirement of a "Miranda warning" applies in this situation, because Flynn was not arrested by the police or placed under his care However, in terms of common sense, what McCabe and his agents did was obviously trapped in. It is even possible that Flynn's conviction would be dismissed beyond the official legal line of conduct. seems to have done.
Let's be clear about what this FBI's perfidy means and does not mean First of all, this has no bearing on the conduct of the investigation by Mueller: the interview with Flynn took place months before Mueller's appointment. And Mueller, pleased with Flynn's cooperation, recommended not to impose a prison on the general. Flynn's case represents only a small part of Mueller's global investigation, which was conducted "under the microscope" (as the expression goes). Secondly, it does nothing to invalidate or render unusable any other information that Flynn has provided to Mueller's team while cooperating. If Flynn has provided evidence involving other people in mischief, that evidence is always good.
Third, this trap provides one more reason for McCabe himself to be the subject of an investigation for misconduct. Time and time again, it has been shown that McCabe did not act as an impartial executor of justice that a senior FBI official should be, but rather as partisan or ideological hacking against conservatives in general or against the team. of Trump in particular.
Fourth and finally, this could remove the "criminal" status from Flynn's permanent record. A man with a distinguished military career, whose lie did not imply criminal conduct in itself and who protected himself less than political maneuvers, perhaps deserved some relaxation. His reputation has already suffered; should its legal status also be permanently marked?
Be that as it may, McCabe's behavior seems shameful and deserves a fierce condemnation.
[ad_2]
Source link
