The Independent View: Judge Appoints Outsider to Challenge Dismissal of Michael Flynn Case

The Federal Judge, Emmet Sullivan, Overseeing the Case against Former National Security Adviser, Michael Flynn, for Two times Lying to the FBI, has Appointed a Retired Judge, John Gleeson, to Challenge the Justice Department (DOJ) and Attorney General Barr, Abrupt effort to Dismiss the Case.

The Case the DOJ had pursued in Court since 2017, is part of the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Election. Trump and his Supporters have embarked on a Long Campaign for Flynn’s Name to be Cleared, while Flynn has sought to Withdraw his Guilty Pleas. The Justice Department announced late last week that it was Dropping the Charges, concluding that Special Counsel Robert Mueller did Not have “a legitimate investigative basis” to Interview Flynn about his Communications with the Russians during the Presidential Transition. In 2019, the Judge Rejects Michael Flynn’s Claims of FBI Misconduct.

Now, Attorney General, William Barr, said that Dropping the Case against Flynn was in the Interests of Justice, but nearly 2,000 Former Justice Department Officials Signed a Letter calling for Barr to Resign, saying he had Undermined the Rule of Law by Intervening in the Case.

Judge Sullivan next Refused to immediately Sign-Off on the Justice Department Decision, saying he would instead let the Outside Legal Community weigh in about the move first. Legal Experts expected Sullivan to ask for Additional Information from the DOJ about its Decision, or to Ask for more Details about why it was Moving to Abandon the Case.

But then Late Wednesday he Surprised with the Extraordinary move of Appointing Gleeson, who will also Explore a Perjury Charge against Flynn. While Judges do sometimes Appoint such Third Parties to Represent an Interest they feel is Not being Heard in a Case, Sullivan’s move was Highly Unusual, said Samuel Buell, a Former Federal Prosecutor who now Teaches Criminal Law at Duke University.

Sullivan is essentially bringing in an Outsider to Represent the Point of View of the Original Prosecutors, who believed Flynn had Committed a Crime before Barr Intervened and essentially Replaced them with a Prosecutor willing to say he had Not. “This is extraordinary for the judge to appoint somebody to argue against a prosecutors’ motion to dismiss a criminal case,” Buell said. “But it’s extraordinary for a prosecutor to move to dismiss this sort of criminal case.” “What the Justice Department did in the first case is, as far as any of us can figure out, unprecedented,” he added. “So the fact that this is pretty unprecedented too is not that surprising.”

Gleeson, who Served on the Federal Bench in Brooklyn and had Run the Criminal Division in the Federal Prosecutor’s Office there, has already made Plain his Skepticism of the Motion to Dismiss the Flynn Case. He Co-Wrote an Op-Ed Article this week in The Washington Post Encouraging Sullivan to Scrutinize it.

The Case holds Deep Political Implications as President Trump seeks to Shift the Focus away from his Handling of the Coronavirus Pandemic ahead of the November Election and Recast the Russia Investigation as a “deep state” Plot to Sabotage his Administration.