- Joined
- Apr 20, 2018
- Messages
- 10,257
- Reaction score
- 4,161
- Location
- Washington, D.C.
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
You may recall that Michael Flynn submitted a sentencing memo that broached the notion that he was somehow entrapped. Today, Judge Sullivan presided over Flynn's sentencing hearing, and during the portion in which he reviewed Flynn's sentencing requests, Sullivan expressly asked Flynn whether he was of a mind to retract his guilty plea and pursue a line whereby he argued that the government's, the FBI's specifically, actions were of a nature that made his lies be not criminally culpable.
Sullivan:
Flynn:
Sullivan:
Flynn:
(Source) -- Note: If/when I see the transcript of the hearing, I'll add it to the thread.
Sullivan concluded that line of inquiry asking whether Flynn "believed that he was entrapped by the FBI?" Flynn, through his attorney, responded, "No."
That exchange transpired well before today's WH press briefing, yet Sarah Sanders, when asked if the WH was of a mind to revisit its stance that Flynn was ambushed, said "no" and she repeated a non-sequitur canard (~2:27 in the video below) regarding the fact of Jim Comey having said that questioning procedure extant in Flynn's in-WH interview was non-standard was adequate for the WH to maintain that Flynn's lying was something other than willful and wholly of Flynn's own contrivance.
That is the WH's, thus Trump's, current position even though:
If ever there were any doubt before, it's clear now that Trump and/thus WH haven't a problem with lying. They have a problem with the FBI. Listen to Sarah Sanders respond to the question of whether the WH/Trump has a problem with one of his top aides having lied to the FBI. "Not when it comes to things that have anything to do with the President." (~5:50 in the video above) In other words, "No."
Seriously?!?! Trump's top national security advisor lied to the FBI and that doesn't bother Trump. WTH!!!
Trump's/the WH's insouciance about lying might be because doing so is SOP, perhaps even de rigueur, with Trump for as Giuliani implicitly acknowledged, Trump has changed his story four or five times.
So, what person would you have and trust as your employee, friend, leader, associate, or veritable strangers who simply has no concern that you lie to them or who lies to you? Do you welcome into your realm liars? Do you clamor to exculpate, defend and ingratiate yourself with liars?
Note:
Sullivan:
Mr. Flynn's briefing concerned the court...I cannot recall any incident where the court has ever accepted the plea of someone who maintained he was not guilty. (Source)... I will inform you, any false answers will get you in more trouble, do you understand?
Flynn:
[Yes]
Sullivan:
[Do you wish] to challenge the circumstances under which you were interviewed by the FBI?
Flynn:
No, your honor. I was aware that lying to the FBI was a crime.
(Source) -- Note: If/when I see the transcript of the hearing, I'll add it to the thread.
Sullivan concluded that line of inquiry asking whether Flynn "believed that he was entrapped by the FBI?" Flynn, through his attorney, responded, "No."
That exchange transpired well before today's WH press briefing, yet Sarah Sanders, when asked if the WH was of a mind to revisit its stance that Flynn was ambushed, said "no" and she repeated a non-sequitur canard (~2:27 in the video below) regarding the fact of Jim Comey having said that questioning procedure extant in Flynn's in-WH interview was non-standard was adequate for the WH to maintain that Flynn's lying was something other than willful and wholly of Flynn's own contrivance.
That is the WH's, thus Trump's, current position even though:
- Flynn pled guilty to lying
- Flynn was, by the judge, given the uncommon opportunity to retract his guilty plea because, as Sullivan noted, the charge Flynn broached in his sentencing request "concerned" the judge. No surprise that, for such a claim, albeit untimely (the time to present it was before pleading, thus, should it prevail, obviating the need, to say nothing of the cost, to plead and proceed to trail; or, if not presented before trial, at trial as part of Flynn's defense) if shown in court to be true, would be a "fair and just" reason for not only retracting a guilty plea, but also form the foundation of a defense that has a reasonable chance of prevailing on a point of law and jurisprudential ethos. Flynn demurred.
- Flynn, in addition to declining the opportunity to alter his plea, Flynn explicitly trothed that he was not entrapped.
- Donald Trump acknowledged that Flynn lied to the FBI: "Flynn lied and they've destroyed his life."
If ever there were any doubt before, it's clear now that Trump and/thus WH haven't a problem with lying. They have a problem with the FBI. Listen to Sarah Sanders respond to the question of whether the WH/Trump has a problem with one of his top aides having lied to the FBI. "Not when it comes to things that have anything to do with the President." (~5:50 in the video above) In other words, "No."
Seriously?!?! Trump's top national security advisor lied to the FBI and that doesn't bother Trump. WTH!!!
Trump's/the WH's insouciance about lying might be because doing so is SOP, perhaps even de rigueur, with Trump for as Giuliani implicitly acknowledged, Trump has changed his story four or five times.
So, what person would you have and trust as your employee, friend, leader, associate, or veritable strangers who simply has no concern that you lie to them or who lies to you? Do you welcome into your realm liars? Do you clamor to exculpate, defend and ingratiate yourself with liars?
Note:
- Flynn timeline included only to provide temporal perspective.