The plot thickens on the Flynn case. It turns out it was the Judge not Flynn’s lawyer who is after the “exculpatory evidence.” I have my own guess on some of it. Keep in mind this is a new judge, not Contreras the judge that was ready to sentence him in his plea agreement.
February 1, 2018 — bunkerville .. Turns out the judge was a member of the FISA court. Hmmm.
It is not clear why Contreras was recused from the case. UPDATE:
(The Judge indeed is a FISA Judge.. did he approve the FISA request?) LInk:
September 20, 2017 — bunkerville
Last year, The Gateway Pundit asked: Was President Trump’s National Security Advisor tricked into meeting with the FBI without a lawyer?
Back to the story at hand.
The federal judge assigned to the criminal case against Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn has ordered Special Counsel Robert Mueller to turn over any “exculpatory evidence” to Flynn’s defense team.
Oddly, however, Flynn’s legal team did not make this request. Instead, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued the order “sua sponte,” or at his discretion, invoking the “Brady Rule” – which requires prosecutors to turn over previously unfiled evidence that might have a material impact on a defendant’s case. Interestingly, two days before the order Mueller filed a motion for an agreed-upon protective order regarding the use of evidence in the case, including “sensitive materials,” provided to Flynn’s lawyers by the office of the Special Counsel.
Judge Andrew Napolitano addressed Sullivan’s decision on Tuesday, saying The judge on his own, not in response to any application from General Flynns lawyers says, “By the way, I want all exculpatory evidence, evidence that could help Flynn or hurt the government turned over to Flynns lawyers.”
Why would he we want that after General Flynn has already pleaded guilty? That is unheard of. He must suspect a defect in the guilty plea. Meaning, he must have reason to believe that General Flynn pleaded guilty for some reason other than guilt.
More at Zero Hedge