Reply: Here's why.
Two Things Nearly Everyone Gets Wrong About the Michael Flynn CaseMay 21, 2020 By Clark Neily
"Represented by lawyers from the large D.C. law firm Covington & Burling (who it now appears had a
serious conflict of interest), Flynn initially asserted his innocence. Crucially, Flynn's attorneys pressed the prosecutors from the Special Counsel's Office to
turn over the memorandum of interview or "302" prepared by the agents who questioned him regarding his communications with Kislyak. Throughout November 2017, SCO prosecutors repeatedly rebuffed those requests even as they ratcheted up the pressure on Flynn to plead guilty in exchange for a recommendation of no jail time. But Flynn continued to maintain his innocence, and his attorneys continued pressing for production of the 302 and other discovery—which
the government continued to withhold."
"It has been reported, credibly in my judgment, that the stalemate was brought to a head when the SCO leaked to certain reporters that
a guilty plea from Flynn would ensure that Flynn's son, who was under investigation as Flynn senior's business partner (and also happened to be the father of Flynn senior's four-month-old grandchild) would not be prosecuted. This is the sort of
despicable tactic one associates with tyrants and dictators; but to our infinite discredit, it appears to have become a routine feature of American prosecutions as well."
(My highlighting in yellow and red)
