Flynn's original defense team rejected immunity offers

Sean Davis:
Multiple congressional committees approached Michael Flynn’s original defense counsel to raise the prospect of immunity in exchange for Flynn’s congressional testimony but were spurned, multiple sources familiar with the interactions told The Federalist.

After Flynn pleaded guilty to making false statements to federal investigators, representatives of multiple congressional committees with oversight responsibility for national security matters asked Flynn’s lawyers if Flynn would testify before Congress in exchange for a congressional grant of immunity. Robert Kelner, Flynn’s attorney at the time, immediately dismissed the overtures, sources told The Federalist. During one conversation, Kelner allegedly responded that in situations like the one facing Flynn, the prosecution essentially “owns” the defendant and added that he would be unlikely to pursue congressional testimony without the approval of former Spygate Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office.

Flynn was not told of these immunity conversations with congressional officials before they were rejected on his behalf, a source familiar with Flynn’s case told The Federalist. The former White House national security adviser and three-star Army general fired Kelner and the rest of his defense team at the Covington law firm in June 2019 and is currently trying to withdraw his guilty plea.

In court filings, Flynn has claimed that Kelner and others provided ineffective legal counsel and had significant unwaivable conflicts of interest that precluded them from diligently representing him in court, effectively denying him the constitutional right to counsel. Flynn is currently represented by attorney Sidney Powell, a former federal prosecutor with a history of exposing law enforcement corruption.
...
“If they failed to get Flynn’s input on whether to pursue congressional immunity, that is an amazing example of ineffective assistance of counsel,” French said. “That is a fundamental failing of the role of an advocate as an attorney.”
...
There is more. 

Covington & Burling have been ordered by the judge to do a new search of documents on their handling of the Flynn case when it turned out that they had failed to deliver a substantial number of documents to Flynn's new lawyer. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Should Republicans go ahead and add Supreme Court Justices to head off Democrats

29 % of companies say they are unlikely to keep insurance after Obamacare

Is the F-35 obsolete?