Home | About | Donate

Flynn to Plead Fifth, Refuse Compliance With Senate Subpoenas


#1

Flynn to Plead Fifth, Refuse Compliance With Senate Subpoenas

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn on Monday will plead the Fifth Amendment and refuse to hand over documents subpoenaed by the Senate Intelligence Committee, according to news reports.


#2

Typical...no guts, no glory. Perhaps Erdogan will provide a villa in Ankara for Flynn where he can retire and not be extradited for treason. Or his pal, Vlad can find a room or two for him at his dacha in Sochi. Again, without being extradited for "high crimes and misdemeanors."

Way to throw away your entire career and future, Flynn.


#3

Damn, someone spread the word to poor people rotting in jails across this great land for unpaid parking tickets and bail, etc, that all they have to do is withhold all documents demanded by the system unless afforded immunity from prosecution.


#4

If Flynn's lawyer can make it crystal clear to Congressional investigators and prosecutors that he has tangible evidence of criminal conduct by his former boss, I say give him some level of immunity.


#5

Another paragon of virtue and inspiration for the young!

Since he was an official, is he allowed to determine what documents belong to him and which are rightfully government documents related to his office? I realize that any meetings before he was appointed to the office is a point but then as a former military officer with high level clearances, those points seem moot.

I think most of America never realized just how mucked up everything is in Washington until Trump set the boob ball rolling. Hopefully Republicans will release America from this arrogant fool who has done more to damage our country than likely anyone ever expected was even possible when the gerrymandered electoral college appointed him to the WH!


#6

I defend the right of anyone to exercise his/ her rights under the Fifth Amendment. It is standard procedure to grant immunity if a subject's testimony is deemed critical in getting to essential facts in a given case.

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation."


#7

Lt. General Flynn ret.. He retained security clearances and as an active part of the Intelligence community/Pentagon, he seemingly would not have the right to declare government activities/documents/contacts to be his own personal property to dispose of as he wished (including restricting them from the government that they belonged to) ..."...except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia..."


#8

I"m not sure about that, the lawyers will have to argue that.


#9

Lt. General Flynn


#10

I'm for granting Lt. Gen. Flynn immunity. Some of the most notorious mafiosi are living incognito, with new identites, provided by the government, for their cooperation with prosecutors. I think it strange to treat Flynn as the major figure when the whole world knows it is Donald Trump that they're after, the Big Tuna is the prize, not little Charlies like Flynn.


#11

The problem with granting Flynn immunity, particularly if done by Congress, is that the same testimony may be inadmissible in court. Read about Oliver North and Iran Contra.

Eh, reread your comment, you are talking about immunity as part of the plea process, not the Congressional investigative process.


#12

Yes, but any lawyer worth his/her salt would not let a client testify before Congress because that testimony can be used against him in court.


#13

Flynn lied to Pence which appears to be on his own dime. Secondly, Flynn took many oaths which he apparently foreswore with reckless abandon. You seem to hold a double standard for the military. While a civilian can be (under the Patriot Act) held without trial under military jurisdiction like was Padilla, you seem willing to not apply those draconian military laws to a high ranking military man.

That said, I agree with you that such expedients like the Patriot Act undermine the Constitution and that all citizens should have the right to take the fifth. However as you quoted, the very amendment as written excludes the military. Flynn's security clearances and position in the government effectively constitute active service and therefore the amendment would not apply in his case.

Naturally that would take (possibly) take years to litigate using appeals. He was an intelligence officer of the government, I take the position that his activities as a civilian (able to take the fifth) are different from his activities (including documents etc) as a serving member of the government with high level security clearences.


#14

Ditto and "PERIOD."


#15

I do not follow your reasoning here. At issue is whether Flynn has the right to refuse to testify under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, I say he does. We'll see how this plays out.


#16

Civil forfeiture:



And this:

Double jeopardy:

Right to trial:

Words are great, but this crap has been going on for years. USA, USA, USA....


#17

Apparently, Flynn believes that the oath to support and defend the Constitution when he joined the military ended when he left the military and certainly did not apply to him as a civilian, let alone as a citizen. He deserves jail time.