Liberal Law Professor Smacks Down Obama For Claiming Dismissal Of Flynn Charges Puts ‘Rule Of Law At Risk’

Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley fired again at former President Barack Obama after the latter claimed that the Department of Justice dropping all prices towards General Michael Flynn signifies that the “rule of law is at risk.”

“The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed — about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn,” Obama stated on Friday, according to Yahoo News. “And the fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic— not just institutional.”

Turley, nonetheless, was not having any of it. The regulation professor, who describes himself as a liberal, stated that Obama’s feedback had been flawed for a lot of causes. He added that they present simply how invested the previous president was in Flynn’s case. “It is a curious statement. First and foremost, Flynn was not charged with perjury,” Turley tweeted. “Second, we now know Obama discussed charging Flynn under the Logan Act which has never been used successfully to convict anyone and is flagrantly unconstitutional. Third, this reaffirms reports that Obama was personally invested in this effort.”

Turley went on to say that opposite to what Obama claimed, there truly is a precedent for the Justice Department’s sudden choice. In reality, Obama’s personal legal professional common had achieved precisely the identical factor. “Finally, there is precedent,” Turley wrote. “There is a specific rule allowing for this motion under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a). There are specific Supreme Court cases like Rinaldi v. United States addressing the standard for such dismissals.”

“The Justice Department has dismissed cases in the past including the Stevens case,” he continued. “That was requested by President Obama’s own Attorney General Eric Holder for the same reason: misconduct by prosecutors. It was done before the same judge, Judge Sullivan. How is that for precedent?”

“While people of good faith can certainly disagree on the wisdom or basis for the Flynn motion, it is simply untrue if President Obama is claiming that there is no precedent or legal authority for the motion,” Turley later wrote on his web site.

This simply goes to point out how bitter and ignorant Obama actually is. He’s livid that the injustices that his administration did to Flynn are being uncovered, and he’s resorted to peddling lies as he throws a public mood tantrum within the hopes of distracting the general public from what’s actually happening. Obama may need to assume twice earlier than he opens his mouth on this topic once more, nonetheless, as a result of even liberals are usually not shopping for what he’s promoting anymore.

This piece was written by PoliZette Staff on May 11, 2020. It initially appeared in LifeZette and is utilized by permission.

Read extra at LifeZette:
House Democrat introduces $100B TRACE Act aimed toward compromising essentially the most basic rights of each American
These RINOs are forming ‘Republicans for Biden’
Michael Rapaport launches disgusting Mother’s Day assault on Melania Trump

Source link