Dowd dangled pardon to Flynn

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by samcraig, May 31, 2019.

  1. samcraig macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #1
    This is truly amazing

    Trump's lawyer John Dowd floated a pardon for Mike Flynn to Flynn's lawyer in the summer of 2017.

    Then, Dowd called Flynn's lawyer a week before Flynn pleaded guilty (in Nov 2017) and said: "Remember what we've always said about the President and his feelings toward Flynn."

    Transcript below of the call

    [​IMG]


    More via this link
    https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5cf18c62e4b0a1997b6a6938
     
  2. AlliFlowers Contributor

    AlliFlowers

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2011
    Location:
    L.A. (Lower Alabama)
  3. raqball macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2016
    #3
    Where do you see a pardon dangled? There is some serious stretching and reading into going on here.....
     
  4. samcraig thread starter macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #4
  5. raqball macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2016
    #5
  6. linuxcooldude macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    #6
    Hilary first.
     
  7. samcraig thread starter macrumors P6

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2009
    Location:
    USA
    #7
    Still living rent free in your head? Deflection noted.
     
  8. LizKat macrumors 601

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #8
    Well Dowd would certainly have hoped at least the other end of that call was doing some reading-into and some stretching of what was actually being said. A White House lawyer is not as free to skate in the margins of letter of law as may have seemed the case back in the 1970s.

    It's surely not like Dowd hadn't refreshed himself on how it came to pass that new rules of the road, --aka the Model Rules of Professional Conduct-- replaced what had been "merely" the Model Code of Professional Responsibility. Those new rules, including some requirements for formally refreshing oneself on ethical conduct from time to time, were laid on after the Watergate scandal put a slew of White House lawyers in the slam, essentially for having figured that ignoring codes of professional responsibility wasn't the same thing as an actual violation of Title 18 code...

    http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/...ow_a_3rd-rate_burglary_provoked_new_standards

     
  9. colourfastt macrumors 6502a

    colourfastt

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2009
    #9
    That, of course, being the 1970s when ethical behaviour was still part of the US government.
     
  10. LizKat macrumors 601

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #10
    Well enough so that at least John Dean realized the White House was going to end up criminally liable for Title 18 violations, at the rate things were then going with Nixon being guided by the likes of Ehrlichmann and Haldeman.

    We're in different territory now for sure. Now we have the head of the executive branch practically celebrating his relative immunity from laws that apply to the rest of us --e.g. his pronouncements early on about how he could cut a real estate deal for personal gain in Dubai "right now" if he felt like it-- and indeed Trump invents some operational freedoms from rule of law that don't exist.

    Trump's agencies do keep ending up in court on some of those maneuvers, but he apparently regards that fact as a mere and possibly temporary annoyance, as if one of these days he'll finally find a way to put the Constitution in a locked room while he gets done whatever he wants to do. Look how many times he sent DHS back to court trying to get a rule undone even behind a string of rulings all essentially saying more's needed to undo a rule than just to propose it's not a logical rule.

    In defense of attorneys advising this President, I will say it's pretty clear no one can really manage him. In the end that must translate to the lawyers having to look out for themselves and avoid scenarios that take them down along with their boss, if Trump refuses to accede to the rule of laws that do definitely apply to him and his agencies of government. Dowd knows the law so I would expect him to be cautious in conveying wishes of the President to third parties when those wishes lie in grey areas of the law.
     
  11. Admiral macrumors regular

    Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2015
    #11
    Flynn deserves a pardon but his conviction will probably be vacated for prosecutorial misconduct anyway.
     
  12. LizKat macrumors 601

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #12
    Pipe dream. Courtesy of the likes of Dick Morris for God's sake. Not saying that's where you formed your opinion. But Morris did rant on about that for awhile last year. Meanwhile Flynn still cooperating... so it's certainly not his own attorneys thinking any of the prosecutor(s) of the various cases Flynn's been involved in have gone down some wrong track.
     
  13. Admiral macrumors regular

    Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2015
    #13
    I didn't form my opinion from anything Dick Morris has said, to the best of my knowledge. I detest Dick Morris and avoid him. But I have followed the career of Andrew Weissmann and it's riddled with prosecutorial misconduct and abuse of power. Weissmann belongs in jail.
     
  14. LizKat macrumors 601

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #14
    So doubtless say some of the people he's landed in the slam who belonged there. It can definitely take a hardball player to counter hardball scofflaws. No one wins every case that lands in appeals court, but certainly not every case that's overturned pivots on "abuse of power".

    Who belongs in jail behind Mueller's investigation includes all the people already convicted if they didn't cut some kind of deal for cooperation ultimately deemed sufficient to waive a term in prison... and probably a few with cases pending at state level... and of course the big fish Mueller declined to charge but did not exonerate.

    To the extent Weissmann helped secure indictments, corroboration of evidence from other witnesses or convictions of any of these miscreants, good on him. If he overreached, some jurist will eventually point that out. Meanwhile your thinking that's the case deserves the "wishful" tag.
     

Share This Page

13 May 31, 2019