Barack Obama, who some people claim is a former president of the United States (I’m not so sure) went on a rant about the dismissal of the charges against Gen Michael Flynn. Of course he got his facts wrong, possibly intentionally. But don’t worry about it. Leftist law professor Jonathan Turley laid it all out for us and in the process, completely destroyed Obama. Obama called the dismissal of the charges, unprecedented, but he’s wrong. In fact the same thing occurred when he was leading the Democratic caliphate in this country.
I can understand where Obama is coming from. He does not particularly like Biden as the Democratic nominee for president but he is now the only one that can cover up the investigation into the origins of the Russia collusion hoax. As more and more information about the origins become known, Obama’s name is getting mentioned more and more. That is why he went on the rant. He was borrowing a page from the Clinton playbook called “Wag the Dog.”
Obama ranted:
“The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed — about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn. 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 norms — but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk. And when you start moving in those directions, it can accelerate pretty quickly as we’ve seen in other places.”
Professor Turley then destroyed him with the following:
Jonathan Turley tweeted: President Obama is being quoted on Flynn, saying “There is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free.” It is a curious statement. First and foremost, Flynn was not charged with perjury. 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. Finally, there is precedent. 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.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?
Professor Turley took Obama to school and ate his lunch. Score one for the good guys.