On December 7, 2017, Judge Rudoph Contreras was recused from the Michael Flynn case. Contreras was the judge who took Flynn’s guilty plea:
Clarice Feldman wrote an interesting article about this on February 13, 2018:
“as the evidence mounts that the warrant was improperly granted, someone – perhaps the chief judge of the district – removed him from further participation in the case, likely because Contreras approved the warrant and its extension. If the warrant was improperly issued, all the evidence it garnered is tainted.”
One will note thatJudge Emmet G. Sullivan was the judge who tossed out the felony conviction of Ted Stevens. Sadly this happened after Stevens had died. The Judge reamed the prosecutors for failing to produce evidence that would have exonerated Stevens. He also changed the way he did things. He no longer expected federal prosecutors to do the right thing, the started demanding it in writing. In this case on December 12, 2017, shortly after this case was assigned to him he compelled the prosecution to immediately turn over all exculpatory material regarding this case:
“Finally, if the government has identified any information which is favorable to the defendant but which the government believes is not material, the government shall submit the material to the Court for in camera review.”
On January 31, 2018, the sentencing hearing for Michael Flynn was delayed at the request of Special Counsel Robert Mueller:
So was the case regarding George papadopoulos which was delayed from February to mid-April. Note that both men are charged with lying to the FBI. If the Nunes and Grassley memos are accurate, the FBI may have lied to the FISA court. How exactly do you convict someone for allegedly lying to someone who has shredded their own credibility? Remember the FBI does not record interviews so the “lied to the FBI” allegation is totally dependent on the credibility of the 302 documents.
The main stream media is totally ignoring this. That is further evidence that this really matters.