‘It is an outrage’: Fox’s Jeanine Pirro fumes at judge’s decision to punt on Flynn’s dismissal

Speaking with Fox & Friends on Friday, Fox News personality Jeanine Pirro fumed over a judge’s decision to punt on Michael Flynn’s dismissal, calling the move “a political hack job.”

“This is a political hack job and it is an outrage that it is occurring,” the Justice with Judge Jeanine host said, according to Fox.

“A political hack job”

Flynn, a retired Army general and former National Security adviser to President Donald Trump, pleaded guilty in late 2017 to lying to investigators about his contacts with a Russian ambassador, The New York Times noted, but he later sought to withdraw his plea, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) formally sought to drop the case against him this month over new evidence that supporters of Flynn say show he was entrapped by FBI agents, according to The Washington Post.

But that information did not appear to weigh on Judge Emmet Sullivan, who moved suddenly last week to freeze the motion to dismiss the case.

According to Fox, Sullivan instead appointed an apparently biased outsider to review the case and consider perjury charges against Flynn. Pirro, who is a former prosecutor and judge, said that the decision shows that Sullivan either doesn’t understand the law, or is too politically compromised to care about justice.

“This judge, by saying I want to consider a perjury charge against Michael Flynn, is so out of his realm that it is stunning to anyone who understands criminal justice,” Pirro said, according to Fox. What’s more, Sullivan seems to be inventing a singular standard of justice to hurt Flynn, Pirro argued.

“Are you going to say that anyone who pleads not guilty to a crime but is thereafter found guilty should be tried for perjury or just Michael Flynn?” she asked Friday, according to Fox.

“He is an embarrassment”

Sullivan’s decision was made more troubling by evidence that the former judge appointed to review the case, John Gleeson, is prejudiced against Flynn. Gleeson wrote a Washington Post article last week arguing that the motion to drop the Flynn case “reeks” of political malfeasance, as the New York Post reported.

Oddly, Gleeson once wrote that it would be an “abuse of discretion” for a judge to refuse a prosecutor’s suggestion to drop a case, the New York Post noted, although he seems to have changed his mind this time around. He will argue against the government’s case next month, according to The Hill.

Pointing to a harangue that Sullivan gave in 2018 accusing Flynn of treason, Pirro said Friday that the judge is clearly biased.

“This judge should be recused,” she argued, according to Fox. “He is an embarrassment to the bench and the robes that he wears, he is doing nothing by trying to extend this case through the election, and they’re persecuting Michael Flynn.”

Pirro is right: This is persecution, not justice, and Sullivan is way out of line. How could something like this happen in the United States?

Share on facebook
Share To Facebook

Welcome to our comments section. We want to hear from you!

Any comments with profanity, advocacy of violence, harassment, personally identifiable information or other violations will be removed. If you feel your comment has been removed in error please contact us!

Latest Posts