Per Leslie McAdoo Gordon, these are the four points Hashim (“Hash”) Mooppan presented:
Mr. Mooppan has 4 points.
First is that there is no case or controversy, which Sullivan said he wasn't going to discuss.
He's saying it's not a separate issue. It's one of the govt's grounds for dismissal.
Second issue: Court isn't a rubber stamp, but the examples Gleeson used don't apply here. This isn't a case of a rogue prosecutor. This case is the "considered view" of the US.
3rd: The US has exclusive authority to dismiss; Fokker give court no role to disagree with DOJ's determination. Nixon and Fokker are controlling.
4th: materiality. DOJ cited Safavian - he gives the page. Says that is about whether a jury "could" convict, not "should" and certainly not whether the DOJ "should" pursue.
saying it was a "close one" - he doesn't know if Flynn lied. Kohl says that would be a problem for DOJ. DOJ doesn't prosecute people unless they are SURE there is a crime; not that there might be.
Calling Strzok as witness? Who misled the FISC?
It's simply a weak case, even assuming there had been a reason for it to begin with.