Media and commentators alike at both extremist ends of the political spectrum would do well to take a step back towards some even-handed objectivity in both reporting and editorializing on this latest political uproar. In law, an apt principle is memorialized with a Latin phrase in pari materia—an equivalency of importance and balanced evaluation.

Flynn is no paragon of civic virtue, as portrayed by his defenders. Nor are those who have pursued him like "The Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight" (the late Jimmy Breslin would be aghast at this analogy because the present sorry saga lacks any of the fun and humor of his classic book!)

Flynn's underlying activities, along with his formal guilty pleas under oath in a court proceeding, speak for its unwholesome odor. (Another excellent Latinism pops up—res ipsa loquitur). Law enforcement has, through some misguided individuals, engendered corresponding infamy in the exercise of awesome official powers—some looking more like a bumbling crew—or intentionally nefarious cabal—bent obsessively on an end-game by any means that might even corrupt any sense of institutional duty.

Both camps have brought dishonor on themselves and on their oath-grounded vocations. They also failed then-Attorney General Robert Jackson's gold standard of conduct: "A sensitiveness to fair play and sportsmanship is perhaps the best protection against the abuse of process, and the citizen's safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth not victims, and serves the law not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility." 1940 Address: "The Federal Prosecutor" (emphasis added) (AG Jackson, later a renowned Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and Nuremberg Chief Prosecutor, was described last year as "The Patron Saint of the Rule of Law" (Wall Street Journal, July 13, 2019)).

Attorney General Barr would do himself a favor by re-reading the inspiring entreaty for himself. Even more, he would render a public service on its 80th Anniversary by re-promulgating it for all his law enforcement colleagues. The entirety of that call to duty from his esteemed predecessor, Robert Jackson, has echoes of The Great Bard's summons to true patriotism uttered through King Henry V's renowned peroration to his troops before the battle at Agincourt ("if it be a sin to covet honour, I am the most offending soul alive").

The ultimate safeguard in this regrettable Flynn disaster is the foundational principle of institutional checks and balances. Presiding Trial Judge Sullivan is now vested with the supervisory judicial review role of stepping back with judicial probity—in pari material—of weighing the competing evidence and principles of adjudication of greater and lesser evils for the good of the nation and fair administration of justice. Even his work will be subject to appellate review with its institutional checks and balances. That objective process should now proceed without rhetorical flourishes of swinging adjectives and adverbs – better to employ unadorned nouns and action verbs to shed light, with less heat, in the "neutral magistrate" judicial resolution of the matter. In the end, that judicial process is entitled to—or at least should be given—respect, also seemingly in short supply these days.

Finally, the media and all forms of journalistic endeavors in service of their fourth estate scrutiny in the coverage of this tawdry saga might also benefit from a set of protocols with internal checks and balances—a cooling rhetorical and ideological step back—that might well provide truer illumination and a more reliable public service.

Joseph W. Bellacosa is a retired judge of the New York Court of Appeals and a retired dean and Professor of Law, St. John's U. School of Law.