Judge Sullivan Scrambles For A Lifeline To Bail HIMSELF Out Of Dropped Flynn Case

[Faun]

Instead, Sullivan opened the door to amicus briefs in opposition to dismissal and then appointed an outside party to argue the point and to argue, as well, that Flynn should be held in contempt of court for perjury because he said he was guilty when he was actually innocent. (Or perhaps Sullivan intends to charge him for claiming innocence — it is a bit murky.)

This is a unique situation. Where there is only one side in an adversarial system, hence the need to put an opponent into the mix.

As noted Flynn also faces the problem of having told one story to one judge, and the opposite story to another judge.

He faces no such problem.


"Judge Sullivan is basing his unconstitutional actions on Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure which provides that: "The government may, with leave of court, dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint. The government may not dismiss the prosecution during trial without the defendant's consent." This judge-written rule was designed to protect the defendant against manipulation by the government to circumvent the protection against double jeopardy. It is not properly employed to hurt the defendant by empowering the judge to act as both prosecutor and decision-maker. It rarely if ever results in a judge denying leave to the government to drop a prosecution that it believes is unjustified.



… Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg recently wrote for a unanimous Court: "Courts are essentially passive instruments..." It is not within their legitimate authority to "sally forth each day looking for wrongs to right." Their role is to "decide only questions presented by the parties." Judge Sullivan is improperly exceeding that role in the Flynn case and should be chastised for it, whether one agrees or disagrees with the Justice Department's decision on its merits."

Judge Sullivan: A Prosecutor in Robes

In the Flynn case, the prosecution and defense both agree that the case should be dropped. Because there is no longer any controversy between the parties to be resolved, there is no longer any case properly before the judge. His only job is to enter an

www.gatestoneinstitute.org

It is the judge.....and you.....who face a problem: bias.

Well that's obvious bullshit since judges have the ability to charge people in their court with contempt.

 

[easyt65]

.

Proper protocol for "talk to". There is no proper protocol for negotiating with a foreign power, except with the approval of the commander in chief.

Actually there IS proper protocol / guides / rules / laws one must adhere to in initiating and making these communication. They are the same ones snowflakes / Obama's criminals claim Flynn violated.

Obama himself stated that ERVERY new administration going in behind an incumbent attempts to get an early start by initiating communications with foreign reps. He declared his own team did the same exact thing.

Doing so became a 'crime', I guess, after Trump defeated Hillary in 2016.

 

[Juicin]

"D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating that he'll soon accept "amicus curiae," or "friend of the court" submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn -- essentially allowing the court to use an "ask the audience" lifeline in what has already proved to be an unpredictable and chaotic prosecution.

Sullivan's minute order indicated that an upcoming scheduling order would clarify the parameters of who specifically could submit the amicus briefs, which are submissions by non-parties that claim an interest in the case. Sullivan specifically said he anticipates that "individuals and organizations" will file briefs "for the benefit of the court."

The move attracted immediate criticism -- and a planned ethics complaint against Sullivan, who had previously refused to hear amicus briefs in the case. ("Options exist for a private citizen to express his views about matters of public interest, but the Court's docket is not an available option," Sullivan wrote in the past.)

"Judge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn," independent journalist Michael Cernovich wrote on Twitter. "This is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules."

It appears Sullivan, who viciously rebuked Flynn in court based on the lies presented in court now doesn't want to simply drop the case and walk away with egg on his face.

The easiest thing to do to make this all go away quietly would have been to allow the case to be dropped....but it appears Sullivan wants the circus to continue...

Flynn judge to allow 'amicus' submissions, delaying immediate resolution and drawing planned ethics complaint

D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating he'll soon accept "amicus curiae," or "friend of the court" submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn -- drawing immediate scrutiny and a planned ethics complaint against Sullivan, who...

www.foxnews.com

.

Having looked into this, this isn't political

This is just a pissed off judge

He went out of his way to make sure Flynn was actually lying, going above and beyond what he needed to do when he accepted Flynn's plea

Now Flynn wants out and he's pissed.

This is typical judge behavior even if there was no politics involved at all here. Flynn and his lawyers have pissed this judge off

One would think the judge would be more pissed about the newly released evidence proving investigative and prosecutorial misconduct, withholding exculpatory evidence from the judge and defense team, destroying / losing THE biggest key piece of evidence (the original 302), the statements made by FBI agents who were about to close the case against Flynn due to a lack of criminal evidence and statements made by FBI Agents who were involved with Interrogating Flynn, agents who started thy did not believe Flynn lied, etc...

As a Judge who truly cared about the law, the Constitution, and people's rights, I would be more pissed the Obama administration / FBI plotted, conspired, targeted, and perpetrated unethical and illegal acts to take down Flynn...

....but that's just ME - a NON-TDS-suffering, NON-Trump-hating douche bag snowflake or Deep state traitor....

Again he went over it with Flynn

Flynn admitted to lying

This is very normal shit in America. Judge reacts to your lawyers claims you're being pressured. Goes above and beyond to make sure he was actually guilty (which isn't normal). And then your lawyers do a 180 like this?

Hahaha of course he's going to wait it out. He did all this work why would he let it go to waste? He knows Flynn is guilty, it's not his job to judge a prosecution as political or not. Only the voracity of the charges

Flynn pissed off the presiding judge and now has to live with it. Sullivan isn't gonna care. He's mad

And due to the extra time and effort he spent on this case. He is undoubtedly more sure than he usually is he's coming down on the side of truth.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Swamp runs deep.


But GOD WINS this time (it always does really). Bless Trump Bless all patriots.

Trump winning in 2016 absolutely was a divine intervention, I've always sensed it but now soon the shining truth will overshadow all the Democrats and media's lies.

#Becauseitsacult

Isn't the term 'cult' more applicable to the side that called their candidate god, Jesus and the messiah?


It appears that you have just verified Rule #2
Rule #2
To know what the Left is guilty of, just watch what they blame the other side of doing.

2a. If not for double standards Liberals would have no standards at all.

 

[Faun]

This analysis shows that what Judge Sullivan does will ultimately fail for several reasons:

American Thinker

Judge Sullivan should be careful what he asks for

By James V. DeLong

May 15, 2020

Excerpt:

The latest development in the persecution of Michael Flynn was Judge Sullivan's unusual order reacting to the DOJ motion to dismiss. As the DOJ establishes, a decision to drop a prosecution is a prerogative of the Executive Branch, so a judge's role is limited. He should establish that the dismissal is requested not to harass the defendant and then sign off.

Instead, Sullivan opened the door to amicus briefs in opposition to dismissal and then appointed an outside party to argue the point and to argue, as well, that Flynn should be held in contempt of court for perjury because he said he was guilty when he was actually innocent. (Or perhaps Sullivan intends to charge him for claiming innocence — it is a bit murky.)

It is unlikely that this effort to extend things will go on too long. The DOJ and Flynn can request a writ of mandamus from an appellate court holding Sullivan to his duty, and there is square precedent that mandamus is proper in a matter such as this one.

But suppose the case does go on, with extensive briefs and a consideration of a perjury charge against Flynn. It is unlikely to develop as Sullivan seems to think it will.

The DOJ motion to dismiss was carefully crafted.

LINK

=============

What Judge Sullivan did was stupid as hell, as he will get smashed over it.

There's no reason for Judge Sullivan to let Flynn off the hook. Flynn is a convicted felon who admitted he broke the law by lying to federal investigators.

It was a process crime.

So?

 

[Nostra]

This shows Flynn went through proper notification protocols before even talking to the Russian Ambassador.

It shows the agent who interviewed him did not think he was lying-----"Strzok and Pientka both had the impression at the time that Flynn was not lying or did not think he was lying.”

The lie that purportedly got him on included the comment "I don't remember." If that was a crime most of Obama's people would be in jail...and Hillary Clinton certainly would be.

Proper protocol for "talk to". There is no proper protocol for negotiating with a foreign power, except with the approval of the commander in chief.

What did he "negotiate"? Be specific.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Flynn's lawyers, the Eric Holder firm, lied to him and withheld exculpatory documents.

They made a side deal with prosecutors to have him plead.

You didn't know that????
So you're a government school grad, huh?

Flynn chose his lawyers. He hasn't filed a motion to have them dismissed, so Flynn must be happy with what his lawyers did.

So if anything of what you allege happened, then Flynn was O.K. with it. (at his own peril)

He can't blame his lawyers for his actions.

Wrong again.


He fired them, and hired Sydney Powell.

Sydney Powell, Flynn's new lawyer:


Lead attorney for Gen. Flynn Sidney Powell argues the government intentionally hid documents in order to protect their prosecution of him.







“…a guilty plea is supposed to be knowing and voluntary….we have evidence that it was coerced….”
Flynn’s previous lawyers “had a secret side deal with the prosecutor….”

“…they hid all the evidence we’ve uncovered that shows he is completely innocent….”

The original law firm, with Eric Holder as a partner, had a deal with the government to make sure he pled guilty.

The FBI needed the prosecution of Flynn in order to keep the obstruction hoax against Trump, going. “Comey knew that they had no evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump Campaign.”

“…we have messages that the 7th floor was in on this…and that’s Comey and McCabe.”


Remember the last time you were right about anything?



Me neither.

 

[Faun]

There's no reason for Judge Sullivan to let Flynn off the hook. Flynn is a convicted felon who admitted he broke the law by lying to federal investigators.

It was a process crime.

Flynn also admitted to committing perjury to the federal courts.

Never charged with perjury, moron.

Dumbfuck, that's what's being looked into now.

 

[meaner gene]

One would think the judge would be more pissed about the newly released evidence proving investigative and prosecutorial misconduct, withholding exculpatory evidence from the judge and defense team, destroying / losing THE biggest key piece of evidence (the original 302), the statements made by FBI agents who were about to close the case against Flynn due to a lack of criminal evidence and statements made by FBI Agents who were involved with Interrogating Flynn, agents who started thy did not believe Flynn lied, etc...

As a Judge who truly cared about the law, the Constitution, and people's rights, I would be more pissed the Obama administration / FBI plotted, conspired, targeted, and perpetrated unethical and illegal acts to take down Flynn...

UNITED STATES V. RUIZ (01-595) 536 U.S. 622 (2002)

The Ninth Circuit pointed out that the Constitution requires prosecutors to make certain impeachment information available to a defendant before trial. 241 F.3d, at 1166. It decided that this obligation entitles defendants to receive that same information before they enter into a plea agreement. Id., at 1164.

The constitutional question concerns a federal criminal defendant’s waiver of the right to receive from prosecutors exculpatory impeachment material–a right that the Constitution provides as part of its basic “fair trial” guarantee. See U.S. Const., Amdts. 5, 6.

But the Constitution does not require the prosecutor to share all useful information with the defendant. Weatherford v. Bursey, 429 U.S. 545, 559 (1977)

These considerations, taken together, lead us to conclude that the Constitution does not require the Government to disclose material impeachment evidence prior to entering a plea agreement with a criminal defendant.

For these reasons the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is

Reversed.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 01—595

UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. ANGELA RUIZ
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
[June 24, 2002]

Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Flynn never denied the conversation and knew the FBI had a transcript of it. Indeed, President Trump publicly discussed a desire to reframe Russian relations and renegotiate such areas of tensions.” The Flynn Case Should Be Dismissed In The Name Of Justice

If Flynn knew about the Transcript, then why did he lie to Vice President Pence, telling Pence, who repeated it a couple of days later on Meet the Press, that Flynn told him, he did not discuss sanctions with Kislyak.

If Flynn knew of the transcript, he lied to the Vice President, who questioned Flynn on the direct orders of President Trump.

And Flynn lied to Pence. When Trump found out about Flynn lying to Pence, Trump fired him.

He didn't lie.







You are on record as having the geopolitical knowledge of a five-year-old....or any Democrat voter.



Trump had to fire him for the following reason:





The Obama/Deep State attempt to destroy the Trump presidency was aimed at tying Trump to Russia. So…Flynn was used by the Obama/Russia Hoax as a wedge, tying him to Russia, the bête noire presented in this imbroglio, and by association, Trump as ‘a Russian agent/asset,’ something we’ve learned was totally false.



When the FBI charged Flynn with close ties to Russia, he became a political hot potato.



This made it a better political move for Trump to find another advisor, rather than confront the Obamunist FBI,



Keeping Flynn would have given the Obama/FBI plan more fuel.


You're really not a quick learner, are you.

 

[Faun]

"D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating that he'll soon accept "amicus curiae," or "friend of the court" submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn -- essentially allowing the court to use an "ask the audience" lifeline in what has already proved to be an unpredictable and chaotic prosecution.

Sullivan's minute order indicated that an upcoming scheduling order would clarify the parameters of who specifically could submit the amicus briefs, which are submissions by non-parties that claim an interest in the case. Sullivan specifically said he anticipates that "individuals and organizations" will file briefs "for the benefit of the court."

The move attracted immediate criticism -- and a planned ethics complaint against Sullivan, who had previously refused to hear amicus briefs in the case. ("Options exist for a private citizen to express his views about matters of public interest, but the Court's docket is not an available option," Sullivan wrote in the past.)

"Judge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn," independent journalist Michael Cernovich wrote on Twitter. "This is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules."

It appears Sullivan, who viciously rebuked Flynn in court based on the lies presented in court now doesn't want to simply drop the case and walk away with egg on his face.

The easiest thing to do to make this all go away quietly would have been to allow the case to be dropped....but it appears Sullivan wants the circus to continue...

Flynn judge to allow 'amicus' submissions, delaying immediate resolution and drawing planned ethics complaint

D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating he'll soon accept "amicus curiae," or "friend of the court" submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn -- drawing immediate scrutiny and a planned ethics complaint against Sullivan, who...

www.foxnews.com

.

Having looked into this, this isn't political

This is just a pissed off judge

He went out of his way to make sure Flynn was actually lying, going above and beyond what he needed to do when he accepted Flynn's plea

Now Flynn wants out and he's pissed.

This is typical judge behavior even if there was no politics involved at all here. Flynn and his lawyers have pissed this judge off

Oh? Did the judge force Flynn to admit guilt?

 

[easyt65]

Again he went over it with Flynn - Flynn admitted to lying

Yeah, its amazing what a man / father will do when he is targeted by political enemies, bankrupted, he loses his home, entrapped (Comey BRAGGED about doing it), and he is finally blackmailed into a confession by the 'good guys' telling you that on top of destroying him and his wife they will throw his son in prison, too.

The released evidence shows FBI agents handling the investigation reported no crime found, they were shutting it down, and there was no basis for continuing the investigation ... until Strzok - who Comey sent over as part f the Perjury Trap set-up - ordered them to keep the case open.

The released evidence proves FBI agents involved with the interrogation of Flynn stated they do NOIT believe Flynn lied....that it was STRZOK who overrode their call and had Flynn charged.

Take your lips off of Obama's ass for a second and take a look at ALL the facts.

 

[Nostra]

There's no reason for Judge Sullivan to let Flynn off the hook. Flynn is a convicted felon who admitted he broke the law by lying to federal investigators.

It was a process crime.

Flynn also admitted to committing perjury to the federal courts.

Never charged with perjury, moron.

Dumbfuck, that's what's being looked into now.

Thanks for confirming I am correct.

 

[easyt65]

One would think the judge would be more pissed about the newly released evidence proving investigative and prosecutorial misconduct, withholding exculpatory evidence from the judge and defense team, destroying / losing THE biggest key piece of evidence (the original 302), the statements made by FBI agents who were about to close the case against Flynn due to a lack of criminal evidence and statements made by FBI Agents who were involved with Interrogating Flynn, agents who started thy did not believe Flynn lied, etc...

As a Judge who truly cared about the law, the Constitution, and people's rights, I would be more pissed the Obama administration / FBI plotted, conspired, targeted, and perpetrated unethical and illegal acts to take down Flynn...

UNITED STATES V. RUIZ (01-595) 536 U.S. 622 (2002)

The Ninth Circuit pointed out that the Constitution requires prosecutors to make certain impeachment information available to a defendant before trial. 241 F.3d, at 1166. It decided that this obligation entitles defendants to receive that same information before they enter into a plea agreement. Id., at 1164.

The constitutional question concerns a federal criminal defendant’s waiver of the right to receive from prosecutors exculpatory impeachment material–a right that the Constitution provides as part of its basic “fair trial” guarantee. See U.S. Const., Amdts. 5, 6.

But the Constitution does not require the prosecutor to share all useful information with the defendant. Weatherford v. Bursey, 429 U.S. 545, 559 (1977)

These considerations, taken together, lead us to conclude that the Constitution does not require the Government to disclose material impeachment evidence prior to entering a plea agreement with a criminal defendant.

For these reasons the decision of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is

Reversed.

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

No. 01—595

UNITED STATES, PETITIONER v. ANGELA RUIZ
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF
APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
[June 24, 2002]

Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court.

There is an entire thread on this, one that proves beyond a doubt what Sullivan is doing violates existing law / precedence. set in ether 2016 or 2017. I won't bother to rehash / report - you can read it all there.

 

[Nostra]

"D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating that he'll soon accept "amicus curiae," or "friend of the court" submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn -- essentially allowing the court to use an "ask the audience" lifeline in what has already proved to be an unpredictable and chaotic prosecution.

Sullivan's minute order indicated that an upcoming scheduling order would clarify the parameters of who specifically could submit the amicus briefs, which are submissions by non-parties that claim an interest in the case. Sullivan specifically said he anticipates that "individuals and organizations" will file briefs "for the benefit of the court."

The move attracted immediate criticism -- and a planned ethics complaint against Sullivan, who had previously refused to hear amicus briefs in the case. ("Options exist for a private citizen to express his views about matters of public interest, but the Court's docket is not an available option," Sullivan wrote in the past.)

"Judge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn," independent journalist Michael Cernovich wrote on Twitter. "This is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules."

It appears Sullivan, who viciously rebuked Flynn in court based on the lies presented in court now doesn't want to simply drop the case and walk away with egg on his face.

The easiest thing to do to make this all go away quietly would have been to allow the case to be dropped....but it appears Sullivan wants the circus to continue...

Flynn judge to allow 'amicus' submissions, delaying immediate resolution and drawing planned ethics complaint

D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating he'll soon accept "amicus curiae," or "friend of the court" submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn -- drawing immediate scrutiny and a planned ethics complaint against Sullivan, who...

www.foxnews.com

.

Having looked into this, this isn't political

This is just a pissed off judge

He went out of his way to make sure Flynn was actually lying, going above and beyond what he needed to do when he accepted Flynn's plea

Now Flynn wants out and he's pissed.

This is typical judge behavior even if there was no politics involved at all here. Flynn and his lawyers have pissed this judge off

Oh? Did the judge force Flynn to admit guilt?

The FBI did. Please try to keep up.

 

[meaner gene]

Obama himself stated that ERVERY new administration going in behind an incumbent attempts to get an early start by initiating communications with foreign reps. He declared his own team did the same exact thing.

Doing so became a 'crime', I guess, after Trump defeated Hillary in 2016.

You left out that the Obama appointees did that communication THROUGH to existing agencies, ex Department of State, Department of Defense etc.

They did not make clandestine phone calls unknown to the current administration. Flynn hid his conversations, which were unknown and unsanctioned, and never reported except when they read the NSA transcripts of the intercepted conversations.

 

[Faun]

.

Proper protocol for "talk to". There is no proper protocol for negotiating with a foreign power, except with the approval of the commander in chief.

Actually there IS proper protocol / guides / rules / laws one must adhere to in initiating and making these communication. They are the same ones snowflakes / Obama's criminals claim Flynn violated.

Obama himself stated that ERVERY new administration going in behind an incumbent attempts to get an early start by initiating communications with foreign reps. He declared his own team did the same exact thing.

Doing so became a 'crime', I guess, after Trump defeated Hillary in 2016.

No one said any communication with foreign leaders is a crime. Negotiating against the interest of the US is, which is what Flynn did.

 

[Nostra]

.

Proper protocol for "talk to". There is no proper protocol for negotiating with a foreign power, except with the approval of the commander in chief.

Actually there IS proper protocol / guides / rules / laws one must adhere to in initiating and making these communication. They are the same ones snowflakes / Obama's criminals claim Flynn violated.

Obama himself stated that ERVERY new administration going in behind an incumbent attempts to get an early start by initiating communications with foreign reps. He declared his own team did the same exact thing.

Doing so became a 'crime', I guess, after Trump defeated Hillary in 2016.

No one said any communication with foreign leaders is a crime. Negotiating against the interest of the US is, which is what Flynn did.

What did he negotiate? Be specific.

 

[easyt65]

You left out that the Obama appointees did that communication THROUGH to existing agencies, ex Department of State, Department of Defense etc.

No, not all of them did. Nice try, though.

 

[meaner gene]

Again he went over it with Flynn

Flynn admitted to lying

This is very normal shit in America. Judge reacts to your lawyers claims you're being pressured. Goes above and beyond to make sure he was actually guilty (which isn't normal). And then your lawyers do a 180 like this?

Hahaha of course he's going to wait it out. He did all this work why would he let it go to waste? He knows Flynn is guilty, it's not his job to judge a prosecution as political or not. Only the voracity of the charges

Flynn pissed off the presiding judge and now has to live with it. Sullivan isn't gonna care. He's mad

And due to the extra time and effort he spent on this case. He is undoubtedly more sure than he usually is he's coming down on the side of truth.

Remember Judge Sullivan is an "anti-government" judge, he is very critical of the governments position.
He makes sure the government proves it's case.

So when the DOJ makes a case that they want to drop the charges, Sullivan is going to make the government again prove it's case.