Good question. About what?
A judge lawyering up in a case.
Don’t know that I have ever heard of a judge lawyering up happening before.
“Don’t know that I have ever heard of a judge lawyering up happening before.”
Certainly any citizen (which the judge is) has the right under our laws to hire an attorney anytime he or she wishes.
What I find concerning is a judge being unable (or unwilling) to simply explain (as the appeals court requested) his own ruling without outside (and after the fact) assistance. If the judge has the legal knowledge and experience to serve as a judge, he should easily be able to explain the legal rationale for his decisions without outside help. If he can’t explain how he arrived at a decision his fitness for office is certainly questionable.
Could it be the lawyer he hired was actually consulted prior to him making the decision and has been advising him in the Flynn case for quite a while behind the scenes. Has she been directing his actions, with a political agenda, since the government dropped the case? Many have pointed out his behavior has been out of character. Does openly hiring her to represent him now protect her from inquiries or investigation with attorney/client privilege?
Clearly the name of the game is delay. Does her insertion into the process provide Sullivan more freedom in delaying dropping the case or sentencing Flynn?
One other thought. If he ultimately accepts the guilty verdict and sentence Flynn, does this effectively keep Flynn gagged until the next appeal which might not be heard until next year?