Skip to comments.Appeals court appears reluctant to order dismissal of Flynn case
Posted on 06/12/2020 9:18:26 AM PDT by jazusamo
A divided federal appeals court on Friday seemed reluctant to order the judge presiding over former national security adviser Michael Flynns prosecution to dismiss the case ahead of scheduled arguments in the trial court next month.
During a Friday hearing before a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, two judges expressed reservations about preventing U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan from ruling on the Department of Justices (DOJ) motion to dismiss Flynns criminal case.
Sullivan drew attention last month when he took the unusual step of appointing a retired federal judge to argue against dropping the charges and to explore the possibility of holding Flynn in contempt for perjury, with a hearing scheduled for July 16.
Flynn responded by asking the D.C. Circuit to order Sullivan to drop the case and block the court-appointed counsel from pressing for Flynns continued prosecution.
But at least two members of the three-judge panel on Friday appeared wary of removing Sullivans authority to consider additional perspectives and issue his own ruling which could include granting DOJs request to drop the charges.
We have Judge Sullivan, who is an old hand, hes an excellent trial judge, said Judge Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee. And he may say, to himself at least, you know, I asked for advice, and I'm ignoring it. And I'm granting the motion to dismiss. Shouldn't he be allowed to do that?
Judge Robert Wilkins, an Obama appointee, also seemed reluctant to intervene in the pending trial court proceedings. The view of Judge Neomi Rao, a Trump appointee who posed probing questions to counsel on both sides, was more difficult to read.
We’ve been living in a banana republic for a while now.
So on to a full panel.
Deep State judiciary
Just one lamp post. Two, max.
Since Usurpation Day when ALL of our elected and appointed clapped like trained seals for a Kenyan/British subject/Indonesian being sworn in as President in direct violation of the Constitution.
Can’t believe this is not a slam dunk when the DOJ did not share exculpatory evidence with Flynn. If you are framed, you should walk, no questions asked
Since R.M. Nixon
It’s all about the election.
using the taxpayers' hard-earned money.
Doesn’t surprise me and I did say it here the courts have their own view of things and it is not determined by what everyone on conservative talk radio or conservative television is so sure is going to happen.
And it doesn’t even mean we have a Banana Republic. When you ask a bunch of judges to make a decision they will make a decision and you may not like it.
I’m not predicting their final decision but it is very unusual for them to take a case away from a judge very unusual.
I know. . . so much for a judiciary that is insulated from politics. If they are going to play politics, they should be impeached.
Cry for our nation. Political hacks now run the courts.
I agree, it should be a slam dunk.
You nailed the crux of it.
They framed him. They not only framed him to get him fired, they framed him to prosecute him.
In our system of justice that = an automatic acquittal.
In the new system of two-tiered justice it is meaningless.
Justice now demands that Durham reveal those portions of his investigation that will show this to be the case. Stop and think about it.... Barr has indicated that there is much more to come, but the investigation is still proceeding. There are many indications that some of the Durham case (actual proof and statements under oath) apply directly to the Flynn travesty.
It is incumbent on the DOJ to release this information or inform the court in a closed hearing of what they have learned as it pertains to Flynn and the coup attempt.
They must. If you think I am wrong here ask yourself why the Solicitor General of the U.S. was the one who wrote the brief for DOJ.....
And he may say, to himself at least, you know, I asked for advice, and I’m ignoring it. And I’m granting the motion to dismiss. Shouldn’t he be allowed to do that?
Thought the issue wasn’t about letting him dismiss it, thought it was about letting it go on after the charges were dropped.
So very true, they tend to look out for each other.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.