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 Flynn’s 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 Justice’s (DOJ) motion to dismiss Flynn’s 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 Flynn’s continued prosecution.
But at least two members of the three-judge panel on Friday appeared wary of removing Sullivan’s authority to consider additional perspectives and issue his own ruling — which could include granting DOJ’s request to drop the charges.
“We have Judge Sullivan, who is an old hand, he’s 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.
– Developing
Exactly. The President declassified everything and handed it over to Barr to be released at his discretion, so what happened?
“We have Judge Sullivan, who is an old hand, he’s an excellent trial judge,” said Judge Karen Henderson.” He did such a great job in the Stevens trial. He allowed all sorts of crimes. After Stevens was convicted and lost his election Sullivan initiated an investigation as a fig leaf. Sullivan is Deep State all the way.
The DOJ has no interest in burning that guy. Its long-winded motion to dismiss could have been replaced by a couple of sentences asserting that there was misconduct.
Sydney Powell and everyone here is arguing that Flynn was prosecuted due to misconduct, but the DOJ has been careful not to say that. After the Stevens case, Judge Sullivan had an independent investigation of the DOJ that lasted for years. The DOJ tried to avoid that by not coming clean.
Powell should have focused more on arguments for removing Sullivan from this case because both his appointing Gleeson after the Washington Post article and the brief Judge Sullivan's lawyer filed with the Court of Appeals demonstrate he is not impartial.
Obama and Clinton appointees. Did anyone expect different. As was said, on to en banc
Sidney Powell did point to seeing Sullivan recused and that would have been ignored by the judge panel anyway.
You didn't understand my post. Henderson is a SHE. And if you listened to the hearing you would not be confident that she "recognizes" anything at all.
I have no idea what you are referring to re correcting typos.
They are blind who will not see. The court system is not quick to jump over the district court, however much you might want a certain result.
I hope they dismiss the case but they don’t like to do that.
How unusual is it for a Judge to invite briefs from non-parties who have no standing before the court?
Now, that’s unusual. It contravenes the Federal Rules of Evidence. It places the Judge in the position as defacto prosecutor and sole trier of fact. It enables a retired judge with no statutory presence in this case to step in and overrule a plea deal between defense and prosecutors. Worse, it invests in this judge some fictitious power as a priori adjutant and post priori jurist - positions he is logically incapable to hold. If ever a judge cried out for removal, Sullivan is it.
But they don't mind burning Flynn. Got it.
We are both on thin ice here. You corrected my error re Henderson and I then recommitted it. I was listening to the hearing while doing other things and focused on the arguments rather than the identity of the speaker.
I have no idea what you are referring to re correcting typos.
Take a look at your original post to me, where you politely point out I misidentified Henderson, and you will see a sentence that is unintelligible of the spelling is taken as you present it. Such writing is conveniently labeled a "typo". So now perhaps you have some idea.
Have a nice weekend, pal.
Let's see if the Grabby Poppy judge goes Resistance.
You plead guilty to a crime you didn’t commit to avoid a lengthy trial and the threat of having your family destroyed by corrupt FBI agents. The FBI agents are exposed, throw out their own case.
Now you’re guilty for pleading guilty to a crime you didn’t commit.
Kafka, move over. Judge Sullivan is in session.
June 10: Leader McConnell has filed cloture on Executive Calendar #710 Justin Reed Walker to be U.S. Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Here's the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit [as of February 11, 2020]:
Judges: 11 Circuit Justice: John Roberts Chief Judge: Sri Srinivasan Next Chief Judge: ??? 2027? ================== Age Title Judge Duty station Born Term of service Appointed by 53 Chief Judge Sri Srinivasan Washington, DC 1967 2013–present &2020–present Obama 76 Circuit Judge Karen L. Henderson Washington, DC 1944 1990–present — — G.H.W. Bush 81 Circuit Judge Judith W. Rogers Washington, DC 1939 1994–present — — Clinton 78 Circuit Judge David S. Tatel # Washington, DC 1942 1994–present — — Clinton 67 Circuit Judge Merrick Garland # Washington, DC 1952 1997–present — — Clinton &2013–2020 66 Circuit Judge Thomas B. Griffith * Washington, DC 1954 2005–present retiring 2020 G.W. Bush 57 Circuit Judge Patricia Millett Washington, DC 1963 2013–present — — Obama 59 Circuit Judge Cornelia Pillard Washington, DC 1961 2013–present — — Obama 56 Circuit Judge Robert L. Wilkins Washington, DC 1963 2014–present — — Obama 56 Circuit Judge Gregory G. Katsas * Washington, DC 1964 2017–present — — Trump 47 Circuit Judge Neomi Rao * Washington, DC 1973 2019–present — — Trump ========================= 79 Senior Circuit Harry T. Edwards Washington, DC 1940 1980–2005 2005–present Carter &1994–2001 84 Senior Circuit Laurence Silberman # Washington, DC 1935 1985–2000 2000–present Reagan 97 Senior Circuit James L. Buckley # inactive 1923 1985–1996 1996–present Reagan 84 Senior Circuit Stephen F. Williams # Washington, DC 1936 1986–2001 2001–present Reagan 74 Senior Circuit Douglas H. Ginsburg # Washington, DC 1946 1986–2011 2011–present Reagan &2001–2008 77 Senior Circuit David B. Sentelle # Washington, DC 1943 1987–2013 2013–present Reagan &2008–2013 76 Senior Circuit A. Raymond Randolph # Washington, DC 1943 1990–2008 2008–present G.H.W. Bush
& denotes Chief Judge of the Court
* denotes Federalist Society member
# denotes Federalist Society associate
==================
We were lucky to get Henderson and Rao on the 3-judge panel for the writ of mandamus in the first place.
Three Rapin Bill/ClownBammy piles of Lefty feces would have laughed at Sidney Powell's request.
Bingo! And, we otherwise busy people thank you for the info in your post.
Perhaps the only difference between MT and me is how we think Henderson will decide. In that regard, it is a close call and neither of us IMO has access to the kind of information that would support a compelling analysis. The only thing I know about her is what I heard today.
Cheers.
“The Appeals Court is going to believe that Judge Sullivan will dismiss the case..”
They’re trying to give him the hint but I don’t think Sullivan hears or cares.
Deep State stooge.
Why is McConnell dragging his feet on appointing judicial openings?
Yeah except that’s not exactly true. In any event, the appeals court can let Sullivan make his ultimate ruling and then hear any appeal. They aren’t eager to bypass the trial court. Will they stop Sullivan from bringing in Gleeson? Maybe.
The courts don’t look at things the way the participants do. And even though Sullivan is a jackass in this case, the appeals court will give him the benefit of every doubt.
That’s the system.
Another problem some of you don’t understand is that once you’re convicted or plead guilty, the judges treat you like you are guilty. They shift into sentencing and punishment mode. And in that mode, they dislike hearing you assert your innocence, because you aren’t any longer. All that “innocent until proven guilty” stuff is gone.
Is it fair or nice? I don’t think so but that is the judicial attitude.
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.