Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The DC Circuit just issued an order for the counsel in Flynn to be prepared to answer questions about mandatory recusal or removal conditions for judges... https://t.co/7kmFnkU34T
Twitter ^ | 8/5/2020 | Jonathan Turley

Posted on 08/05/2020 1:39:29 PM PDT by 31R1O

DC Circuit Court throws a curve ball!


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: emmetsullivan; flynn; jessebinnall; judgesullivan; michaelflynn; sidneypowell
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

1 posted on 08/05/2020 1:39:29 PM PDT by 31R1O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 31R1O

That is an odd request. Any speculation as to ... why?


2 posted on 08/05/2020 1:40:35 PM PDT by taxcontrol (Stupid should hurt - Dad's wisdom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 31R1O
"DC Circuit Court throws a curve ball!"

~~~~


3 posted on 08/05/2020 1:42:31 PM PDT by z3n
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 31R1O

That is an odd twist of the screw.
Looking to remove Sullivan?


4 posted on 08/05/2020 1:42:52 PM PDT by Ouchthatonehurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ouchthatonehurt

The initial response to the en banc hearing request discussed alternate means of resolving this so IDK.


5 posted on 08/05/2020 1:44:08 PM PDT by 31R1O
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
It seems like a perfectly obvious request to me. Sullivan's involvement in the case as a litigant implicates the mandatory recusal and disqualification provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 455. A judge has an affirmative duty to recuse himself sua sponte (on his own motion) if he believes those grounds exist. While Flynn's lawyers did not raise this issue in their brief, I think at least one of the judges on the Court of Appeals must think that the Court of Appeals also has a duty to consider sua sponte whether a trial judge should be compelled to recuse himself.
6 posted on 08/05/2020 1:46:06 PM PDT by The Pack Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

To me it means that the court wants to hear Powell’s opinion as to when the Judge’s conduct has reached the point where he should be bounced off the case. I do not think they would be asking that unless some of them had an idea that the Judge was at that line, or had crossed it.

Which was not the play the Judge thought he’d bought a ticket for.


7 posted on 08/05/2020 1:46:11 PM PDT by Flash Bazbeaux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 31R1O

I don’t read it favorably. Yes they could switch judges but the standard for doing that is very high. More likely they want to say, if you can’t convince us to remove the judge from your case, why should we intervene? My guess is the panel got together and decided they (the Democrat judges) ain’t reversing this unless Flynn can prove bias by the judge. And although the judge is a horse ass I doubt we meet that standard.


8 posted on 08/05/2020 1:46:47 PM PDT by Williams (Stop Tolerating The Intolerant)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 31R1O

Alternatively, one of the Court of Appeals judges may believe either he or one of the other judges may be subject to mandatory recusal.


9 posted on 08/05/2020 1:47:24 PM PDT by The Pack Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 31R1O

Judge is removed...soon


10 posted on 08/05/2020 1:47:34 PM PDT by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me https://youtu.be/wH-pk2vZG2M)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: z3n

Not if Fauxci threw it...


11 posted on 08/05/2020 1:47:55 PM PDT by Vendome (I've Gotta Be Me https://youtu.be/wH-pk2vZG2M)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 31R1O

And not an Anthony Fauci curve ball I presume


12 posted on 08/05/2020 1:48:11 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flash Bazbeaux

I think some of the deep staters like Sullivan are so eaten up with hate for President Trump that they are desperate and do foolish things.


13 posted on 08/05/2020 1:48:23 PM PDT by shelterguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

Sullivan needs to be compelled to lock himself up for, at the very least, contempt.


14 posted on 08/05/2020 1:48:39 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: The Pack Knight

A FReeper was speculating that Judge Sullivan had privately surveyed the appeals judges to see if he had enough support for an en-banc review.

Perhaps Sydney Powell has found proof of this and they are now all in CYA mode?


15 posted on 08/05/2020 1:49:29 PM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Not a lawyer, but once stayed at a Holiday Inn Express!

My non-legal, political take on this request: they simply want to add further delay...

My understanding is that Flynn is under a gag order?

So, if they can push this trial out to November 4th, Flynn will not have a chance to impact the election with any dirt about what transpired with the Mueller Team...


16 posted on 08/05/2020 1:54:41 PM PDT by MCEscherHammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: z3n

Fun movie, at least during the baseball scenes.


17 posted on 08/05/2020 1:58:02 PM PDT by CatOwner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Williams

I admit, I am completely and totally baffled by this.

The case was brought against Gen. Flynn by the DOJ.

The DOJ has said they aren’t going to pursue a prosecution and dropped it.

Why is this still going on, other than an a-hole leftist judge trying to keep it in the spotlight?


18 posted on 08/05/2020 1:59:07 PM PDT by rlmorel ("Truth is Treason in the Empire of Lies"- George Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

Amen. He has committed a flagrant abuse of his office to carry out a grudge against a criminal defendant before him, and it is even more outrageous that he is continuing to fight on appeal. He is compounding his abuse of his office by failing to recuse himself when it is obvious to any observer that “his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

At the very least, it should be considered an impeachable offense for a judge to blatantly ignore a statutory duty to recuse himself where the grounds are clear. If the Republicans take back the House, they should impeach him for it.


19 posted on 08/05/2020 2:00:23 PM PDT by The Pack Knight
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MCEscherHammer

That’s what this is all about. Keeping the gag order in place until after the election.


20 posted on 08/05/2020 2:00:33 PM PDT by freedomlover
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson