Original title as I posted it.
Posted on 05/20/2020 11:06:07 AM PDT by street_lawyer
The Flynn Case Is Not Only Ripe It is Rotten By: Sharp Steelblade, Esq. Without a doubt, Sidney Powell has done an outstanding job of lawyering for General Flynn. What she is trying to accomplish would be granted in the court of public opinion and common sense, but in a court of law the outcome is not so obvious. Judge Sullivan has ordered that anyone, including I, could presumable file a amicus brief in the case. This could be the only issue that is ripe for appeal, and It should be granted. The recusal issue may be premature since there was no motion in the district court requesting recusal. Judge Sullivan has not yet decided whether to allow Flynn to withdraw his plea. Until he actually issues an order there is arguably no case or controversy, unless the appellate court decides that the facts are so convincing that denying the motion to dismiss would be a grave miscarriage of justice. Not dismissing the case certainly seems to me to be beyond a miscarriage of justice, it would be a total denial of due process, and should properly result in criminal complaints against
(Excerpt) Read more at badnewsjournal.com ...
Even Justice Ginsberg has ruled against Sullivan.
Ginsberg wrote the unanimous opinion in a case that does NOT directly address what Sullivan is doing in this specific case, but it is certainly applicable in general to what he is doing. However, the problem in this case (and others) goes beyond the “law.”
I am outraged by what happened to and continues to happen to General Flynn, but this case might be a blessing in disguise. Chief Justice Roberts told the world there were no politics in the Federal courts.
This case, among many other examples of judicial activism, is revealing the fallacy of his statement against Trump in a very big way.
Flynn is going to walk. We are going to find out much more in hindsight about how dirty this whole game was and clearly see the Judge’s role in carrying it out with absolute bias.
District court judges very rarely behaved this way in the past because the appellate courts or SCOTUS would slap them down and they did not want to wear the shame. It is pretty obvious that these judges no longer fear any consequences for biased and politicized decisions that are not rooted in either the law or precedent.
They are in effect, shameless. They are not held accountable. This is why district court judges in Hawaii or California can issue rulings against Presidential authority that are binding on the entire nation.
Our courts are tragically politicized despite the illusion that Chief Justice Roberts wants us to believe and it must be addressed or we will continue down the road to a Banana Republic (if we are not already there).
“Even Justice Ginsberg has ruled against Sullivan.”
How so? Did not even know she had anything to do with Sullivan.
The Supreme Court case from two weeks ago is 100% inapplicable to the Flynn matter.
One of the things which immediately revealed what a terrible lawyer Powell is, was her citation to the Steven’s case, which was also 100% inapplicable to the Flynn case. Her citation to Stevens (which she continues to do) is the sort of thing laymen and incompetent lawyers do.
The SCOTUS decision dismissed the idea of amicus briefs and said that a Judge should only consider what is within the courtroom?
While I do think Powell has done some odd things in this case, her overall strategy if you are Flynn appears to be working. It will definitely make for a bestseller by Powell and I have never lost sight of that.
The rest of us are just sitting in the bleachers shaking our head about the injustice of the case from the outset. All the legal wrangling now appears to be splitting hairs on the decapitated head of the case.
https://www.foxnews.com/media/mark-levin-blasts-arrogant-flynn-judge-sullivan
on Amicus
The Constitution, Article 3 Section 2, places the case against Flynn out of Sullivan’s jurisdiction as soon as the prosecutor drops charges and declines to complete Flynn’s conviction. Why? Because the Constitution gives federal courts authority over cases to which the U.S government is a party.
The U.S. government is not a party to Flynn’s case, and Sullivan has no jurisdiction. It’s that simple.
In the future, post content from this site in our bloggers forum.
“The SCOTUS decision dismissed the idea of amicus briefs and said that a Judge should only consider what is within the courtroom?”
“All the legal wrangling now appears to be splitting hairs on the decapitated head of the case.”
The legal issues in the Flynn case are quite technical. 99.99% of lawyers have never dealt with these issues and are incapable of discussing them intelligently. They are spit-balling. They are like dermatologists advising you on brain surgery.
Included among those incompetent lawyers is Powell. She has no idea what she is doing, other than making a name for herself. And I have to admit, she has done a great job of that, completely winning with a political argument despite her legal incompetence. But she is winning in that respect because she is manipulating MAGA people with the political argument.
I despise what Powell has done to Trump supporters, MAGA patriots, and to Flynn himself.
You praise her overall strategy, but can you articulate it in a legal context? Her “strategy” has put Flynn in a very horrible position.
Barr tried to get Powell off the hook before she mishandled the case any further, but even that is up in the air.
Ask yourself this question: when Flynn was promised probation on a minor offense where everyone was sympathetic to him and believed he had been framed (which was true when he was charged) what did Powell say to Flynn about legal strategy? How was he going to be better off?
And we now know, she did not have the faintest idea where it would all go, because her strategy was legal baloney on the day she took up the case.
I don’t pretend to know the ins and outs of the legal arguments in this highly unorthodox case, but I do not dismiss what you are saying out of hand either.
Powell is and was looking for her next book and I said that a few times and got slammed for it here.
However, the proof is in the pudding as they say and right, wrong, fair, or indifferent, the DOJ asked to dismiss the case. Given that the DOJ very rarely releases information that might be embarrassing to them in any way I am not sure how much we would know now if Powell had not made a stink.
We knew it would be weird when she went on television repeatedly and talked about the judge. You don’t have to be a lawyer to recognize how unorthodox that might be and likely not the best course of action.
We will see in the end how it washes out. I want justice for Flynn who was clearly targeted by a partisan bunch of hacks for political reasons and I want the story behind what happened and who the bad actors were.
Surely we can agree on that.
Yes, we do agree on that. The framing of Flynn was disgraceful and corrupt, done by the same slimy crew who tried and are still trying to bring down the President.
So I’ll post this again on your latest point-to-selfblog-posting...
After a quick glance, I noticed that you consistently post articles from the same site, written by the same “Sharp Steelblade, Esq”, yet when criticized, your reply is; “I just posted the article”.
As a casual observation, one would conclude two things...
...”Sharp Steelblade, Esq” is most probably a fake name
...you are most probably the author of the blog you consistently post and you only post excerpts prompting freepers to bring traffic to your site, to generate revenue for you
This creates three natural questions...
If this is your site and you’re the author, why not defend you position?
Why not use your real name in the site you’re promoting?
Do you donate to FR as you use FR to generate revenue for your own website?
It’s none of you business is it?
Sure
“This time around”
Nice back handed compliment
This thread has been pulled.
Pulled on 05/22/2020 8:37:00 AM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
Fake headline
Okay
Just so you know, that is what the headline was originally when I posted it.
https://nypost.com/2020/05/22/biden-says-charlamagne-tha-god-aint-black-if-he-might-vote-for-trump/
if you hover over the tab at the top you can see the original as I posted it.
Original title as I posted it.
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.