Posted on 05/24/2020 5:57:58 AM PDT by EyesOfTX
If this surprises you, you havent been paying attention. Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan, under fire for his bizarre conduct of the case involving the framing of General Mike Flynn, will not be filing his own response to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals order for him to explain himself by Friday. Instead, the Washington Post reports that he has taken the extraordinary step of hiring a high-profile lawyer to do that for him:
The federal judge who refused a Justice Department request to immediately drop the prosecution of former Trump adviser Michael Flynn has hired a high-profile trial lawyer to argue his reasons for investigating whether dismissing the case is legally or ethically appropriate.
In a rare step that adds to this criminal cases already unusual path, U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has retained Beth Wilkinson to represent him in defending his decision to a federal appeals court in Washington, according to a person familiar with the hire who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter. The U.S. District Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is now examining the judges actions and the larger case against Flynn after lawyers for President Trumps former national security adviser asked the court to force Sullivan to toss Flynns guilty plea.
Wilkinson, known for her top-notch legal skills and get-results style, is expected to file a notice with the court in the coming week about representing the judge. She declined to comment when reached Friday evening. Sullivan also declined to comment through his office.
[End]
Dont you just love the phrasing? high-profile; top-notch legal skills; get-results style; the pathetic Post reporter must have just done a cut-and-paste from Wilkinsons marketing flyer, which no doubt was stapled to the handy talking points memo that came in from the DNC.
So, what does this tell us? It tells us that Judge Sullivan is worried, very worried. The order from the DC Circuit demanded a response personally from him, not some high-profile lawyer with a get-results style. It also tells us that the judge who refused to allow the DOJs motion to dismiss the case is not confident that he is capable of explaining his own actions. Amazing.
The Post story indicates that Wilkinson plans to file a notice to the court that she will be doing the responding on the judges behalf, something the Circuit Court has no obligation to allow. This will be another very interesting week in the Soviet-style show trial of General Flynn.
None of the men are wearing masks. President Donald Trump (I never tire of typing those three glorious words) drove the corrupt news media nuts once again on Saturday, simply by playing his first round of golf since early March. The automatonic ghouls at CNN and MSNBC tut-tutted about it all day long, obsessing over the fact that, while spending four hours in the wide open spaces, neither the President nor any of his playing partners and entourage were gasp! wearing masks.
Trump tees up controversy as he plays golf in a pandemic | US news ...
Oh, the humanity!
Not even Anthony Fauci is confused enough to pretend that wearing a mask would serve any productive purpose in that setting, and you can be certain that none of the TV talking heads, cooped-up in their enclosed studios with cameramen and production staff, were wearing masks while doing all the tut-tutting and tsk-tsking.
These are the worst people in our society. They truly are.
Yore attenshun good citizens! Tha Honorabull Rayaph Coonman Northam is a-gonna go visit tha beach and mingle with tha peoples down theyah! Meanwhile, detestable Democrat Virginia Governor Ralph Northam was doing this:
Image
No one at CNN or MSNBC had a word to say about it. Funny how that works.
Living in a Democrat state is hazardous to your health. No really, it is. Reuters compiled data showing that residents in blue areas of the country are three times more likely to die of the Wuhan Virus than residents living in the red areas:
Image
So, come on to Texas and Florida, folks, but when you get here, dont vote for Democrats.
Speaking of dangerous Democrat governors Andrew Cuomo, in his frenzy to misdirect blame for his states thousands of nursing home deaths anywhere but in his direction, is now claiming that he issued his order forcing hospitals to send infected elderly patients back to nursing homes based on guidance from the Trump Administration:
Gov Cuomo blames Trump administration for forcing him to send 4,300 coronavirus hospital patients to nursing homes where 5,800 New York residents died New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has argued that he was simply following White House guidance on sending hospital patients to nursing homes Dont criticize the state for following the presidents policy, Cuomo said It was revealed Thursday that 4,300 recovering coronavirus patients were sent to New Yorks already vulnerable nursing homes There have been more than 5,800 nursing and adult care facility deaths in New York This is a completely false claim. No guidance from the federal government or anyone else justified Cuomos unconscionable, ghoulish order.
But here are tools supplied by the federal government to New York that Governor Cuomo could have used to avoid sending those infected patients to those nursing homes, where they infected thousands more residents who might otherwise have avoided the virus:
A 1,000 bed Navy hospital ship that saw a grand total of 84 patients before leaving New York Harbor; A 2,900 bed field hospital at the Jacob Javits Center that Cuomo and Bill de Blasio barely used; A 500 bed field hospital in Brooklyn that also sat barely used. Lets be crystal clear: Andrew Cuomo and Andrew Cuomo alone is responsible for the needless deaths of thousands of nursing home residents in New York. Period.
That is all.
“Dont 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?
Sullivan needs to be impeached. He hires lawyers to tell the circuit panel what his thinking is? He has become a buffoon. He is an embarrassment to every judge in this country.
Knowing what you know, can you tell me when criminal charges stop pending? Can a prosecutor unilaterally drop charges at anytime? How about after a conviction?
And can you cite your authority for saying a judge cannot hire legal representation when he is the subject of a mandamus petition? You seem to have that answer, and I would appreciate knowing it before I further embarrass myself.
Also, can you explain how Fokker governs the Flynn case, and why Flynn was not in contempt for lying to Sullivan’s face?
Thanks! I appreciate hearing from someone who knows what he is talking about beyond a first year level!
“The order from the DC Circuit demanded a response personally from him”
That’s a really outstanding point.
What’s the point of having him on the bench if he can’t write a decent legal opinion defending his own decisions?
He thinks it’s OK to outsource his job? He just gets to sit there and cut checks?
I can’t see the appellate court doing anything but ending it.
I didn’t say the judge didn’t have a right to, I have just never heard of that happening in an appellate review.
The judge usually just writes an answer.
So something interesting is definitely going on.
The judge has made some great judgments in the past.
This case has been a bit of a puzzler.
The ‘treason’ comment was exceedingly strange. I will avoid speculating on why the judge made that comment.
As is the judges decision to allow a third party to come in and argue for the government.
Defendants have changed pleas all of the time. The judges willingness to go along and use a change in plea as grounds for charging perjury or contempt of court... well, that would certainly cause a lot of problems in other future court cases for ordinary citizens.
Ref: FLYNN
Can't remember the U.S. Supreme Court cite; but something along the lines one shouldn't have to give up / lose one {constitutional right} in order to save / use another. "give up one right to save another".
I know it's a U.S.S.C case cite, my old age {66 yr's} is preventing me from remembering it properly. If I recall correctly, it had to do with a drug case, and the ensuing questions during the investigation of said case.
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.