Posted on 08/05/2020 12:35:58 PM PDT by EyesOfTX
This is absolutely surreal. – The term “en banc” as it exists in U.S. law is defined as follows:
en banc
(on bonk) French for “in the bench,” it signifies a decision by the full court of all the appeals judges in jurisdictions where there is more than one three- or four-judge panel. The larger number sit in judgment when the court feels there is a particularly significant issue at stake or when requested by one or both parties to the case and agreed to by the court.
[End]
Most people think that an “en banc” hearing will involve all judges that are a part of a given circuit court of appeals. That is not necessarily the case, however. First, any judges who are for whatever reason disqualified from hearing a case are excluded. Second, each of the various circuit courts establish their own rules for determining how many of their total judges will participate in any en banc hearings that take place.
Federal law provides that for courts with more than 15 judges, an en banc hearing may consist of “such number of members of its en banc courts as may be prescribed by rule of the court of appeals.” The DC Circuit Court of Appeals consists of 17 total judges, but 6 of those judges, appointees of Carter, Reagan and Bush 41, have taken senior status and thus do not normally participate in en banc hearings.
Here is the roster of those DC Circuit Court judges:
Judges
Sri Srinivasan, Chief Judge 216-7080 Karen LeCraft Henderson Judith W. Rogers 216-7260 David S. Tatel 216-7160 Merrick B. Garland 216-7460 Thomas B. Griffith 216-7170 Patricia A. Millett 216-7110 Cornelia T.L. Pillard 216-7120 Robert L. Wilkins 216-7240 Gregory G. Katsas 216-7220 Neomi Rao Harry T. Edwards 216-7380 Laurence H. Silberman 216-7353 Stephen F. Williams 216-7210 Douglas H. Ginsburg 216-7190 David B. Sentelle 216-7330 A. Raymond Randolph 216-7425 All phone numbers are in the 202 area code.
Today, that Court released the list of 10 of its judges who will participate in the en banc hearing in the case of General Mike Flynn:
Here is a listing of those judges along with the President who appointed them:
Srinivasian – Obama
Rogers – Clinton
Henderson – Bush 41
Tatel – Clinton
Garland – Clinton
Griffith – Bush 43
Millett – Obama
Pillard – Obama
Wilkins – Obama
Rao – Trump
Judge Katsas, a Trump appointee, has recused himself from this hearing, presumably for some conflict.
For those keeping score at home, that amounts to 7 judges appointed by either Obama or Clinton compared to just 3 appointed by Republican presidents.
We all know how those 7 Obama/Clinton judges are going to rule, don’t we? Of course we do.
Thus, the fix is in. Sidney Powell might as well not bother to even show up for arguments when this kangaroo court hearing convenes on August 11. She should focus on preparing an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the meantime, the Deep State advances towards its goal of delaying the final disposition of this case – in which the DOJ moved to dismiss more two months ago – until after the November election has come and gone.
It’s almost enough to make you want to take up arms and march on Washington, isn’t it?
That is all.
Seriously?
Judges don’t prosecute cases. They are the judicial branch. That’s what the doj does in the executive branch.
It’s as the poster said.
“This will go to the Supreme Court.”
Where the ever-impartial, Constitution defending Roberts is the CJ. Flynn’s screwed.
...and it goes soooo deep
Not so sure. The SC has surprised us in the past when they ruled 9-0 against blatantly unconstitutional acts by liberal judges.
When it gets to this scummy DC appellate circuit loaded with low life Dems, Flynn does not have a legal problem. He has a political affiliation problem and their political decision to not require Sullivan to dismiss will only be corrected by an appeal to the Supreme Court
I am pretty confident that they are going to remove Sullivan from the case and assign it to another judge to dismiss.
Sullivan will get a few shameful votes with some word salad justification, but it won’t be enough.
One thing that I hope will happen is that DOJ will tell the court what happened to Flynn in clear language - he was framed by the FBI and special counsel. The prosecutors threatened his son to secure the plea. The FBI doctored the original 302.
Durham’s investigation be damned - justice demands they provide the court with information they possess to protect an innocent man.
Merritt Garland has no business being on this panel. He’s vindictive because the GOP wouldn’t give him a hearing on his nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Like I said in the beginning, this will go to the Supreme Court where it will be shut down. The purpose in this by democratic Judge Emmett Sullivan is to keep it in the news as long as possible to be detrimental to the Trump campaign for re-election. Sullivan looked at the makeup of the full court and figured that with 7 Obama and Clinton judges to just 3 Republican appointed judges, he’ll win the en banc case. What a slob he is!
Strip away the robes, the masks, the garb, the other visual distractions. Focus on the face, the eyes, the words, the deeds. it’s all about the criminal vs the innocent, the lie vs the truth, injustice vs justice, the collective vs the individual. At the end father time is undefeated.
But the Federal Prosecutors DO work for the DOJ, which has said they are no longer prosecuting the 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.