Posted on 05/12/2020 4:59:56 PM PDT by Hostage
Now the purpose of the leaked conference call, aka instructions, from former President Barack Obama come into play. In a very unusual move today Michael Flynn’s judge, Emmet Sullivan, enters an order granting outside parties the time to enter amicus briefs (friend of the court) to assist in guiding the court; a briefing schedule to follow.
It looks like the judge wants to give former DOJ employees (2,000 signatures on letter) an opportunity to publicly undermine and undercut the position of the DOJ in moving to dismiss the charges. Infuriating, remarkable and transparently political.
Judge Sullivan even cited famously political Judge Amy Berman Jackson, a subtle hat/tip to President Obama’s recent May 8th instructions. Sullivan’s order can put to rest any contemplation of him holding corrupt prosecutor Brandon Van Grack to account; and only further delays removing the sword of damocles from atop Lt. General Michael Flynn.
The transparent purpose of allowing public comment, specifically from the Lawfare resistance group, is to undermine the DOJ and further create a political narrative around AG Bill Barr. However, on the positive side this might stir Barr to release even more damaging information to counter the political efforts of Judge Sullivan. Quite remarkable.
(Excerpt) Read more at theconservativetreehouse.com ...
Do you think then that the judge lacks authority to declare a mistrial? Does he lack authority to allow a withdrawal of the guilty plea? Must the judge fail to take notice of any prosecutorial misconduct?
Suppose that a defendant had pleaded guilty to murder and the prosecution discovered that witnesses lied and that uncontestable proof existed that the defendant was innocent. Would the judge be unable to grant a prosecution's motion to dismiss?
What do you think the legal consequences are when an appeals court remands a case to a lower court? Isn't that an order to treat the case as if it has not been fully adjudicated? Do you think the judge lacks authority to do that which a higher court might order him to do?
I vaguely recall a case where a woman was convicted of killing her child with anti-freeze. I don't recall that an appeals court was involved. Instead, lawyers working for the defendant made a presentation to the prosecution team. Convinced of the innocence of the woman, I believe that the prosecution team petitioned the original court to set aside its conviction and free the woman.
They could dile an Interlockatory Appeal. It wouls still take some time but would stop any other actions. until it is resolved. I can’t believe that a Federal court is letting non involved people comment on a citzens case. They have no standing. This is more $hit for Fkynn’s lawsuits.
Who’s putting the judge up to this?
Sullivan is compromised.
This looks unprecedented, and is obviously a blatantly partisan act. Sullivan is unfit for the bench, always has been, always will be.
My recollection is that parties who wish to file amici briefs must first petition the court for permission to do so. The petition probably includes some description of how the filing party is affected by the pending decision. I've certainly never heard of such a filing in a criminal case.
I think what the judge is missing is that the amici can have no effect on his ruling. Neither the judge nor any amici are parties to this controversy. If the judge has the power to dismiss, then I think he must do so. I don't think the judge would be justified in ordering a prosecutor to knowingly prosecute a defendant whom the prosecutor believes is innocent.
In this case the prosecutor is claiming that no crime was committed. The fact that some amici claims otherwise is simply not relevant. Prosecutors decline to prosecute cases virtually every day. I doubt that judges concern themselves with that.
Near as I can tell the DOJ considers adjudication and sentencing to be separate phases.
No matter, Sineneng-Smith clearly isn't on point.
Easier to get a plea changed before sentencing.
Once Flyn pled guilty and tthe coourt accepted the plea, the trial is over. Flynn then reconsidered and affirmed his guilty plea.
................
The judge can impose sentence any time he wants, or allow the plea to be withdrawn and dismiss the case, or declare a mistrial.
...........
Of course, appeals can be made. Asking for Friend of the Court briefs, if he intends to sentence, is often done.
...............
Having an independent judiciary means that judges can do what they damn well please once the trial is over.
This had to be expected by Barr. Does this mean he will lay all the evidence out immediately for everyone to see?
He had to expect this.
It is very much on point. And the case has not been adjudicated. There is no final judgment that can be appealed.
No, I think Sullivan has broad powers here.
The post I was replying to implied that he couldn't legitimately solicit outside briefs and I think that legally he can.
We may get a chance to find out.
If so I'd expect to hear that argument from DOJ tomorrow
“The case has been adjudicated. Flynn pleaded guilty.”
Sorry, it has been established that the Muller team concluded within a month that there was no collusion between team Trump and Russia, yet they proceeded to intimidate and coerce Flynn into pleading guilty to a “crime” he did not commit. That in itself is a crime by the prosecution. Everything stemming from the fraudulent Mueller investigation is the fruit of the poisoned tree and should be dismissed forthwith. This is not rocket science.
By the way, for whom did you vote in the last presidential election? I voted for President Trump.
Who can say how this will turn out?? (/sarcasm)
In the Navy we had a term for this type of situation::
‘Re-F***ingdiculous”
“However, on the positive side this might stir Barr to release even more damaging information to counter the political efforts of Judge Sullivan.”
Barr should be releasing stuff with both hands right now regardless.
Get it all out.
All of it.
Now.
L
He should be
Suliban had plenty of time and opportunity to do the right thing. Instead he posed and postured and played everyone. It is abundantly clear that he will do the opposite of what is right. He needs to be hounded out of office - after being publicly humiliated of course.
What does Obama and Co have on this judge and/or his loved ones?
Flynn was interviewed by the FBI in January and resigned, admitting he had lied, in February.
Mueller was appointed in May.
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.