Posted on 05/14/2020 2:46:43 PM PDT by Enlightened1
General Mike Flynn’s fired lawyers at COVINGTON & BURLING filed court papers on Thursday to reappear in Flynn’s case.
Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered Flynn’s former legal team to reappear as an interested party and they complied by filing a notice of appearance.
Via Law & Crime:
The federal judge overseeing Michael Flynn’s criminal prosecution has directed the legal team that Flynn fired to reappear as an interested party in the controversial proceeding. On Thursday, that former legal team complied by filing a notice of appearance.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan of the District of Columbia on Thursday ordered the clerk of the court to “add Covington & Burling LLP (‘Covington’) as an interested party in this matter and directed counsel for Covington to file a notice of appearance on behalf of Covington as an interested party.”
On April 25, 2020, The Gateway Pundit reported on former Obama Attorney General Eric Holder’s role at Covington and Burling as his law firm was representing General Michael Flynn from corrupt deep state operatives.
Covington had numerous conflicts of interest related to their biggest case ever, representing General Michael Flynn in his unjust indictment by the Mueller gang. Flynn’s attorneys at the firm withheld evidence from their client. They asked for dirt on President Trump. They hired individuals that were involved in the criminal Spygate scandal.
After spending millions of dollars in legal fees, and after untold negative stories in the fake news media, General Flynn obtained new lawyers.
Flynn’s new lead counsel Sidney Powell fought to get her hands on the thousands of documents Covington & Burling were hiding from Flynn and the Court.
The hidden Brady material was finally released and General Flynn’s case was dropped by the DOJ after handwritten notes revealed the FBI framed Flynn.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Lol.
Yes.
No one is permitted to bring a private prosecution of criminal charges in the country.
And in a court system worthy of the name, no judge has ever been permitted to bring a private prosecution of criminal charges in case over which they preside.
Occasionally in litigation someone tries something there is no court opinion forbidding because it is so clearly unlawful that no one has tried it before.
But it is not usually the judge.
I read that this forces DOJ to appeal to the 3rd District. If they accept the appeal, I think it will go badly for Sullivan.
Bingo! Obama enraged about the Pali thing in the UN SECURITY COUNCIL that the general lobbied against the those who oppose Israel
If Trump gets re-elected, I disagree with your last sentence. I think release of the unmasking list alone has done much to restore Flynn’s credibility as a VICTIM, not a PERP!
I am presuming that even Sydney needs a couple of days to draft up a writ petition so I can’t think of anything. Moreover, with today’s development it kind of appears that Sullivan is a moving target. It is a matter of minutes for him to make a write petition moot and engage in some other outrage instead.
Because it is known that Covington & Burling had both had a conflict of interest and withheld exculpatory evidence.
https://mobile.twitter.com/we_have_risen/status/1257210812696944640?s=21
The Twitter link above reveals an email from a New York Times reporter named Mark Mazzetti to lawyers at Covington & Burling. Mazzetti is asking for a meeting with General Mike Flynn’s attorneys to discuss what the New York Times had just discovered, that Joe Pientka told IG Horowitz that Andrew McCabe ordered him to alter the FD-302 report originally filed in the Flynn case.
Remember, the text messages that indicated Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were conspiring to alter the FD-302 we’re not found by the Justice Department, they were found by Covington & Burling... so they knew all along...and judge Sullivan knows they knew.
Read my comment on this post and you will see why I think that matters. I believe it’s comment number 52 or 54.
Flynn's name was made public, and therefore it is patently evident that the unmaskers did not engage the necessary minimization procedures that they had a duty to put in place.
That still doesn’t tell you what Flynn said to Peter Strzok and Joe Pientka during their “interview”. That information would, should, be on the original FD-302 that is now missing.
Yes, the advice of his counsel that had both a conflict of interest and withheld exculpatory information from Flynn and the court.
The evidence in this case demands that judge Sullivan acquiesce to the Department of Justice and defense counsel and end this charade.
For instance - U.S. Code § 1809
A person is guilty of an offense if he intentionally—
(1)engages in electronic surveillance under color of law except as authorized by this chapter, chapter 119, 121, or 206 of title 18, or any express statutory authorization that is an additional exclusive means for conducting electronic surveillance under section 1812 of this title;
(2)discloses or uses information obtained under color of law by electronic surveillance, knowing or having reason to know that the information was obtained through electronic surveillance not authorized by this chapter, chapter 119, 121, or 206 of title 18, or any express statutory authorization that is an additional exclusive means for conducting electronic surveillance under section 1812 of this title.
§ 1810.Civil liability
An aggrieved person, other than a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power, as defined in section 1801(a) or (b)(1)(A) of this title, respectively, who has been subjected to an electronic surveillance or about whom information obtained by electronic surveillance of such person has been disclosed or used in violation of section 1809 of this title shall have a cause of action against any person who committed such violation and shall be entitled to recover—
(a)actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages of $1,000 or $100 per day for each day of violation, whichever is greater;
(b)punitive damages; and
(c)reasonable attorney’s fees and other investigation and litigation costs reasonably incurred.
“Judge Sullivan’s actions can only be understood in only one plausible way. He is desperately trying to protect Obama.”
No kidding.
Yep, another piece of missing evidence. How do you charge a crime without evidence?
another radical tyrant on the bench
Exactly! If you’ll read my comment (#52) you might agree with what I believe has to happen in this case. Judge Sullivan has no other way out.
Nuke them from orbit, Sidney Powell, nuke them from orbit.
Sullivan's past history is a tell.
The Prosecutor... the DOJ, dropped the charges in the trial. There cannot be a “mis”trial for a trial in which the charges have been dropped. It is simply not possible. At all.
This judge is setting himself up to be removed— the Judges jobs exist by a law creating them-— they are not sacrosanct as a separate branch of government unto themselves. They can be removed by the Executive Branch through the proper organiztions-— and citing Supreme Court rulings (the higher court) on the same.
Brennan et al turning our Judicial officers into a Venezuelan style “court”... having nothing to do with our Constitution.
His boss, obamaumao, as the former sworn defender of same, and mocks the “Rule of Law” is a Soviet style apparatchik, as is this judge. No judge can arrange for the prosecution of a trial in which the prosecution under our laws, has dropped all the charges for absolutely covered by law, legal reasons.
So leads one to wonder what do they have on this judge— is he pedophile of the club, has deep dark skeletons they can bring up. Like the trial he conducted on Sen.Ted Stevens— something there?
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.