Posted on 06/08/2020 9:28:13 AM PDT by jazusamo
Oral arguments are set to take place this week, when U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan will have to explain why he has not signed off on the Justice Departments motion to dismiss its case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn.
The hearing marks another extraordinary turn in an extraordinary -- and seemingly interminable -- case that has brought pressure upon both the Justice Department and the judge overseeing it. After calling into question the DOJs choice to drop Flynns prosecution, Sullivan is now in the position of defending his own decision.
~snip~
Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure states that prosecutors may, with leave of court, dismiss an indictment, information, or complaint. Retired Judge John Gleeson, chosen by Sullivan to file an amicus curiae brief, claimed in a May Washington Post op-ed he co-authored that this means a motion to dismiss is actually just a request. As a judge in 2013, however, he wrote that courts are generally required to grant a prosecutors Rule 48(a) motion unless dismissal is clearly contrary to manifest public interest.
Trump allies have criticized Sullivan's handling of what was initially thought to be the coda of Flynn's legal saga.
"What I see is the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure dont allow for what Judge Sullivan is doing," former Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker told Fox News in May. Whitaker said that prosecutors are the ones who decide which cases they pursue, and that "theres really no discretion on the judge based on the current state of the law."
~snip~
In 2009, Judge Sullivan presided over the case of former Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who had been found guilty of lying on a Senate ethics form before a whistleblower in the FBI revealed that evidence had been withheld from Stevens.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Yep, Sullivan will be there to explain.
His attorney submitted a 45 page brief in which she did not explain why he has not dismissed the case.
He is the judge and he need to explain his own reasoning not have some attorney write a bunch of stuff about why he could have done what he did.
Under law, he was the judge exercising discretion in the matter. He had to exercise discretion, he had to exercise discretion legally, and his exercise had to be reasonable - i.e. for a valid stated reason.
He did none of that. He didn't even exercise his disretion. He just kicked the can down the road.
What is comical is that an attorney that shows up occasionally on my youtube feed had a video making the case that Sullivan’s explanation was rock solid. Pretty comical. But the guy outed himself yesterday with a preposterous rant against the Lafayette square thing. It was preposterous, especially after seeing Barr’s interview about it. He simply believed the bullchit from the MSM and based his response on it.
Communist rat face judge making up his own law and is so crooked that it will be new law. America is lost.
When the case against Flynn is officially dismissed, he’s probably dead man walking. No way does the Deep State allow Flynn to talk to the public about what he knows.
Reportedly, DS needs to muzzle Flynn to prevent him from disclosing Foreign / Domestic traitors imbedded in US Government.
Once case dismissed, Flynn is activated
The hack Judge ignores recent new evidence that the FBI withheld
evidence from Flynn and that Flynn was set up.
Shameless dirty, lying, treasonous and
very dirty Sullivan makes Emmet mean “LIES AND SEDITION”.
The Shadow President is still giving the orders.
I disagree. That brain-dead ass-hat puppet couldn’t find his way out of a wet paper bag if he were holding machetes in each hand.
This goes much higher, much higher.
His argument, which the court of appeals is likely to buy (because they really want to come up with a reason to deny the writ of mandamus) is that he did not deny the motion, he merely set it for hearing and gave groups who had previously been denied the right to file amicus briefs the opportunity to do so before the motion was heard.
Will the Judge be present to explain, or will his hirelings explain?
By it's ORDER of 4 Jun 2020, the court set oral arguments to start 12 Jun 2020 at 9:30 a.m; one counsel per side to argue.
Sydney Powell will argue for Michael Flynn.
Beth Wilkinson will argue for Judge Sullivan.
A Form 72 has not yet been docketed to show who may argue for the U.S. Department of Justice. Any Form 72 is due by June 8, 2020.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
USCA Case #20-5143
Document #1845695
Filed: 06/04/2020
Page 1 of 1
United States Court of Appeals
For The District Of Columbia Circuit
____________
No. 20-5143
September Term, 2019
1:17-cr-00232-EGS-1
Filed On: June 4, 2020
In re: Michael T. Flynn,
Petitioner
O R D E R
It is ORDERED, on the court's own motion, that the following times are allotted for the oral argument of this case scheduled for June 12, 2020, at 9:30 A.M.:
Petitioner, Michael T. Flynn - 15 Minutes
U.S. Department of Justice - 15 Minutes
Respondent, Hon. Emmet G. Sullivan - 15 Minutes
One counsel per side to argue. The panel considering this case will consist of Circuit Judges Henderson, Wilkins, and Rao.
Form 72, which may be accessed through the link on this order, must be completed and returned to the Clerk's Office by June 8, 2020.
Per Curiam
FOR THE COURT:
Mark J. Langer, Clerk
BY: /s/
Scott H. Atchue
Deputy Clerk
The following forms and notices are available on the Court's website:
Notification to the Court from Attorney Intending to Present Argument (Form 72)
Once the transcript of the call released, he looks even stupider. He ought to crawl in a hole and resign.
It's only a three judge panel, with 2 of the 3 being Republican appointed. With COVID-19, the DC Circuit cancelled all oral arguments for May, and has very few arguments scheduled for June. Basically, the panel that is handling this case didn't do much in May, thus has lots of time on their hands. Flynn got lucky with having two conservatives on his panel...
I assume, and sure hope, that General Flynn has a brief or some kind of document that would be released IMMEDIATELY if anything “untoward” happened to him.
And,hopefully, President Trump has a copy!
Explain? The Resistance don’t need no stinkin’ ‘splainin!
And, despite the author's attempt to suggest otherwise, Gleeson's current position is consistent with his 2013 writing. Sullivan (et al) selected him for a good reason.
(What are the odds Ronn Blitzer is related to the adored "Stud Muffin"?)
Gen. Flynn should sit down, under the “cone of silence” with Donald Trump,Jr. as stenographer. He should tell all he knows, and who is involved, to protect himself, and the information he has.
I trust Donald Trump, Jr., and doubt he’d leak or spoil the confidence.
Because Orange Man Bad.
It could have been splained easily a long time ago...I am a racist, deep stater, bammy/hellary demonrat...next question...
Flynn should have come out with blazing words screaming that he would not give an inch and they would have to throw him in jail...LIKE THAT JEROME CORSI DID.
I was so impressed with him. He would not SHUT UP. Kept saying “put me in jail, I am not going to lie!”
I think he INTIMIDATED THE fools at FBI/DOJ. I could have watched him forever, he was great.
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.