ike someone on Fox said, if he holds an actual hearing, the prosecution and defense will be sitting at the same table...both arguing for him to drop it.
Yes, but for very different reasons.
Flynn’s reasons are obvious.
The prosecution maybe not so obvious. The longer this drags on, the more criminal activity is discovered and aired in public with the potential for criminal prosecution of some very well known names.
It is to the prosecutions advantage to end this trial and cover up as much as they can that which has already been discovered.
None of the parties filing amicus briefs have Barr's knowledge. Their briefs can ONLY be political in nature, begging Sullivan for their pound of flesh.
Does the Judge really need Barr to reveal ALL of the illegal tactics and legal errors of the prosecutors? The Judge knows some or even most of the issues, as the defense presented them and Judge Sullivan rejected their requests.
If Sullivan dismisses the case for reasons he already rejected when presented by the defense, he looks like an impartial jurist. When a Judge is less concerned with a defendant's rights than the prosecutor, and so hostile as to call the defendant a traitor, that judge should be removed from the bench.
Normally I would agree, but it would be a new “prosecution” which is on-board with Barr’s wishes to throw the whole case out.