Posted on 05/13/2020 8:08:26 PM PDT by kiryandil
The Justice Department’s move to dismiss the prosecution of former national security adviser Michael Flynn does not need to be the end of the case — and it shouldn’t be. The Justice Department has made conflicting statements to the federal judge overseeing the case, Emmet G. Sullivan. He has the authority, the tools and the obligation to assess the credibility of the department’s stated reasons for abruptly reversing course.
The department’s motion to dismiss the Flynn case is actually just a request — one that requires “leave of the court” before it is effective. The executive branch has unreviewable authority to decide whether to prosecute a case. But once it secures an indictment, the proceedings necessarily involve the judicial branch. And the law provides that the court — not the executive branch — decides whether an indictment may be dismissed. The responsible exercise of that authority is particularly important here, where a defendant’s plea of guilty has already been accepted. Government motions to dismiss at this stage are virtually unheard of...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
In that case the DC COA held: "[T]he `leave of court' authority gives no power to a district court to deny a prosecutor's Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the prosecution's exercise of charging authority." United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., 818 F.3d 733, 742 (D.C. Cir. 2016).
The case further held:
The Constitution allocates primacy in criminal charging decisions to the Executive Branch. The Executive's charging authority embraces decisions about whether to initiate charges, whom to prosecute, which charges to bring, and whether to dismiss charges once brought. It has long been settled that the Judiciary generally lacks authority to second-guess those Executive determinations, much less to impose its own charging preferences.
He used to be a candidate for the SC.
He’s not anymore... I think that has a lot to do with his decisions.
No reason to be fair- at least for his own sake.
I have reluctantly come to the same conclusion ... all these protestors being provoked by governors are like birth pains ... something is going to pop ...
See post 21 !!!!
It all seems like a big deal to me.
But, with the way the Dems are reacting it seems like Armageddon. This is huger than huge.
Thanks for posting - that ruling deserves it own thread
So it looks like Sullivan is caught with his pants down.
We’ll see, they don’t call it the swamp for nothing.
We need a new system. A system where judicial power is limited per our Constitution and judges have term limits and accountability to the people. No more lifetime appointments, no more nationwide injunctions, no more secret courts, no more stare decisis, etc. etc, and on and on.
Post 6 has your answer.
Three authors.
“So it looks like Sullivan is caught with his pants down.
We’ll see, they don’t call it the swamp for nothing.”
Exactly. Barr boxed in Sullivan and he has nowhere to go. He is flailing about by calling in Judge John Gleeson to bail him out. That will get over ruled on appeal in a heart beat.
He let Stevens off after he had lost re-election.
Judges should have six years, just like senators. They have broken the system. It is a grand joke.
You’re right. The Dems have never been so blatantly corrupt. They will get worse and worse and they don’t care who sees it.
Judge Sullivan can go get @#%&* by a rabid billy goat.
Sullivan can’t stop the inevitable, and he knows it. His goal is to extend the case as long as he possibly can. Notice you haven’t seen Flynn speak in public or to the press yet? He really can’t until the case has been officially dismissed. When he is free to speak his mind, he will destroy any Deep State narrative about the legitimacy of the Obama admin spying and unmasking on him. That will also rally more public support to his/Trump side and away from the DS/dems. That is what Sullivan’s delays are all about.
"Tuesday’s appellate opinion (pdf) written by Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan said, “The Constitution allocates primacy in criminal charging decisions to the Executive Branch.”
What the judge may not anticipate...he’s likely to be turned into a Trump-campaign-theme and bring another million Democrats to the ‘red-pill’, voting for Trump. I’d want to clear this off my schedule, and dump this.
Are these three shysters in search of 15 seconds of fame or infamy? I hope the other dominating precedent cases they seem to ignore bitch slaps them into “Happy Dale” where the bars are iron, not legal.
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.