Posted on 05/23/2020 2:46:59 PM PDT by CaptainK
Veteran trial lawyer Beth Wilkinson is helping guide U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan as a federal appeals court questions his plan to probe the U.S. Justice Department’s decision to dismiss the case against former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn despite his admission he lied to the FBI.
Sullivan refused to immediately dismiss the charge against Flynn, a retired Army general who served for just weeks in Trump’s White House, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is now weighing whether the longtime Washington federal trial judge overstepped his authority.
The appeals court set a June 1 deadline for Sullivan to respond to a petition from Flynn’s lawyers that seeks the immediate dismissal of the case. Sullivan, meanwhile, has appointed an outside lawyer, John Gleeson, a former federal judge in Brooklyn, to make arguments against the Justice Department’s bid to ditch the prosecution. Flynn pleaded guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI about his communications with the Russian ambassador to the U.S., but he later hired new lawyers to help him withdraw his acknowledgement of wrongdoing.
Wilkinson, a co-founder of the litigation boutique Wilkinson Walsh, confirmed Saturday she had been retained by Sullivan, who has served on Washington’s federal trial court since 1994. The Washington Post first reported Wilkinson’s role advocating for the judge.
Wilkinson has long been in the spotlight in Washington legal circles and beyond as a successful defense-side trial lawyer advocating for major U.S. companies. She left the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison in 2016 to start the boutique, which has offices in Washington, New York and Los Angeles.
She has frequently taken on high-profile assignments. In 2018, she was hired by Brett Kavanaugh, then a U.S. Supreme Court nominee, to help shepherd him through confirmation proceedings at which he had been accused of a decades-old sexual misconduct allegation. Kavanaugh, who denied the claim, was confirmed to the high court.
More recently, Wilkinson was retained by Summer Zervos in a suit in New York state court that accuses Trump of lying in his denials that he did not grope and kiss her without consent in 2007. The case is pending.
In the D.C. Circuit now, Wilkinson is counsel to Cheryl Mills, a former aide to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in a dispute over a deposition in a public-records case. One of Sullivan’s colleagues on the bench, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth, said the plaintiff—the conservative advocacy group Judicial Watch—could depose Clinton and Mills.
.Sullivan’s move to appoint Gleeson, now a partner at Debevoise & Plimpton, to oppose the Justice Department’s move to dismiss was seen by some observers as an assertion of independence of the courts as a co-equal branch of government. Still others said Sullivan had assumed too powerful a role, and that he should have dismissed the case at the Justice Department’s request.
Legal scholars are divided over how much power Sullivan holds to scrutinize the Justice Department’s charging decisions. Federal rules do not allow prosecutors to unilaterally dismiss any criminal case. They need “leave of court” before a charge can be withdrawn.
At one time, Flynn was prepared to be punished, but he agreed to further cooperate with the special counsel’s Russia investigation in an effort to secure a non-jail sentence. During Flynn’s first scheduled sentencing, Sullivan raised the prospect that Flynn might go to prison for lying to federal agents.
Timothy Shea, the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia and a former close adviser to Barr, asked Sullivan to dismiss the case against Flynn on the ground that prosecutors no longer believe there was a strong basis to justify the FBI’s 2017 interview that is central to the false-statements claim. Former Justice Department officials have disputed the government’s claim there was no ground to interview Flynn.
“Start with #122 or sooner and read from there. You may learn something. I doubt you will contribute anything”
Here’s my contribution that will be proven correct. The Appeals Court will receive whatever Judge Sullivan has to say by June 1st and they will then act accordingly under the law. The recent case of Fokker can be argued to no end and will be quickly expedited to a final conclusion. The Appeals Court is clearly interjecting into the lunacy of an amicus call by Judge Sullivan even as he’s avoided any action on the withheld Brady material discovered against his standing order.
Judge Sullivan will go down in flames and this will be the epitaph to his legal career.
The Court of Appeals action will lead to his case being dismissed, one way or another.
So put that in your pipe and smoke it, Hostage!
sure, hire the most conflicted person possible, that will help
Exactly.. Gotta keep that gag order in place at least through early November. That should about do it?
Sorry but you’re not a lawyer nor have you been one.
Flynn IS a democrat...or at least he was. Obama appointed him as the Director of the defense intelligence agency. He was the primary intelligence adviser to the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He did not get along with Clapper or Brennan because he thought they were light weights and he opposed the Iran deal and the CIAs massive off the books Middle East operations that supported and armed radicle groups like ISIS. He also called out Obama and contradicted Brennan and Clapper before Congress when he testified that ISIS was a real and growing threat, not some junior varsity.
Yes, that’s the Bongino et al coverage. There’s also the Hillary - Gulen matter.
Flynn as a Democrat is irrelevant. He’s a patriot, all that matters other than being a believer.
Is that the way it works?
I read it somewhere from what I saw as a good source, I think it is true.
Research it if you want to know now.
“Maybe she’s a defense lawyer for him. Could be the Judge was in on the scam. Barr could be investigating him.”
It seems to me one of the prosecutors quit, and recused himself from all other DOJ matters, perhaps you’re right.
That would be a strong incentive for the deep state to make Trump pardon Flynn, in addition to the political angle of bringing “legal experts” on camera, including more impeachment nonsense.
Magic Negro Judge
I don't think so. The tort of malicious prosecution depends on misuse of the courts, not on the outcome in court. A pardon is a separate event, and does not judge guilt or innocence. A pardon is generally viewed as requiring an admission of guilt and repentance, but any express conditions for pardon are attached by the person doing the pardoning.
That said, if Flynn is pardoned (and there is no reason to do so, he is out of legal jeopardy), the defendants in civil lawsuits by Flynn will argue exactly what was proposed - a pardon is the same as "no foul."
This is as nonsensical as charging him in the first place, but you can bet the argument would have traction in our crooked court system.
An interesting question is whether Sullivan's immunity from suit can be pierced as he wanders so far afield from allowed practice. Flynn is paying for Powell to take the appeal for a writ of mandamus to get Sullivan to stop. Is Sullivan liable for malicious prosecution?
Both prosecutors and judges have "absolute immunity," but the kind a judge has is stronger. "Absolute" isn't really "absolute" in the case of a prosecutor.
Here is a case where a prosecutor was in the line of fire: Freddie Gray vs. Marilyn Mosby.
A couple of esoteric points. The DOJ Motion to drop the case says, expressly, "no crime." There is nothing to pardon there. What Sullivan is yapping about, Criminal Contempt, may be viewed at outside of Trump's pardon power! In criminal contempt, the judge is the prosecutor. POTUS can pardon when HIS branch prosecutes. He can't pardon state crimes. Trump's pardon of Arapio was challenged, and the pardon power was unsuccessfully challenged.
Yes....
Exactly.
That’s why the case needs to be thrown out as the DOJ said. Charges dropped an exoneration period.
Good info.
he meant traitor to the democrat party!
pretty sure kavanaugh has major libtard tendancies.
Sorry I’m right and you’re wrong.
Ok, I’m not sorry you’re wrong.
General Flynn wins as the Appealls Court disrupts and ends the case, one way or another.
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.