The full DC Appeals Court ruled in an 8-2 decision that DC District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan doesn’t need to grant the prosecutors’ motion to drop the criminal case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
Just to bring you up to speed, Attorney General William Barr assigned a prominent US Attorney to take a look at James Comey’s FBI’s case against Flynn, and determined that the whole thing was a setup and that prosecutors withheld exculpatory information, and that’s not even the half of the level of corruption by the Obama administration. After they discovered what the FBI did to Flynn, the DOJ made a recommendation to drop the case against him. Someone got to Judge Emmett Sullivan to do the unthinkable.
The review held by the full court reversed the decision of a three-judge panel, which had issued a writ of mandamus ordering Sullivan to toss the case. There is no reason for Sullivan to keep the case alive except for partisan political motives. There was no reason for Sullivan to then ask for the full court to review the case other than he knew the court was full of liberal judges that would go along with the “resistance” cause against Donald Trump.
When the DOJ drops the case, and the defense team has evidence that the government acted badly, what other reason could the judge have for keeping the case alive, other than stretching the Democrats’ political talking point out until the election. Imagine how bad it would look for Democrats if the word went out that the Obama administration was the most lawless and corrupt in our history.
Flynn and his team of lawyers argued that Sullivan overstepped his authority by appointing a third-party amicus curiae (friend of the court) to argue against dismissal, even though Flynn and the Justice Department had an agreement to drop the the case. What is especially disturbing is that all throughout the case when other outside parties tried to get the attention of the court, Sullivan turned them all down. At one point he made a statement: “The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure do not provide for intervention by third parties in criminal cases.” And yet he saw fit to bring in third parties to trash the former national security advisor.
“Quite simply, the only separation-of-powers question we must answer at this juncture is whether the appointment of an amicus and the scheduling of briefing and argument is a clearly, indisputably impermissible intrusion upon Executive authority, because that is all that the District Judge has ordered at this point,” the court’s opinion said.
“We have no trouble answering that question in the negative, because precedent and experience have recognized the authority of courts to appoint an amicus to assist their decision-making in similar circumstances, including in criminal cases and even when the movant is the government,” the opinion continued.
While dismissals are normally done as “leave of court,” Flynn’s attorneys argued that in the overwhelming majority of cases it’s just a formality and that this case doesn’t warrant being the rare exception where a judge needed to step in for further review.
If Sullivan decides against to not drop the case following arguments, it would take up where it left off and move on to the sentencing phase.
Can you believe that an innocent man could be sent to prison all because a judge has been corrupted by seemingly the same deep state that set him up?
Another theory I have is that the Democrats got Sullivan do this so that it forces Trump to pardon Flynn. That way, Flynn and his lawyers could argue the need for the pardon, because of the level of corruption in the FBI and with this judge, and the president and Attorney General could make the same arguments, but you know that the mainstream news media would report whatever Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, or Chuck Schumer told them to say, which would be the DOJ and the president are corrupt, and that’s the story that would go out.
Prosecutors went to drop Flynn’s case, which he had previously plead guilty, but that was only because after railroading him, the FBI agents then threatened to go after his innocent son if he didn’t plead guilty to providing false statements to the FBI for answers Flynn gave on questions about what he said to the Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak about the sanctions that President Obama had recently put on the Russians, which is a felony. Here’s the real kicker on that. Recently, FBI 302 documents were released that showed that not only did Flynn not lie about the question on sanctions, but the FBI never even asked Flynn about sanctions. So, how could he have lied about something they never asked him? That is how absurd this whole thing is.
Rich is a conservative, syndicated opinion writer and owner of MAGA-Chat.com. He writes about politics, culture, liberty, and faith.
Fight tech tyranny. Join Rich on MAGA-Chat.com, where free speech is still free. Join the revolution!