Judge Sullivan Will First Rule on Brady Allegations in Flynn Case…

Federal Judge Emmet Sullivan held a sealed ex parte hearing with Michael Flynn’s defense counsel, Sidney Powell, today.  An “ex parte hearing” is a judicial review of an emergency request, in which the other party may or may not be present. [ie. a discussion between Flynn’s counsel and the court. The content was ‘sealed‘.]

(Hat Tip Techno-Fog)

As an outcome of today’s discussion, the court (Judge Sullivan) stated he will first reconcile issues surrounding allegations of Brady violations (unethical concealment of evidence favorable to the defendant), before proceeding to issues around the DOJ’s refusal to grant defense counsel with security clearances.

The ex parte hearing was prompted by a filing from Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell, (reposted below).  From the court’s response today it would appear Judge Sullivan will address the Brady concerns first, during the hearing scheduled for September 10th.

In the 19-page filing (full pdf below), Ms. Powell walks through the history of the DOJ, FBI and intelligence apparatus weaponization against Mr. Flynn and lays out the background behind everything known to have happened in 2016, 2017 through today.

From the corrupt DOJ lawyers who were working with Fusion-GPS and Chris Steele, including Mr. Weissmann, Mr. Van Grack and Ms. Zainab Ahmad; to the 2015/2016 FISA database search abuses; to the CIA and FBI operation against Flynn including Nellie Ohr; to the schemes behind the use of DOJ official Bruce Ohr; to the corrupt construct of the special counsels office selections; to the specifics within the malicious conspiracy outlined by hiding FBI interview notes of Mike Flynn,… all of it….

The conversation today with Judge Sullivan is an outcome of this stunning filing that many CTH readers are well prepared to understand.

.

Judge Sullivan will address the allegations of Brady violations first, and then proceed to the issues of security clearances (if needed).   The hearing is Tuesday, September 10th:

Advertisements
This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Abusive Cops, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump Transition, FBI, IG Report Comey, IG Report McCabe, media bias, Notorious Liars, Spygate, Spying, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

393 Responses to Judge Sullivan Will First Rule on Brady Allegations in Flynn Case…

  1. All Too Much says:

    If the court’s ruling on Brady results in the prosecution being dismissed, a ruling on a security clearance would no longer be necessary. Powell only needs the clearance for Flynn’s case. If the case goes away, so does the clearance issue. In my four decades of litigating in federal courts, I have seen federal judges decide one issue before another in situations where the latter become moot. Not saying this is the case here, but it was my first impression.

    Liked by 32 people

    • cboldt says:

      I have the same view, expanded a bit. One case is ehn the second issue is mooted, another case is when the arguments or some other aspect of the second issue are colored by a decision on the first issue.
      In other words, there are more possible forks in the road than all or nothing.
      Sullivan taking the issues NOT in the order presented, but in the order most senisble for resolving the case is perfectly natural, unsurprising, and signifies nothing about the ultimate resolution.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Dutchman says:

        Agree with this analyses, based on my jailhouse lawyer experience, one additional possibility.
        SANCTIONS. If the Judge were to impose SANCTIONS on the Prosecution, as a resultvof the Brady violations, he would do that, first.
        NOT sure if it appliescinbthis instance, only because we are theoretically looking at a plea deal already agreed to by both parties, and accepted by the court.
        Normally, if a Judge detirmines that one side has violated the rules, and that violation hurt thecother sides case, he can sanction the violating side, in such a way as to try to even the score.

        He might not allow them to present a piece of evidence important to their case, and that normally WOULD meet the rules of admissable evidence, for instance.

        Certainly it makes sense to decide in this order. Beyond this decision on order, an ex parte discussion is highly unusual, and combined with his setting this order is very good news for ‘us’, and very BAD news for them.

        As I scan the home page this aftrrnoon, I am once again getting cheek cramps, from an ear to ear grin!

        Liked by 10 people

        • cboldt says:

          Noting the case Sullivan cited in the docket notes, I think ex parte on request for security is the norm. Security clearance is not a question on the merits of the case, it’s a tangential executive matter.

          Like

          • Dutchman says:

            Yeah, but once Sullivan and Sidney were alone in a room, with no Prosecutors, do you REALLY think they didn’t discuss, at ALL her blockbuster filing on Brady?,…REALLY?!!!

            Liked by 3 people

            • arze says:

              Maybe this is going out on a limb but here goes. Much of what Gen. Flynn’s lawyer, Ms. Powell seeks appear exactly what the Barr/Durham/Huber team is reviewing and/or claim to be.

              The Powell memorandum was sealed, though it states she requests seeing the unredacted FISA Judge Collyer decision — that hot potato.

              I wonder if Gen. Flynn was indicted — under a sealed indictment — separate from the case at hand. [Recall that Julian Assange was indicted via a sealed indictment and none of us were aware, until UK arrested him when USA unsealed the Assange indictment; the key point being someone can be indicted under seal, and not know it, and that could stay sealed for years, and be unknown to the target as well as unknown to the public.)

              Collyer’s ruling states, p. 89: “…the FBI must establish a separate review team whose members have no role in the prosecution of the charged criminal matter to conduct the initial review of such target’s communications….” [pages and pages are entirely blacked out after this section of Collyer order]

              If Gen. Flynn may be indicted under seal in a separate criminal case — at best that is a speculative thing to begin with and cannot be shown to be accurate simply because under seal means out of sight.

              While the risk in conjecturing/theorizing this can be said to be wildly irresponsible, the fact remains that in this case, Powell right now is trying to get a handle on all of Flynn material possessed by government.

              And even if Flynn is indicted under seal in a separate case or cases, how would that be Brady material? However, if Flynn is among/named in redacted portions of Collyer ruling, then what? Powell may want to know exactly if that is or is not a fact.

              But imagine if Flynn was indicted under seal, in 2015, or the next year, that would be extraordinary. Powell knows Flynn was smeared and his character was destroyed for a reason or many reasons right after Pres. Trump was sworn in.

              I am not saying Flynn was indicted under seal, in a separate case. I am saying the veritable craziness of this conspiracy against the Trump Team has been full of one wild surprise after another. And perhaps this one is too wild even for this Gong Show Episode called Swamp on Parade. And: This is where you have to imagine the rest….

              Liked by 1 person

              • Dutchman says:

                Indicting someone, and sealing the indictment can be done for several reasons, and has several effects. It stops the clock on the statute of limitations, for instance.
                It can be used when there are multiple defendants in related criminal cases.
                You have enough evidence to prosecute defendant A, but are,still building your case against defendants B and C.

                If you openly charge A, you alert B and C before you have built your cases against them.
                But, you run the risk of running outvof time on A, so you file an indictment under seal against A.

                Mind you, weismann engaged in what might be called “creative prosecution”, and his career should be a class at law school; how NOT to practice law, but I doubt your what if, personally.

                Liked by 3 people

                • arze says:

                  Present Novel is Significant

                  The fact of the matter is: the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, [FISC/FISA cases] has no objections, zip, zero, NADA — to the DOJ [Jeff Sessions/Matt Whitaker/Bill Barr] releasing any classified FISA material to them.

                  Though this is “old” news[**], it’s worth repeating that when then-Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, on Jan. 16, 2018 requested FISA material from Judge Rosemary Collyer, she wrote back saying so, and that it was an unprecedented ask.

                  The judge said the FISA “Court has never previously received a request from Congress for the contents of any specific FISA application or order, nor has the Court provided any to Congress” and that this “present novel and significant questions.” [Note use of subjunctive tense — ‘present’ novel…]

                  Collyer wrote that the DOJ and FBI — “Those agencies possess most, if not all, of the responsive materials the Court might possess, and we have previously made clear to the Department, both formally and informally, that we do not object to any decision by the Executive Branch to release any such FISA materials to Congress.”

                  https://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/Presiding%20Judge%20Rosemary%20M%20Collyer%20response%20to%20Chairman%20Goodlatte%20180215_0.pdf

                  Rep. Nunes, at the time Intelligence Committee chairman wrote her Feb. 7, 2018 and got a similar response as Goodlatte on Feb. 15, 2018.

                  https://www.fisc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/Presiding%20Judge%20Rosemary%20M%20Collyer%20response%20to%20Chairman%20Nunes%20180215_0.pdf

                  [**]
                  Old news only in the sense that it is 20 months old — the Media Apostles, it bear repeating, have yet to touch this hot potato.

                  Gen. Flynn’s Lawyer, Ms. Powell, will force their hand on this matter, too.

                  As for the “what if” — I doubt it too, but won’t discount it, yet. I am not in a position to know its veracity or lack thereof. It is something to think about. Or as President Reagan said: “Trust but verify.”

                  I do know, however, that Hillary Clinton’s attorneys did not have security clearance to access classified information.

                  https://www.mrctv.org/videos/fbi-director-hillary-clinton-s-lawyers-did-not-have-security-clearance-when-they-went-through-her-emails

                  So far, access to classified material has been denied Ms. Powell, who is requesting permission for that access. I wish there were an audio feed for the Sept. 10 hearing.

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  Yes,is NOT the court the material was submitted to, that ‘classified’ it, pretty sure they do not HAVE the authority to classify anything.
                  It was and is the submitting agencies that have classified, and are keeping classified, the FISA application filings.

                  And yes, Hillary fiasco was a farce, from beginning to end.

                  To deny Sidney Powell clearance to view these materials is ONLY because she will use these materials, to hang the prosecutors “out to dry”; it has -O- “intelligence value”, they ARE being ‘truthful’ (sort of) when they cite ‘protecting sources and methods’ they mean their illegal, unethical and unconstituional sources and methods for subverting and politicising intelligence gathering, law enforcement and prosecucutions.

                  Like

                • As a man thinkth says:

                  Dutchman…the procedure you presented above, sounds as if it precisely the leagl approuch that should be employed to round up the “small group”, get them indicted and use the government paid prosecutors
                  To slowly drain their fortunes till they “start to sing and compose”

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  Its one of the legal approaches available to prosecutors.
                  The draining wouldn’t happen until the indictments are unsealed, of coarse.
                  And, no doubt to assure them they will be taken care of (and so don’t flip) they are having $ thrown at them, thru gofundme, book and broadcadting deals, and free representation from lawfare.
                  Nunes is right, of coarse. While they are guilty of numerous process crimes, charging Conspiracy is the way to go, for 2 important reasons.
                  If charged individually, each in their own trial can blame the other. And since their jury is charged with detirmining, BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that THEY did it, and not “the other guy”, they could both get off.
                  Conspiracy your charging both or all, and have ONE jury.
                  Secondly, every ‘affirmative action’ that furthers the goals of the conspiracy, is a seperate crime, charge and sentence.

                  So, you could end up with many counts of “Conspiracy to: Obstruct Justice, Commit perjury, etc.
                  Each count 7-10 years, it could add up to life sentences. These guys might be willing to do a couple of years, in club fed, if sufficiently compensated.

                  But an effective life sentence, or rolling over? There is no honor among thieves, Stroxz, McCabe, Comey rat, IMHO.

                  Process crimes, no matter how agreageous (sp?) ain’t gonna be worth prosecuting them for.

                  The question of coarse is is there the WILL? And on that its still opinion.

                  Like

              • Linda K. says:

                Why would the prosecutors have Flynn plead to the one conversation, if they had more under seal? I am beginning to see many problems with the FBI. Their clean image seems more and more contrived to cover their own very questionable behavior, under pretext of national security.

                Liked by 2 people

        • Dutchman et al.- we should not be grinning or smirking just yet.

          This article by Margot Cleveland at The Federalist is very enlightening. Ms. Cleveland is an excellent legal analyst and she explains about the Yunis case/ decision that Judge Sullivan referred to in the memo/ order.

          The Yunis case that she discusses actually allowed the Government to withhold evidentiary tapes of the defendant’s own conversations. It is not a good precedent for Gen. Flynn.

          https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/06/happened-flynn-lawyers-secret-meeting-judge-week/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=1fd8b5cbf4-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-1fd8b5cbf4-83984129

          Like

          • mike says:

            “… not grinning or smirking just yet”
            Mad as hell. Deep State still won time and is way ahead if Flynn had the goods on Obama administration treasons and malfeasances. The country has lost over two years of Trump’s administration and much justice on Obamunist criminals and traitors.

            Liked by 5 people

          • Louisiana Tea Rose says:

            Agree, Seneca, but I also wonder how infuriated Judge Sullivan may be if it turns out Weissman pulled the same stunt regarding Brady as he did with the Stevens case.

            And not withdrawing his guilty plea is totally understandable considering his prior “legal representation”.

            It would take a Sidney Powell to have any chance to wrest victory from the jaws of certain defeat.

            Liked by 3 people

          • Dutchman says:

            I’ll take my grins where I can get them, but I understand your caution. This ain’t the fat lady singing, in the Flynn case. And MAY not even be her warming up yet.
            Having weismann etc.’s shenanigans all laid out, concisely but in enough detail, in plain english, in an unsealed court filing that can’t be contested is a major victory in itself.
            I have long felt the Flynn case has the potential to blow up in their faces, and expose Mueller investigation as the coup attempt and cover up it was.

            We’ll see,..

            Liked by 3 people

        • Observer says:

          Repeated, systematic, deliberate violations of a direct order of the court should result in criminal contempt for each of the prosecutors for the purposeful obstruction of justice being demonstrated every day by their actions. Just my opinion.
          Until corrupt prosecutors are prosecuted AND JAILED, their criminal behavior will continue. We cannot have a country with 2 (or more) standards of justice.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Dutchman says:

            Oh, fully agree. Congress, once again needs to ‘step up’; there ARE legitimate reasons for shielding Prosecutors from being civily liable for legitimate, lawfully conducted prosecutions.
            We don’t want an injustice of guilty ‘getting away with it’, out of fear of being ‘ruined’ financially from making honest mistakes.
            However, the law as written gave Mueller licence to KNOWINGLY subvert Justice, creating a much BIGGER injustice; sending 4 men, innocent of the,crime they were charged with to prison for Murder, AND allowing the guilty party ‘off’, which meant Bulger committed additional crimes.

            And it was TAXPAYERS, not Mueller, who paid the compensation, and Mueller was allowed to continue his career, and wreak additional havoc.

            It shouldn’t be that hard to ammend the law, to distinguish between legitimate ‘honest’ errors, and prosecutorial abuse and misconduct by ‘overzealous’ asshats like Weismann and Mueller.
            Problem, once again is Congress. Seems like thats inevitably where we always end up. Congress created the administrative ‘deep’ State.
            Congress controls the IC, more than POTUS.
            Congress has usurped the power of the POTUS, with regard to appointments.
            Congress has undermined the concept of Representative government, and divided and enumertated powers.
            WE need to FIX Congress, perhaps in the,same way we talk about getting a dog ‘fixed’?

            Liked by 1 person

        • Observer says:

          Repeated, systematic, deliberate violations of a direct order of the court should result in criminal contempt for each of the prosecutors for the purposeful obstruction of justice being demonstrated every day by their actions. Just my opinion.
          Until corrupt prosecutors are prosecuted AND JAILED, their criminal behavior will continue. We cannot have a country with 2 (or more) standards of justice.

          Liked by 2 people

        • Observer says:

          Repeated, systematic, deliberate violations of a direct order of the court should result in criminal contempt for each of the prosecutors for the purposeful obstruction of justice being demonstrated every day by their actions. Just my opinion.
          Until corrupt prosecutors are prosecuted AND JAILED, their criminal behavior will continue. We cannot have a country with 2 (or more) standards of justice.

          Like

    • JIM COMEY IS A WEASEL_DOUG says:

      Makes a ton of sense.

      Like

    • All- wouldn’t that be wonderful.

      Like

    • warspite2 says:

      Agreed. A lot could be going on behind the scenes. If Lamberth denies to Brady violation the Court then needs to address security clearance. This will require a whole set of arguments and counter arguments the US may not want to proffer. Plus if Lamberth denies security clearance it will then present two issues to [at least try to] take before the CADC. Sounds like delay, delay, delay, not to mention the trial court having to deal with multiple difficult issues.

      At this point the DOJ may well have decided it (Team Mueller) faces minimal repercussions from a dismissal on Brady violations. It is patently obvious the media will run interference by downplaying any dismissal, coming up with excuses premised upon “technicalities”, and covering up by playing up some other Trump story de jour. If the DOJ has already signaled behind the scenes it does not want to broach the security clearance issue Lamberth can enhance his image and reputation for independence by dismissing the case.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Sherri Young says:

        Judge Sullivan has this case. Judge Lamberth has one of the Judicial Watch FOIA cases.

        Judge Sullivan had one of the Judicial Watch FOIA cases. I don’t know if Judge Sullivan still has that case or if it is the one Judge Lamberth now has. Both of these judges have granted discovery to Judicial Watch in their cases.

        Liked by 1 person

    • rondonmonson says:

      They could then sue the Gov. and many, many parties it seems, thus the info would be forthcoming eventually. However, for Judge Sullivan to find a show cause, hes going to have to look at the material himself it seems, and thus he might impose justice on them in his own way, before real justice comes !!

      Like

    • zaq123 says:

      Questions, given your 40yrs in federal courts:
      It seems to me that the judge, and for a time the SC, is delaying everything about Gen Flynn, because as time goes on, more and more comes out showing that the FBI/DOJ/SC did some really dirty sh*t to try and get the President. That being said…

      If Powell shows that the whole case was built on a lie, evidence was intentionally withheld to tip the scales forcing a plea, etc….can Sullivan toss the case and allow Gen Flynn to walk out a free man?
      Could Gen Flynn have any remedies to go after the corruption, that seems so obvious?

      Like

      • Observer says:

        I believe there is plenty of grounds for dismissal and even a directed finding of not guilty which would definitely play better when the corporate media distortion/reporting occurs.
        The real problem is this evil crap will continue against other innocent people until the real criminals are put in prison. Prosecute the prosecutors on criminal charges when they obstruct justice.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. subro52 says:

    How amazing it would be if Flynn and Powell were to be the beginning of the end for the renegade FBI and DOJ coup along with Mueller and his merry team of lawless lawyers. I can only imagine the media and the Left losing it if Flynn is exonerated!

    Liked by 13 people

    • Spooky says:

      It would be more than amazing, it would be miraculous. Which is why it isn’t going to happen. There will be no fairy tale ending here. Judge Sullivan will weasel out of doing the right thing if for no other reason than he doesn’t want to become a social pariah in the swamp he inhabits.
      There will be no indictments, no prosecutions and no convictions for the coup plotters. Even if there were prosecutions a jury full of government employed D.C. swamp rats will not convict their own no matter how overwhelming the evidence. Surely you noticed that Clinton shyster lawyer David Craig just received a not guilty verdict from a D.C. jury.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Sherri Young says:

        The judge who worries me is Judge Rosemary Collyer. Surely the swamp creatures who falsely swore out unverified FISA applications could have been indicted if she had made referrals for prosecution.

        Then again, I guess the general public never will be allowed to know if she did make referrals and a grand jury refused to indict.

        Liked by 7 people

        • California Joe says:

          It would most likely be contempt of court prosecution and the judge would be the decision maker. No grand jury involved.

          Liked by 1 person

          • saintoil says:

            I am not a lawyer. The thing that sticks out like a sore thumb to me is Sullivan lecturing Flynn and calling him a traitor. Rachael Madcow did a rant the day before that hearing were Sullivan lectured Flynn. And Sullivan spewed talking points almost verbatim that Madcow had just put forth the night before. I don’t hold out much hope for Sydney and Flynn.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Observer says:

              He did not call Flynn a traitor. That was media distortion. He made reference to treason being a logical inference due to some poor language choices by others. A hour later, he clarified his statement to deliberately remove any negative reference to Flynn but corporate media was already running around like chickens with their heads cut off screaming and distorting the “news”.

              Liked by 3 people

      • formerdem says:

        I think you are too discouraged of DC juries. They have weaknesses but not pro-govt-top-level. In the end that is not who they are made up of.. And those of the elite who do go are trying very hard to be fair. I know that is not exciting but it is true.

        Liked by 1 person

      • This is a reply to Spooky. I disagree with your opinion. Sullivan dismissed the conviction against Senator Ted Stevens, a Republican, because of the same issues…involving some of the same prosecutors. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to see him come down even harder this time around.

        Liked by 5 people

      • JL says:

        I noticed the Craig case. I go both ways about it.

        I would have liked to see Craig rot.

        But I also enjoy seeing Weissman fail miserably.

        Like

      • Michael Todaro says:

        No indictment in slam dunk guilty Portland case also.
        Murderer Zacate given clean slate.
        The thugs can attack, without warning, with impunity.
        Be armed and self defend.
        No wonder Republican congressman are resigning.
        Genetically, diversely mutated Morlocks pose a real threat to the Eloi, real American, men and women.
        This is neither a joke nor remotely hyperbolic.

        Liked by 1 person

        • JL says:

          I never saw the Morlocks as antagonists or the Eloi as protagonists. If anything the Morlocks are the real people that make the world work, and the Eloi live a life of comfort from the fruits of the Morlocks labor. Until they get eaten by the Morlocks, of course.

          They just represent two sides of the same coin.

          Liked by 1 person

    • DaughterofLiberty says:

      It seems the easiest/best route is for Sullivan to let Flynn withdraw his guilty plea based on Brady violations, set the matter for trial and sanction the govt – depending on how serious the Brady violations are – either by outright dismissal of the charges, or by way of tailored jury instructions whereby the jury is charged with certain adverse findings against the govt, and in favor of the defense.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Truthfilter says:

    Without a security clearance, can Powell even see the documents/evidence that they withheld? Seems to me this decision gives the judge another chance to cover up for or whitewash the activities of the Mueller crooks.

    Liked by 1 person

    • PBR says:

      Truthfiler, this is at the forefront of my thoughts as well.

      Like

    • JL says:

      No. She can’t.

      But, I have a feeling if Sullivan finds Brady violations and doesn’t dismiss the case, Powell will get her security clearance for the trial after Flynn is allowed to change his plea.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Redzone says:

      Truth – that could be correct. However, I believe at least some of the Brady material she is requesting relates to specific documents that Powell knows exists, but has never been provided.

      Certainly new info could be in play, but I think there are specific items that can’t simply be swept under the carpet….at least in theory. But, nothing surprises me any more.

      Like

    • Linda K. says:

      If there is a sealed indictment on Flynn, could Sydney see it?

      Like

  4. Alice Zents says:

    Praying for the safety of Judge Sullivan, gratefully and anxiously.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Spooky says:

      He doesn’t deserve your prayers because he’s ultimately just another Corrupticrat. Save your prayers for fellow patriots and innocent victims of our injustice system. In fact, save your prayers for President Trump, he’s going to need them.

      Like

    • tozerbgood8315 says:

      Why? What does he know about the Clintons?

      Like

  5. ChampagneReady says:

    Joe diGenova doesn’t hold Judge Sullivan in high regard, Sidney Powell does.

    She knows Emmett Sullivan and I tend to believe Sidney knows that she has given him chapter and verse in her masterpiece motion that what they are trying to do General Flynn is an exact carbon copy of what they did to Senator Ted Stevens by grossly and illegally withholding what will CLEARLY merit the case being thrown out. She has proven in the motion they have ALREADY been caught at it.

    You can bet these goverment bastards that were trying to rush this to sentence did not want the judge to give her an ex parte’ hearing for the security clearances. This is almost veritable proof that Judge Sullivan was bowled over by her motion. I would call it a prima facie clue.

    I’m pretty sure he knows now this was a set up. If he disregards her indisputable facts in the motion and instead would rule in favor of these cretin prosecutors and mete out a sentence for Mike Flynn, it would have reversal on appeal written all over it. And he knows the appeal would be filed so fast, the ink wouldn’t even be dry on his signature.

    Liked by 26 people

    • Champagne- love your comment and hope you’re right. It’s about time someone on our side got a win. (besides our President Trump).

      Liked by 6 people

    • Dutchman says:

      CR,
      I would put it differently, while agreeing over all; Sidney is doing “Trust but verify”; she MAY in fact ‘trust’ Judge Sullivan, but that masterpiece she composed paints him in the corner you suggest; it leaves him no wiggle room.

      Whether he is a,white, grey or black hat, doesn’t matter. He really has no way he CAN avoid or obsfuscate, pretend he doesn’t know, etc.

      IF he is a white hat, fine. If he’s not, doesn’t matter. To do other than the right thing would leave him pants, in broad daylite, in Macy’s window.

      He can NOT ignore it, or avoid it.
      So, Sidney isn’t ‘trusting’ Sullivan, she is trusting him to have no choice.

      In years to come, that filing will be studied extensively, by law students and historians, assuming our country survives.

      Liked by 9 people

      • Donzo says:

        Since when has doing the right thing or quaint sentiments like shame motivated the DC insiders? Morals? It’s all relative. Besides, there’s Arkancide.

        Like

        • Michael Todaro says:

          Right Donzo, and one of Epstein’s main procurerers was disappeared last week.
          The USA is the most corrupt nation on Earth (by far) because it is the wealthiest nation on Earth.
          Euphemistically renaming massive $$$ bribes “campaign contributions” is money laundering at best and, more accurately, pure evil.
          2020 real man/real woman voter turnout must far exceed that of 2018 and even 2016.
          Democrat voters include alien invaders, human skeletal remains, neuter gender perverts, inbred allahu akbars, violent felons, criminally insane nut cases and much more.
          VOTE !

          Like

        • Remington says:

          Here’s hoping Sheldon is able to win this case, and the good General is back in the game.

          My question, is there any way he can be made financially whole again. From what I’ve heard, bro pretty much had to liquidate his belongs to defend himself against an out of control gov’t.

          Like

      • va22033 says:

        “Whether you are a public official or a private citizen or a Guantanamo detainee,” the judge (Emmet Sullivan) said, “the government has an obligation to produce exculpatory evidence so that justice can be done.” (LA Times, April 8, 2009 Ted Stevens’ charges dismissed as judge excoriates prosecutors)

        Both you and Champagne are correct. Former Federal Prosecutor Sydney Powell was the perfect person to put together the “masterpiece motion” in front of the Judge with no wiggle room as you allude for anything other than acting on the matter at hand directly. In essence the prosecutor has adroitly pinned the Judge’s arse against the wall. This should be good! 🙂

        Liked by 2 people

        • Donzo says:

          Apparently “excoriating” the prosecution in the Ted Stevens case had little effect on the prosecutors of Flynn. Excoriation is not a punishment. Sounds more like a bad rash. Withholding evidence should have sent them to jail. Fat chance. Same playbook. Only the Judge won’t make same mistake twice, but I doubt we’ll see sanctions. If so, major win.

          Liked by 2 people

        • PBR says:

          VA22033 -Defense counsel?

          Like

        • Dutchman says:

          Its been a lingering hope of mine, expressed here months ago, that this case,would blow it all open.
          Its looking like I may get my wish,….

          Liked by 2 people

        • InAz says:

          After what those corrupt cretin commies did to Ted Stevens they should have been disbarred. Weissman and partners in crime have been allowed to run amok to ruin targeted people.

          Liked by 1 person

      • saintoil says:

        I am a commoner, do not understand the motion. I hope your right, would like to hear others familiar with the law to chime in on whether or not Sydney has boxed Sullivan in?

        Like

        • Dutchman says:

          The motion she filed is in uncharateristically plain language, unlike most such legal filings.
          Thats the beauty of it. As she lays out, IN PLAIN LANGUAGE THAT ANYONE CAN UNDERSTAND, the exact nature of what they did to Flynn, and as the Judge is reading it he’s thinking ‘anybody and everybody can read and understand this, know whats going on and evaluate my ruling on this motion.
          Suggest reading the motion thru, several times if neccesary.

          Sundance has a previous post dedicated to Sidney Powells filing and in the comments it is extensively analysed.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Donovan’s Trigger says:

      Exparte is considered an extraordinary proceeding as it excludes one party. Sullivan to his exparte hearing quickly and this seems a favorable sign.

      Liked by 1 person

    • PBR says:

      Judge Sullivan is the one that said, “all you guys want to do is destroy Trump”. I think he has known for a long time. He has just needed someone to bring him the facts.

      Liked by 2 people

    • JL says:

      Joe diG is fun, but he is frequently very confidently wrong, in a very spectacular way. That being said, he has a very thorough and correct understanding of the whole affair.

      Powell on the other hand, is pretty much always correct.

      Liked by 2 people

    • iconoclast says:

      Yes. This. She knows Brady violations and so does Judge Sullivan. They’re talking the same language. I am optimistic that the judge is going to call out the corrupt DOJ lawyers.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. OldParatrooper says:

    The entire Flynn prosecution stinks like a week old fish. Lets hope Judge Sullivan dismisses the charges with prejudice, orders the DOJ and FBI to produce the exculpatory information they withheld so the public can see the bias, and then holds the DOJ and FBI actors in contempt.

    Liked by 13 people

    • Niagara Frontier says:

      If you throw in referrals for disbarment so that these monsters can never practice law again anywhere in these United States, I’m with you.

      Liked by 19 people

    • neal s says:

      For some reason my mind goes to Deuteronomy 19:16-20
      —————-
      If a false witness rise up against any man to testify against him that which is wrong;

      Then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges, which shall be in those days;

      And the judges shall make diligent inquisition: and, behold, if the witness be a false witness, and hath testified falsely against his brother;

      Then shall ye do unto him, as he had thought to have done unto his brother: so shalt thou put the evil away from among you.

      And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you.
      ===========

      In my wildest dreams, the crooked lawyers would wind up serving at least a portion of the sentence that they had wanted Flynn to serve. We wouldn’t need too many such instances of corrupt prosecutors serving sentences for the rest to suddenly have an “attitude adjustment”.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Linda K. says:

        I just listened yo a video of Sidney Powell where she stated almost the same thing you have brought up neal. It was buried in the tape but it was “If a prosecutor with holds evidence purposely and gets a conviction, he should have to serve the sentence received by the defendant.” Only she said it better and it came after she listed transgressions she had seen prosecutors get away with.
        So, we have you, Sidney and the Bible all on the same page.

        Liked by 3 people

  7. It would be a huge personal turn-around for Sullivan to actually show some honest judgment (competence).

    Liked by 1 person

  8. redline says:

    I want this whole corrupt league of sedition to know a great, soul-crushing pain of permanent, humiliating disgrace; disgrace that will not fade while humanity lives to remember, and will be their everlasting legacy for all their posterity, the first principle associated to their names whenever they are mentioned.

    Liked by 5 people

    • ThisWeDefend says:

      Red,
      The People must heal. The only curative is an action, of such capital stature, which declares to posterity: “Never! Ever! Again!!” Mere public infamy is a given, but not a totality of the justice they, and our Nation deserve.
      Only sure and certain appointments with resurrected woodworks on the Ft. McNair green, for every last one of them, will suffice!
      TWD

      Like

      • cboldt says:

        I don’t think public infamy is a given. I think the public will view this like it does everything else, through partisan goggles.
        The days of principle are gone. The public has been taught away from basic civis, reason, and lacks the fundamental knowledge necessary to poke holes in the liberal’s arguments.
        These days, the winner is determined by popularity, astroturf, and membership in cliques. At least half of Washington thinks Comey is a hero – see “can’t go to trial because DC jury will acquit.”

        Liked by 1 person

  9. Johnny says:

    The key question is what is under seal. That is the money shot. We have no idea what Sydney has had to file under seal.

    Just another way of not letting criminal antics be seen.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. EggsX1 says:

    Judge Sullivan is a decepticon. Is there any evidence this isn’t just a judicial variant of Bengazi, IRS Targeting, Fast and Furious, etc. Sullivan makes it appear that he is doing something but in actuality is just sending up chaff and countermeasures. All things of substance go the Deep State’s way. He just writes a report after the fact how dirty it all was. Can anyone really expect him to rule in favor of Flynn?

    Was anybody held to account regarding the Senator Stephens case? From my understanding we have the same characters involved with Flynn as that with Senator Stephens. What a surprise that after Sullivan wrote his sternly worded letter that they just kept doing the same crap. They flipped a senate seat and got a dem supermajority, why not try to flip the presidency. Will Sullivan write another sternly worded letter?!?!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Johnny says:

      He appointed a special counsel to investigate the prosecutorial misconduct and the special counsel wrote a scathing report and several were sent to the Bar for discipline, but low and behold they skated. Weissman was represented by the DOJ. So the deep state liberals protected them, not Judge Sullivan.

      Watch the video in a older post where Sydney Powell explains all of it

      Liked by 6 people

      • cboldt says:

        That’s how the system works. One piece of it gets to play good cop, then they send the case to bad cop for resolution.
        SCOTUS ignores gun cases for decades, even those that blatantly misconstrue SCOTUS precedent. SCOTUS get to play good cop, sort of, while reality is simply that the system does what it wants. On gun case, I cite Presser, which says states cannot impinge the RKBA. Circuit courts applied Presser for the OPPOSITE.
        Back to Sullivan and corrupt DOJ, he gets to look clean as a whistle, and that is probably the only thing he cares about.

        Liked by 1 person

    • ChampagneReady says:

      NY Tmes …. August 19,2016

      “In a brief ruling issued on Friday afternoon, the judge, Emmet G. Sullivan of Federal District Court in Washington, approved a motion by the conservative advocacy organization Judicial Watch to pursue its vigorous campaign to expose Mrs. Clinton’s use of the private server. In addition to requiring her testimony in writing, the judge allowed the group to depose a senior State Department aide who had warned two subordinates not to question her email practices.”

      And there’s more where Judge Sullivan showed he is DEFINITELY not deep state.

      Liked by 5 people

    • James Groome says:

      NO however there was NOT a standing BRADY order… THERE IS IN THE FLYNN CASE… A STANDING BRADY ORDER ENSURES the prosecutors have NO OUTS as to not producing the Brady Evidence.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Cathy M. says:

      Re the Sen Stevens case-

      Nope, the 6 prosecutors in that case were not held to account according to this article but one of those prosecutors committed suicide.

      “Recalling the Injustice Done to Sen. Ted Stevens | Commentary”

      https://www.rollcall.com/news/recalling_the_injustice_done_to_sen_ted_stevens_commentary-237407-1.html

      Liked by 1 person

  11. OSP says:

    For the sake of discussion, let’s assume Sullivan rules against Flynn on both motions, Flynn then withdraws the guilty plea and we’re headed to trial.

    1. Will the defense be stuck with only the discovery materials they have now, or can there be more discovery?
    2. Does the govt really want this to go to trial?

    Liked by 2 people

    • cboldt says:

      Discovery in a criminal trial is always open, even though there is a procedural step where both sides say they are ready to go to trial.
      New evidence can even be brought in post conviction. Not easy, but the system has widgets to do the right thing, even though the players abuse the widgets.

      Liked by 2 people

  12. appraisher says:

    I fight this site every time I post. They don’t make it easy.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. JIM COMEY IS A WEASEL_DOUG says:

    I’ll bet the majority of folks commenting negatively about Judge Sullivan haven’t taken the time to read Mrs Powell’s filing from 8/30. It’s right there in the body of the story.

    I don’t know how you can read what Mrs Powell presented to the judge and think he’s just going to fold and protect the DipSticks from muleheads team. She’s holding up a mirror in front of his face.

    Liked by 12 people

    • JL says:

      Hopefully the mirror wasn’t so big and bright that Sullivan decides he doesn’t want to look like he’s being influenced by Powell instead of her arguments.

      Like

      • GB Bari says:

        A judge is SUPPOSED to be influenced by the FACTS and the LAW. .
        If the DOJ tried to conceal FACTS and thus violated the LAW, then the judge has little choice but to rule against them.
        That Ms. Powell elucidated the facts of Flynn’s case versus the law and supported her explanations by so many prior case decisions and court opinions so clearly is exactly what any honest and professional judge should want.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Linda K. says:

          I also think and would float the idea that Judge Sullivan only really knows what facts have been presented to him by Flynn’s old lawyers and the prosecution. It may be the case that Sidney Powell opened up Judge Sullivan’s view on the matter before him, with her motion, unless there is a hidden part of this case we do not see. But isn’t it every defendant’s right to have an open hearing on the case against him, in front of the public? Isn’t it Flynn’s right to see all of the evidence against him and not be bullied into making a plea?

          Liked by 1 person

          • GB Bari says:

            I don’t the answers to your questions. I would think the answers are “yes.” But sometimes the “law” runs counter to logic.

            Like

    • OmegaManBlue says:

      Because Orange Man Bad. Remember what the NYT reporter said about Trump that he had to be treated differently. The same applies to others connected to him.

      Like

  14. Bogeyfree says:

    If you are the highest attorney in the land overseeing thousands of legal professionals, one would assume adhering to and enforcing the rule of law would be sacred and paramount right??

    So is it unreasonable to ask if Barr ever confronted the attorney’s for the prosecution and asked each of them one simple question……..

    Did you conceal ANY evidence favorable to the defense?? Yes or No

    Liked by 5 people

    • RJ says:

      If Barr is the guy on the white horse he then has assembled a close team (assistant sheriffs so to speak) who would go out and seek the truths of the matters that come before his attention. So, that “yes or no” question has been asked, meaning if you want to see how the wind blows watch how the government responds through the DOJ.

      The issue here is nothing more than “sunlight” where truths may reside. Who is hiding truths?

      The escape route has always been “those are your truths, these are mine” so we both just disagree and need to go home.

      Bye bye and good luck…sweetie!

      Like

    • ATheoK says:

      “Bogeyfree says: September 5, 2019 at 9:11 pm

      Did you conceal ANY evidence favorable to the defense?? Yes or No”

      Aah, the world of absolutes where in court rooms answers are frequently defined as only “Yes or No?” responses.
      Where to place the gray area responses?

      “Did you conceal” or rephrased as “Did I conceal?”

      The trouble with personal pronouns and direct action verbs, are they exclude all inaction possibilities; e.g. “I did not conceal, I was only here doing work”.

      Knowing that evidence is missing/hidden/skewed is not direct concealment.

      Like

  15. Darren says:

    I for one will be glad when Ms. Powell is able to post on CTH again. I wish her and Gen. Flynn the best. I sit here praying for justice to be done. Real justice rather than the mockery we’ve been seeing for so long. Stay strong folks. Let this play out. Sid is one freaking smart lady with a lot of fight in her. No matter what happens to her motion. I’m sure this won’t be over.

    Liked by 19 people

  16. meadowlarkspring says:

    Liked by 3 people

  17. Merkin Muffley says:

    Sullivan always talks a good game, but when all is said and done, he always sides with the Democrats. Remember when he accused Paul Manafort of Treason, and had to be told by Mueller’s lackeys that he wasn’t charged with Treason?

    Liked by 1 person

  18. meadowlarkspring says:

    Liked by 4 people

  19. I don’t dare put money on a prediction.

    Like

  20. MustangBlues says:

    Sydney Powell has experience with Brady issues, with Enron case, her book, ‘License to Lie’,

    Chronicles in detail her work; her book was heavy duty Brady, and ‘crooked’? judge ruled against.

    Liked by 1 person

  21. rayvandune says:

    The MSM is going to have a tough time spinning Brady violations as a “technicality”, especially when they have a “name” to them that is hard to avoid mentioning, and the aggrieved party has been such a poster child for Trump “collusion”. That won’t keep them from trying, though!

    Like

  22. They have a real fight on their hands now. I however would not put it past these scumbags to manufacture tapes that match. I keep praying for justice and hope one day I will get it. I do not cling to this hope but it is there.

    Like

  23. OmegaManBlue says:

    My opinion is judge will say no harm no foul, you found out before sentencing, you can change plea. If he does go other way it will be a slap on wrist with a wet noodle.

    Like

  24. It really amazes me how many people post comments and don’t have a clue as to what they are talking about. Especially when if they just read prior comments beforehand, it would enlighten them. Or at least make them pause and question themselves. There’s an old saying. Better to be thought of as a fool, rather than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

    Like

  25. Fools Gold says:

    I want to remind everyone, this is how you do it “by the book”. #SidneyforAG

    Liked by 1 person

  26. SpanglishKC says:

    If Sidney Powell wins this thing she will be a genuine American heroine and she has my vote for a Presidential Medal fo Freedom

    Like

  27. Midnite says:

    I think Powell’s move here is absolutely brilliant! Flynn was charged with lying to the FBI about his recollections of a conversation with the Russian Amb.. A conversation that we know was recorded (and so did Flynn) and then used as the basis for both for the initial interview of Flynn and later as evidence of his alleged lying.
    Sydney needs three things to prove her case. 1) The original recording of that conversation (not a summary of the transcript), 2) The hand written notes of Pientka taken during that interview and 3) The original 302 written shortly afterward.
    Even if Sydney doesn’t actually get her hands on all three items, her motion will allow the judge to hear and see that evidence for himself in order to make his determination. Given that he has applied the US vs Yanis case I think the context is clear in that it applies to recorded conversations used by the defense.
    If you compare those three pieces of evidence against each other in real time vs the allegations brought by the SC based on the later edited versions of that 302 written months later…well you might find some minor differences, don’t you think? I’ll bet you dollars to doughnuts this is the first salvo in the battle to discredit the FBI investigators themselves and the later SC’s handling of the prosecution.

    Like

  28. willthesuevi says:

    I appreciate the writing of the filing in plain english. Normally those legal things read like some ancient german dialect on engine assembly.

    Even a troglodyte like me can understand this legal document.

    I really hope Counselor Powell sticks it in, twirls it around and breaks it off, inside these legal clowns. Not sure if there has ever been a gaggle of attorney’s who needs this punishment as much as Weismann, Liu, Van Grack and company.

    Like

  29. Gil Stonebarger says:

    and what happens when it turns out sullivan is just another swamp creature and Flynn is convicted? do we patiently wait for the next supposed “white hat” hero? How long can you lose before you realize you have NO CHANCE of winning?

    Like

  30. ATheoK says:

    Another Sundance article that I wish there was a “Love it” button. “Like” is so pallid in comparison.

    Like

  31. cocamars says:

    A great article explaining what’s going on with yesterday’s filings.

    https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/06/happened-flynn-lawyers-secret-meeting-judge-week/

    Like

    • Beau Geste says:

      By postponing decision on defense counsel clearance, Sullivan has already signaled that he will deny General Flynn from having a lawyer who does, or has had “clearance”, from even looking at the records. There is no reason that the requested records should not be reviewed by a defense attorney having clearance to aid the court in their relevance, even if General Flynn is denied the right to see the records. Note that General Flynn himself has had the highest possible clearance, and these records are of no real security risk in any event. (Sydney Powell should have included a motion to add a defense lawyer who currently has security clearance, to improve chances on appeal)

      Sullivan is using caselaw generated against a known airplane hijacker-terrorist (rather than a US General who has been cleared at the highest security levels) which is extremely favorable to government “secrecy”. Under Yunis case, the prosecutors only need to show that their claim to classification secrecy “is at least a colorable one.” The wiretapping and FBI notes are at last “colorable”, merely because the FBI claims they are conversations of a government official with a russian.official…

      But there is no actual reason the recordings of Flynn, the FBI-Flynn interview and FBI notes and the original 302 forms reportedly indicating General Flynn did not lie, should be “classified” rather than released. But Sullivan will find there is at least a “colorable” claim to classification. Then Sullivan will say to Sydney Powell and General Flynn, “you can’t see the records relating to your indictment to show how they help your defense, but I secretly find that the classified records are NOT “helpful to your defense” without even letting a defense lawyer with security clearance look at the records”.

      Sullivan will use law generated against an actual airplane-hijack terrorist who obviously has never had security clearance, to rule against General Flynn.

      General Flynn then may try to withdraw his guilty plea before being sentenced. Sullivan will deny the motion to withdraw a guilty plea, and sentence General Flynn.

      Denial of the motion to withdraw a guilty plea can be appealed, but reversal of a plea, even one extorted by threat against the defendant’s family, is very unlikely.

      Judge Sullivan’s risk is that:
      1. the requested records do show FBI bias, FBI/CIA/obama hostility against General Flynn (including “f*cking Flynn to f*uck Trump”), and attacking Flynn’s son to extort a guilty plea, and that
      2. President Trump will release the records, thereby showing the court and the DC appeals court to be untrustworthy deep swamp.

      Accordingly, after judge Sullivan sentences General Flynn, Sydney Powell may well request AG Barr and President Trump to release the “classified” records. AG Barr of course will not release the records, because he hasn’t released anything whatsoever yet, and is still fighting tooth and nail to prevent release of even the Roesnstein-Mewler scope memos under which General Flynn and his son were attacked to coerce a guilty plea.

      Of course, Lindsay Graham would not obtain the requested records, so need not even be asked.

      Will PDJT release the records if requested? We all may be called on to petition PDJT to do so. If PDJT does not cause these records to be released, we should point that out as a reason for refusing donations.

      Like

      • Midnite says:

        Your outline is based on the premise that everything that can go wrong in this case, will go wrong. Judge Sullivan delayed the decision on the security clearance because one determination follows the other and is a logical sequence. If there is no exculpatory value in the requested document production of classified material then it follows that there is no need for a security clearance. To imply that the judge has already made a decision to deny the defense access to possible Brady material, before viewing that evidence is on it’s face a false and misleading assertion.
        It’s clear to me that Sydney Powell has put her ass on the line with her filing, charging the prosecutors in this case with serious ethical violations and I doubt she would do that knowing the consequences for her and her client if she’s wrong. By now she must know the basic facts of the case and has no doubt interviewed Flynn to gain real first hand information on how this all went down.
        What she suspects happened and needs evidence of, is the misfeasance of the FBI, DOJ and the malfeasance of the SC’s prosecution of this investigation. If she can show that the FBI and DOJ opened this investigation for political purposes ie. F… Flynn, F….Trump kind of attitude that’s going to be a big step forward.
        If she can also prove that the SC’s office mishandled evidence, withheld exculpatory evidence or engaged in malicious prosecution then she’s got ’em by the short hairs and she knows it.
        I think she knows exactly what’s on those tapes because Flynn’s told her, I think she has a damn good idea of what’s in those notes and the 302 and is willing to take the risk they also prove Flynn’s innocence. She also knows Weissmann’s tactics and his propensity for bending the law to the breaking point and I have no doubt it would give her great pleasure to drive a stake through his wretched heart.

        Like

  32. ozymandiasssss says:

    Why hasn’t Flynn asked for his guilty plea to be withdrawn? Stevens never pled guilty

    Like

  33. shortcoach says:

    If anyone has not read the entire brief, do yourself a favor and read it – read it all. It will reinvigorate your passion for “needing justice to be done” in this entire wretched episode of government run amok.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s