Flynn Defense Files Request for Appellate Court Intervention…

Moments ago Michael Flynn defense counsel Sidney Powell filed an appeal to the D.C. Circuit, a Petition for Writ of Mandamus (pdf link here), asking for intervention to correct Judge Sullivan’s unauthorized action.

Within the request Flynn’s defense requests the DC Appeals Court to order district court judge Emett Sullivan to: (1) grant the Justice Department’s Motion to Dismiss; (2) vacate its order appointing amicus curiae; and (3) reassign the case to another district judge as to any further proceedings.

The request cites numerous legal precedents in favor of granting the writ; but it’s a DC panel of judges so politics will likely play a role in determining what the appeals court decides to do.  Given the nature of this extraordinary situation it is difficult to predict success or failure for the request to intervene.   The whole darn thing is bizarre.

Within the petition the defense team notes:

…”The district judge’s latest actions—failing to grant the Government’s Motion to Dismiss, appointing a biased and highly-political amicus who has expressed hostility and disdain towards the Justice Department’s decision to dismiss the prosecution, and the promise to set a briefing schedule for widespread amicus participation in further proceedings— bespeaks a judge who is not only biased against Petitioner, but also revels in the notoriety he has created by failing to take the simple step of granting a motion he has no authority to deny.

This is an umpire who has decided to steal public attention from the players and focus it on himself. He wants to pitch, bat, run bases, and play shortstop. In truth, he is way out in left field.”…

A case reassignment in the DC district is a sketchy proposition.  Things could get even worse than they are now.  Sidney Powell is doing everything within her legal power to advocate on behalf of her client, Michael Flynn; however, the politics in DC seem to be the guiding force – and not legal standards or judicial prudence.

Here’s the full petition:



This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Activist Judges, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Donald Trump, Donald Trump Transition, FBI, media bias, President Trump, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY. Bookmark the permalink.

361 Responses to Flynn Defense Files Request for Appellate Court Intervention…

  1. ARTHUR says:

    This is the mandate of the process being the punishment. This isn’t anything else but the psychological torture through the misuse, and it is definitely misuse of the Judicial system. All the while those able to do something to right this wrong seem a bit too quiet and content to do nothing. Sullivan’s actions are a mockery of blind justice in turning this into some type of kangaroo court. Meanwhile the real criminals are still free to act and say and do whatever they please while the rest of us remain under illegal house arrest because hey it’s the same process as punishment agenda being used against the rest of us as well. Pure evil.

    Liked by 9 people

  2. Clara says:

    Think of the precedent this will set if Sullivan succeeds. Henceforth, any judge in any criminal case where prosecutorial misconduct has occurred and been exposed — resulting in prosecutors agreeing to drop the case — can simply choose to ignore all the prosecutorial misconduct, overrule the executive branch, and appoint his own prosecutor to re-try the case from scratch. It’s really a double jeopardy situation writ large. Flynn must now pay his lawyers to start the whole process of his defense over again.

    I really think there is something very wrong mentally with Sullivan. I hope somebody does some much-needed investigative journalism about both his public and private life, and gets to the bottom of this situation. Fast!

    Liked by 16 people

    • wlbeattie says:

      I read some time back that Judge Sullivan was involved with a #SOROS organisation and he prompted ire with his peers by (IIRC) sending them unsolicited emails (propaganda).

      Does anyone else recall this or am I having a “senior’s moment?

      Liked by 1 person

        • spoogels says:

          This should go VIRAL on Twitter
          Someone copy and paste it before though because the WaPoop will remove it if that happens
          Also post it here as I cant see it all


          • MelH says:

            I tried to copy and paste but it won’t happen. It was a childish event. Sullivan sent out an invitation to a Climate Change event. Another judge responded that Sullivan shouldn’t waste everbodys’ time soliciting judges to get involved with his climate change stuff. Both judges are in their 70’s, crochety, and I’d be willing to bet the other judge is a Republican.
            But it has no bearing on the Flynn case, in terms of Sullivan’s judicial leanings. It wasn’t a judicial matter. It was two boorish guys who hate each other making a mountain out of a mole hill. Your opinion may vary.


          • spoogels says:

            Can’t read it at WaPoop-paywall- but I found it here:

            August 20, 2019 by Tom Ramstack

            A Washington, D.C. federal appeals court judge was removed from an upcoming high-profile environmental case last week after a dispute with a second judge over what was supposed to be a harmless invitation.

            It started with a simple advisory email from one judge telling others about an upcoming climate change seminar.

            “Colleagues, just FYI. No need to respond to me!” said the email from U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

            The seminar was sponsored by the Environmental Law Institute and supported by the Federal Judicial Center, a research arm of the federal judiciary.

            The email correspondence was shared among 45 judges and their staff, according to a report that started with The Washington Post.

            Senior appeals court Judge A. Raymond Randolph responded with a tough-worded email that took aim at Sullivan’s professionalism and threatened to report him to the court’s ethics officers.

            It led Sullivan to ask the judiciary’s conduct committee for an opinion on whether Randolph violated ethics rules with his reply.

            Sullivan also asked whether Randolph should be compelled to recuse himself from some environmental cases.

            Randolph was supposed to preside over oral arguments Sept. 6 in a challenge to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s rollback of Obama-era vehicle greenhouse gas emission standards. Last week, he was taken off the case without explanation.

            In his email exchange with Sullivan, Randolph also criticized the Environmental Law Institute.

            The seminar was supposed to inform judges about how climate change issues increasingly are finding their way into court cases. Randolph appeared to be debunking global warming theories when he wrote, “The [supposed] science and stuff you are now sponsoring is nothing of the sort. Get out of this business and back into the business of judging, which are what you are being paid to do.”

            Randolph criticized Sullivan for “many of your latest public displays” and said his email invitation “crossed a line.”

            “Should I report you? I don’t know,” Randolph wrote.

            He accused Sullivan of “subjecting our colleagues to this nonsense.”

            Sullivan replied by expressing regret that Randolph was offended. He explained that he was merely passing along the invitation but had no personal stake in the issue. He added that he would omit Randolph from similar messages in the future.

            In his inquiry to the conduct committee, Sullivan asked whether Randolph should be recused from handling appeals of the district judge’s orders.

            Other judges who saw the email exchange largely defended Sullivan.

            The appeal Randolph was scheduled to hear in September was filed by California and joined by 16 other states last year. It sought to block a Trump administration proposal to freeze strict tailpipe emission standards required of automakers.

            The Obama administration standards would require progressively fewer greenhouse gas emissions through 2025. The Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency proposes freezing the standards at 2020 levels.

            Automakers had complained to Trump that the tougher standards would raise automobile prices for consumers.


            Sullivan is a nasty POS

            Liked by 2 people

    • Erik Heter says:

      He’s just a corrupt hack, that’s all. Nothing wrong with him mentally, he just has no morals, no ethics, and no soul.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Issy says:

      The Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit should be chatting with him.


  3. I won't back down says:

    If the case lands back on contreras, another writ? Or does that make the appeal go better?

    Asking for a friend

    Liked by 1 person

    • Laramie Evan says:

      They won’t won’t re-assign the case. But, they likely won’t grant the writ either. Writs are discretionary, meaning a court of appeal can choose whether to grant or deny them. (An appeal is mandatory; the appellate court must hear it. There is no option for an appeal from what is called an “interlocutory order.”)

      Most writs are denied. The Court of Appeal here will probably deny this one and give Sullivan the opportunity to ‘do the right thing.’ If he acts inappropriately, then an appeal can ensue and they could reverse him if they choose. No guarantees but this is what usually happens, although this is an unusual case.

      Someone also suggested that Sullivan could appoint his own prosecutor and start the case over from scratch. Again, that’s not how this would work. Sullivan would probably just deny Flynn’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea, deny the request by both parties to dismiss, and convict based on the operative guilty plea. That’s when an appeal would lie.

      And, if his game is to make this political, this would probably accomplish his goal. An appeal from such a conviction would take months and carry these issues past the election. My hunch is that this is what he’s trying to do. We’ll see. Hopefully I’m wrong on this and we get a decent Court of Appeal panel. CTH is right: Much depends on the composition of the 3-judge panel to whom the writ is assigned.

      Liked by 2 people

      • MelH says:

        Sydney is a brilliant Saint. Think how many hours she must have invested in the research and writing that monstrosity must have taken.


  4. Troublemaker10 says:

    Turley doesn’t seem to think the appellate court will do much good.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. safvetblog says:

    Petition no longer on Scribd – here’s the link to Sidney’s website:

    Click to access Petition-filed.pdf

    Liked by 1 person

  6. sarsfield says:

    Lou Dobbs interviewed Sidney tonight – 1) she expects DOJ to join in her Mandamus appeal 2) in response to direct q from Dobbs she is not aware of any health issues Sully may have. Leave it to Dobbs to get right to it.

    Liked by 5 people

  7. CNN_sucks says:

    Goodluck, Sidney. Bring this to a close.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Mike says:

    I’m sounding like a broken record on this the the best we can do to help is not whine, inject and rant. It’s donate to the Mike Flynn defense fund. Unfortunately it looks like he is going to need it now more than ever.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Del Parker says:

    Sydney’s Appeal Brief is perhaps, the Best Read of the Year.

    As you carefully read it, take a look and understand just how it conforms to these outlined 7 effective elements…


  10. Bob Reichert says:

    Sydney Powell reminds me of the “Iron Lady”, Margaret Thatcher. Mike Flynn has the right person for his defense.


  11. Greg Brain says:

    Judge Sullivan’s actions make no sense in light of the history of his past judgments on other cases. I mean seriously, is this guy for real is it all an ACT???? A mole maybe to smoke out the cockroaches in hiding? One has to wonder….


Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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