Flynn Judge’s Lawyer Files Response to District Court – Says Flynn Can Defend Himself Against Independent Accusations By Court…

The hired lawyer for Judge Emmet Sullivan has filed a response to the DC District Court order in the case against Michael Flynn. [pdf available here] The DC district court ordered Sullivan to explain why he would not allow DOJ to drop charges against Flynn; the response by Sullivan’s lawyers says the DOJ position is essentially a moot issue, and Flynn can defend himself against independent accusations by the court.

The premise of Judge Sullivan to act as both prosecutor, judge and jury is ridiculous.  Additionally, Sullivan now claims Flynn must defend himself against claims of unlawful lobbying for Turkey that were never a substantive part of the original DOJ filing before the court.

Here’s the Full Filing:

.

The underlying premise behind the justification by Sullivan is fraught with twisted language to spin the prosecution.  It will be interesting to see how the DOJ response is structured.

Part of the illogical argument within Sullivan’s filing relates to his demand the DOJ explain in detail the background corruption that underpins their change in position.  Example: why did none of the original corrupt prosecutors sign-off on the change in DOJ position?

If there is one positive that might come out of this nonsense it’s that AG Barr may be forced to directly put specific details of corrupt behavior by the Mueller prosecutors in a response.   The DOJ has attempted to retreat from the Flynn case without calling out, and directly identifying, corrupt DOJ activity.  Perhaps that will change….

We shall wait and see.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Activist Judges, AG Bill Barr, Cold Anger, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, FBI, media bias, Notorious Liars, Professional Idiots, propaganda, Spygate, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

432 Responses to Flynn Judge’s Lawyer Files Response to District Court – Says Flynn Can Defend Himself Against Independent Accusations By Court…

  1. mimbler says:

    Just when I think Sullivan can’t get more outrageous he does this,

    Liked by 18 people

    • bertdilbert says:

      If Sullivan can be the prosecutor, can he be the jury as well?

      Liked by 11 people

      • way2opinionated says:

        …and executioner?

        Liked by 9 people

      • Appeals Court will approve writ and either give case to a new judge or dismiss outright. I think they will do the latter.

        Liked by 8 people

        • bertdilbert says:

          Sullivan is an embarrassment to the profession. They need to get rid of this as fast as possible.

          If Flynn was Black and not connected to Trump, White judge, there would be riots in the streets.

          Liked by 9 people

          • FrankieZee says:

            I think Sullivan is playing the RACE CARD. If they get rid of him, the riots start all over again because the WHITEY fired a highly educated Black Man. He is hoping that they throw him off the bench. ODUMBO must be petrified of what will come out from Flynn if he is cleared. So we have out of control D RAT Governors, mayors, congress, judges and rioters. Something must be done and done quickly.

            Liked by 2 people

          • delighteddeplorable says:

            But…..since he’s white and Sullivan is black, we should go out on a massive looting spree, right?

            Like

        • OldSaltUSNR says:

          I think that the context and content of the Judges response to the appeals court is so ridiculous, so non-responsive to the Appeals court question, that the Appeals court will rule against Sullivan without comment. I think that they Appeals court will follow Judicial propriety, and kick it to another judge to dismiss. Appeals court rule on the writ before them, and do not generally make judicial rulings outside that writ. Therefore, I doubt that the Appeals court will dismiss charges directly.

          Liked by 1 person

      • littledan says:

        In the movie, Sullivan will play Flynn, and Kirk Lazarus plays Sullivan.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Deplorable_Vespucciland says:

        Judge, prosecutor, jury, Appeals Court… he is Superman.

        ~~~ from The Federalist

        “The actions of the rogue federal judge in the Michael Flynn criminal case are an unprecedented and unconstitutional abuse of power that represent a “recipe for tyranny,” seven top senators, including the Senate Majority leader, told a federal court on Monday. In an amicus brief filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) blasted the refusal of Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to grant the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss charges against Flynn. Sens. Mike Braun (R-Indiana), Kevin Cramer (R-North Dakota), Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), Rick Scott (R-Florida), and Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) also signed the brief.

        Sullivan’s actions violate the Constitution’s clear separation of powers on which branch of government may prosecute American citizens, the senators assert, citing the U.S. Constitution, quotes from Founding Fathers, and longstanding federal court precedent. According to the U.S. Constitution, the Executive Branch that houses the Department of Justice has the exclusive discretion to begin and to end a prosecution while the Judiciary has the power to decide cases or controversies. Just as the Executive cannot direct the Judiciary’s rulings, the Judiciary cannot direct the Executive’s prosecutorial decisions, the senators write.

        No less than the former Chief Justice John Marshall described prosecutorial discretion as “‘an indubitable and a Constitutional power’ which permitted [the President] alone to determine . . . when to pursue and when to forego prosecutions,” the senators note, quoting the former chief justice from his time as a congressman. The senators reminded the court that Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 78 that “while the Executive ‘holds the sword of the community,’ the Judiciary ‘can take no active resolution whatever’ because it has ‘neither Force nor Will, but merely judgment.’” They quote James Madison in Federalist No. 47 that “[a]lthough individual liberty has ‘nothing to fear from the judiciary alone,’ it has ‘everything to fear’ from the union of the judicial and executive powers—which is a recipe for ‘tyranny.’”

        Liked by 2 people

    • GB Bari says:

      It’s outrageous to be sure but we really don’t know how much of this is Sullivan’s original thinking versus how much is from the Lawfare cabal via Sullivan’s attorneys. Those details are all moot, of course, but the wording in there **does** look like the twisted garbage that we’ve previously seen from the Lawfare Resistance mob.

      Liked by 9 people

      • hocuspocus13 says:

        So how does
        🇺🇸
        Twisted Garbage
        hold up against
        Declassified Facts?

        Liked by 2 people

      • Rhoda R says:

        GB, does it really make any difference who actually wrote this? It is Sullivan’s response to the Appeals Court and therefore it is HIS response. He owns it regardless of who actually wrote it.

        Like

        • GB Bari says:

          Legally it may be Sullivan’s, but my point is it comes from the highly twisted minds of the Lawfare Resistance cabal, which, if I recall correctly, hasn’t been successful in any anti-Trump effort in which they’ve pushed and participated from “behind the curtain..”.

          Like

  2. TwoLaine says:

    His face will appear in the dictionary next to:

    Stupid
    activist judge
    Obama judge

    Liked by 12 people

  3. grandmotherpatriot says:

    Thanks for the Update Sundance. I no longer recognize Our Republic.

    Liked by 17 people

    • Horace says:

      Our country has been murdered in its sleep. We are now the most numerous, largest people on Earth who not only do not have their own country, but do not even have a single country-level institution to represent our collective interests. The corrupt Republican Party may be cleansed of globalists and become such, but it is not today.

      Liked by 3 people

      • grandmotherpatriot says:

        It’s ” We the People ” that need to take back OUR Nation not a single political party.

        Liked by 1 person

        • James Carpenter aka "Felix" says:

          When disparity and injustice measure such a gulf as currently seen between two opposing interests, diplomacy is usually pursued through other means.
          Resolution is arrived at only after much breaking of things and killing of people.
          Our own history books describe the events of just such a pattern.

          Like

    • plumnelly1 says:

      Nor Do I .

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Dutchman says:

    Just finished reading it. My guess is the appeals court will NOT grant Sidneys writ of mandamus (mad at us, lol) and the ball will be back in Sullivans court, where he can have Gleeson argue against granting the States motion to didmis, and/or perjury charges.

    Not a bad responce, overall, in terms of the filing.

    And so, the case drags on,…

    Liked by 4 people

    • margarite1 says:

      One would think in view of the fact that now it’s been exposed that the case against Flynn was based on lies by corrupt government officials that the appeals court would use this opportunity to apply some actual and extremely overdue justice.

      Methinks Sullivan is hiding skeletons and someone is pulling his strings.

      Liked by 13 people

      • Dutchman says:

        Thats not the issue that is being brought before the appeals court, in the request for writ of mandamus, primarily.
        And, Sullivan is sorta making that argument; that the request is pre-mature.
        Let him hear from Gleeson (amicus brief), and then adjudicate the various matters still pending in the case,…and IF he then rules against Flynn, at THAT point it can go to appeals court.

        I suspect the writ for mandamus will be denied,…

        Liked by 2 people

        • margarite1 says:

          Do you have a legal background? I don’t.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Dutchman says:

            I do. Never a LAWYER, but played one many times, in court representing “en proper” which is latin for representing myself.
            Felonies, including one Federal offence, traffic tickets, child custody dispute, a variety of cases.

            Once threatened a Judge and arresting officer with their jobs if I was convicted, and while the Judge threatened me with contempt,…he dismissed the charges cause he realised I was right. I was 19 at the time.
            When I was 17, had a Superior Court Judge tell the Prosecutor ” If you EVER bring a case like this before me again,…I’ll have you before the Barr association! CASE DISMISSED!”
            He said I presented one of the best “en proper” defences he had ever seen, and it was better than many lawyers presentations.

            I discredited an expert witness, which they teach in law school you can NOT do, and so shouldn’t try.

            Thing is, since I never went to law school, nobody taught me, lol!
            So yes, I have SOME legal background, an appreciation of how the legal system works, and how to navigate thru it.

            Liked by 3 people

            • margarite1 says:

              WOW! Impressive! You obviously have a talent for this.

              I’ve been involved in lawsuits with our businesses and a personal matter or two and found it interesting but never wanted to be a lawyer.

              Too me this endless railroading of General Flynn should be against the law – someone other than Flynn ought to go to jail. The man deserves his life back.

              Liked by 1 person

              • Dutchman says:

                Tho my Dad wasn’t a lawyer, he had a legal mind, which I inherited.
                And, in my youth I was a hooligan, a career criminal, and couldn’t afford a lawyer, so necesities a muther! LOL.
                I never wanted to BE a lawyer, wouldn’t want the responsibility of someone elses fate in MY hands,…

                But, also didn’t want MY fate, in someone ELSES hands.

                I wouldn’t reccomend most defend themselves; in addition to a legal mind, and understanding of how the courts work,…you need to be DISPASSIONATE, and OBJECTIVE totally putting aside your emotions and what you WANT, and focusing on what IS.

                I submit the many responces to my post suggesting the writ of mandamus won’t be granted, are a demonstration of how rare this quality is.
                But, when defending yourself, its VITAL, if you want to prevail!

                I simply couldn’t afford the luxury.
                “The relationship between the truth, and criminal courts, is like the relationship between a warm puppy,…
                And a hot dog!”

                Liked by 2 people

        • Chip Bennett says:

          On what basis can the judge invite amici to the proceedings? You don’t think the Court of Appeals will take issue with him riding roughshod over his own prior rulings in this very case, the court’s own rules of proceedings, and the court’s own Circuit precedent?

          Liked by 1 person

        • ARW says:

          The issue is whether Sullivan has discretion which he hopes is because Flynn’s case is distinguishable from Fokker. It can’t be because the judiciary simply simply can not be in the position of determining which cases are appropriate to prosecute against a defendant when the executive branch has chosen not to proceed. Who would be the opposition party against the executive and defense be in such a proceeding…the judiciary?

          But, what do I know. Nothing.

          Liked by 1 person

          • regitiger says:

            don’t be coy…sing it loud.

            you have succintly described the misconduct of this judge.

            bravo..

            please and more!

            Like

        • Johnny says:

          There is no longer a prosecutable case being brought forth by the executive branch. End.

          By the constitution all he can legally do is file the paperwork in the courthouse as djsmissed by the government.

          He has no legal authority to continue a trial when there is no prosecution. If no prosecution, you have no accuser to confront in front of a judge.

          Like

        • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

          Sullivan is sorta making that argument

          But……….Sullivan is NOT making the argument as was required.

          There is NO place for an amicus in a criminal case especially when a motion is unopposed.

          The US has enjoined…….. signed by the Solicitor General et al.
          This has gone above Barr.

          Like

          • Dutchman says:

            Not done reading DOJ responce, but DAMN this is FASCINATING!

            Liked by 1 person

          • Dutchman says:

            Yeah, can’t get no higher than Solicitor General, who argues states case before SCOTUS.

            Like

            • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

              You are reading the SCOTUS argument by the SG.
              Only…he’s making it to the LOWER court.
              The governing case law is extensive and recent.
              And the fact that he’s making it NOW to the lower court is significant.
              They have been put on notice.
              Don’t see anyway that Sullivan ain’t goin down.
              But we now live in Oz so who knows.

              Liked by 1 person

              • Dutchman says:

                Agree who knows, and yes I noticed the Solicitor General, right off….interesting….
                I generally treat all I see as ‘enemies’ of PDJT and us Deplorables as if they were ONE entity, under the “kiss principle” of keeping it simple.

                But, I DO recognise there ARE different entities with their own interests.
                You know my view of Barr: that he is a cleaner..accepting, for discussion that he is, Sullivans refusing to drop the case would be contrary to the “Cleaners” goal, of just cleaning up the mess.

                I wonder if it is SOP for the Solicitor General to put their name to such a filing, or if that was because Barr finds Sullivans actions making his job as cleaner more difficult?

                It would be as if Barr told Mueller team to “shut it down” because it had become an embarrasment, and Mueller had tried to keep it going,…which is exactly what happened, actually….
                Lets see what happens. Not sure the appeals court is under a deadline, but I’m thinking days to a week to issue ruling.

                Like

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  Why did Barr file the Motion to Dismiss at all?
                  Totally dumb if a cleaner.

                  This goes back to my argument a year ago.
                  Unintended consequences.
                  When you have the kill shot you take it.
                  Every Bond Movie:
                  Bond isn’t an amazing spy….the Arch Villians are dipshits
                  A TRUE evil genius upon capturing Bond (which happens in every movie) would be:

                  “If you wanna know my master plan….
                  ASK GOD.”
                  And then he shoots 007 in the head.
                  You do not fiddle with your prey you take him out.

                  Barr could have avoided ALL of this by simply agreeing with his good buddy Bob.

                  “Yup…..Trump committed criminal obstruction.”

                  Mess cleaned.

                  It would be as if Barr told Mueller team to “shut it down” because it had become an embarrasment, and Mueller had tried to keep it going,…which is exactly what happened, actually….

                  NOT AT ALL what happened.
                  Barr shut it down….on Mar 5, 2019 and “with prejudice” on Mar 24.
                  Then told us exactly how he did it on May 1.

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  I DID ask you to accept, JUST FOR THE SAKE OF DISCUSSION, in order to get to my broader point, the possibility of Barr as a cleaner, NOT to get back into our unresolved debate.

                  I agree, so many movies do the same thing, once you capture the enemy, kill them would make the movie a short.

                  And have you ever answered the McConnell dilemma?
                  Either argue that McConnell is a PDJT ‘Ally’ despite doing everything he can to obstruct PDJT’s MAGA agenda, AND any sunlight on the coup, or aknowledge McConnell is the enemy, and explain WHY he would confirm Barr?
                  No distractions, no other arguements, just THAT.

                  Like

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  I agree McConnell is not working on Trump’s behalf.

                  But on what basis would McConnell BLOCK Trump’s nomination of Barr?

                  Barr has:
                  1) Already been Senate confirmed…
                  2) By the SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE…
                  3) for the job of…..ATTORNEY GENERAL!!!

                  What’s McConnell gonna say to block this nomination without revealing himself??
                  Barr’s too old?
                  Barr’s too fat?
                  Barr doesn’t play the right musical instrument..we need a drummer not a piper?

                  Trump be like:
                  “I already had a shitty AG (as my Tweets made clear) Whattya mean I can’t have Barr as AG……
                  HE ALREADY WAS!”

                  YOUR theory only ENHANCES the reason for Barr to take the kill shot….
                  He would know McConnell will go along with it in a Senate Impeachment trial because…
                  according to you….
                  McConnell PICKED Barr to “CLEAN”.
                  And what’s their prize?
                  President Silly Puddy…
                  The much more pliable Mike Pence.
                  Who would pardon Trump meaning Barr would NEVER HAVE TO PROVE CRIMINAL OBSTRUCTION in court.
                  And if he did….Barr wouldn’t care if he loses.
                  Because there is NO IMPEACHMENT Appellate court.

                  This is so EASY a caveman could do it.

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  Have you never watched “The West Wing”? Many who worked IN the west wing, under various Presidents gave it high marks, for accurately depicting what actually goes on there.

                  And your notion of how the confirmation process works is frankly, a little naive.
                  The discussion is between the POTUS’s staff, and McConnells staff.
                  And McConnells staff’s input is along the lines of “Oh, he CAN’T be confirmed” and “Heres someone that CAN be confirmed” or “He’d never make it out of committee!”
                  And the Majority leader has enough control over the Senate, that if his staff tells the POTUS’s staff its a “no go”, than its,a no go.
                  The recent Grennell manuever we watched, was a highly unusual, as in RARE attempt by a POTUS, to over rule or push a confirmation through against the wishes of a Majority leader, and only possible BECAUSE of the unique, Trump era situation.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  Thank you for the TV review and
                  CONTINUING TO MAKE MY POINT

                  First why “CAN’T HE BE CONFIRMED” to a job he already had.
                  You got to have an articulatable reason.
                  And if you don’t…
                  Then I’M not the naive one….TRUMP IS
                  Especially since he had FINALLY gotten rid of a bad AG he complained about for TWO YEARS

                  If Barr is McConnell’s HOMIE.
                  Then McConnell has Barr’s BACK

                  “Hey Bill…just agree with Bob and
                  we’ll take if from there. I got Elaine’s Chinese money to protect ……
                  Oh ….and all the other Senators involved in the coup.”

                  Ryan surrendered the House.
                  You really think Mitch wouldn’t risk the same to have PENCE over TRUMP?
                  (But maybe they haven’t covered that on West Wing yet)

                  Barr had the “broom” HANDED to him on a silver platter.
                  And didn’t USE IT.
                  If he’s a cleaner….he’s the WORST EVER as he continues to make MORE messes for himself.
                  They shoulda called “The Wolf” from Pulp Fiction. (That’s a movie) He was brilliant:
                  “Clean the blood outta the car, change clothes and get rid of the body.”

                  Speaking of manuevers……how about Barr’s manuever to get rid of that beauty
                  JESSIE LIU we’ve been reading about here for 2 years.?

                  “Hey Jessie I hear there’s an opening over a your old stomping ground the DoT. You should take it.”
                  She does and immediately steps on Trump’s Trap Door
                  S’long sweetheart!

                  Barr instead of promoting from in uses the “highly unusual’ move (the vacancies act) to drop in… behind Mitch’s back..(Grennell-style)
                  the still unconfirmed…

                  “HE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED”
                  Tim Shea

                  Who now has FIVE heads on the wall of his trophy room.

                  Perhaps one day SD will introduce us to him. But I doubt it.

                  Now……what channel is West Wing on?

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  No longer on the air, but you can buy the whole series on dvd, on disc.
                  The Senate doesn’t NEED an articulable REASON. McConnell just says “doesn’t have the votes”; thats all the excuse he needs.
                  Look at Ratcliffe, the FIRST time.
                  He’s former Prosecutor, been on House intel committee, etc.
                  There has always been (until Trump era) an understanding that Senators and Congressmen nominated to cabinet positions in an administration are ‘easy’ confirmations, even when the ‘other party’ controls the Senate, part of the ‘good ole boy’ system.
                  Ratcliffe ASSUMED he would sail thru. His staff called McConnells and Grahams staffs, to make an appointment to discuss his confirmation, and were told the soonest either Senator coukd meet with him, ON THAT SUBJECT,…was 3 months.
                  They were telling Ratcliffe he didn’t have McConnell Grahams ‘support’, and at that point he knew his nomination was ‘dead in the water’ because AGAIN, if McConnell don’t want you, you ain’t getting in.

                  Soon after withdrawing his nomination, in an unusual moment of candor, Ratcliffe SAID this, about calling McConnell and Graham, in a Fox interview, that I saw here on CTH.
                  Later interview, said it was cause Burr/Warner, SSIC wouldn’t support him.

                  THATS how its DONE. FIRST a nominee has to get “thru committee”, THEN a vote of the full Senate.
                  McConnell has gamed the system of “Advice and consent”, to “you take who we give you, cause I can block any nominee I don’t want you to have. Reasons? I don’t NEED no stinkin reasons!”

                  Many of us have been frustrated by PDJT’s “picks” who have been lousy,…Tillerson, etc.
                  THIS is why. McConnell has seeded PDJT’s admin with bad seeds, Rino traitors at every turn.
                  He was lucky he got his Wolverines in, snuck them by McConnell early on, when McConnell wasn’t looking at TRADE representatives, being focused on domestic appointments.
                  The while Grennell gambit shows what PDJT had to do, to FORCE McConnell to appoint someone (Ratcliffe) to a position that would bring sunlight to the coup.

                  Recess appointments is another example, McConnell using a rediculous manuever to violate the intent of the Constitution, to prevent PDJT from getting nominees he wants, and McConnell doesn’t.

                  I have no doubt that IF he deemed it necesary to get PDJT out of office, McConnell would willingly pass the majority to Schumer, just don’t think he CAN, with PDJT’s popularity, but I’m watching for that.
                  Just as Ryan removed Nunes as chair for bogus ethics, the Senate did NOTHING, and held NO HEARINGS, on the coup, in the runup to the midterms.

                  Politically, if the Congressional Republican leadership had full throatedly used hearings to expose the coup, it would have gained seats in both Houses in the midterms.
                  Instead you had Senate Republicons singing Muellers praises, and blocking Nunes’s efforts.

                  Can you not see, that by actions and inactions, Congressional Republicon leadership has done everything they could to PREVENT any sunlight exposure of the coup?

                  And now Graham says,”Oh, back when I was praising Mueller, I had NO IDEA!”

                  WE knew. And, as Ghomerts op-ed on Mueller makes clear, just looking at Muellers career BEFORE being appointed SC, he was a highly DIS honorable man, and Lindseys excuse simple doesn’t hold up to serious scrutiny.
                  Senate Republicons were IN on the coup, from day one, not fooled, not oblivious, COMPLICIT.
                  If you look objectively at their actions, its the occams razor only logical explanation.

                  Liked by 1 person

                • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

                  McConnell just says “doesn’t have the votes”; thats all the excuse he needs.

                  So Trump is an idiot and justs accepts that excuse AND ANOTHER shit AG.
                  Got it.

                  Can you not see, that by actions and inactions, Congressional Republicon leadership has done everything they could to PREVENT any sunlight exposure of the coup?

                  Can’t you see by not taking the easy kill shot when it lands in your lap….
                  Literally none of the rest is even necessary?
                  NONE.
                  Swamp and trillions protected by President Pence.

                  I’ll check NETFLIX on the other thing.

                  Like

                • Dutchman says:

                  I’m pretty sure its on netflix, although I have the complete series on disc, so never needed to see if its on netflix.

                  No, PDJT isn’t an idiot. He is however in a situation unique in our history, as far as I know, where “his own party” in Congress, is doing everything they can to undermine him, and “normal political considerations” don’t apply.

                  And by that I mean what,Ryan did, deliberately turning the House over to “the other side”, and NOT pursueing, through hearings, etc the exposure of the coup, which SHOULD have been a major campaign issue, going into midterms.

                  And it WASN’T an “easy kill shot”; IMHO, as always, McConnell has been trying to NOT expose this truth, that he is actively working AGAINST PDJT, all the while doing just that.
                  The ‘strength’ of the Republicons, as one half of the Uniparty, is ONLY a result of their stealth nature, purporting to represent the “conservative” viewpoint, while actually doing everything they can, BEHIND the scenes, to undermine it.

                  Like a,stealth aircraft, take away the stealth, its just another warplane.

                  Expose, to the 94% of Republican voters, that McConnell and co. are working directly against the Republican voters best interests, and they lose their power to forward the globalist agenda.

                  Put another way, its my contention the whole insurance plan was to A) turn House majority over to Nancy, cause optically there was NO WAY a Republican majority controlled House could initiate impeachment of a Republican POTUS.
                  B) Find an excuse to appoint a Special prosecutor.
                  C) Leak all sorts of crap and lies, to undermine PDJT’s core support.
                  C) Create an excuse, that Senate Republicons could hide behind, to justify to the base, their SAYING they would vote to convict.

                  Either, engaging in such outrageous behavior that PDJT would fire Mueller, Rosie, Sessions,…in which case Sing along with Mitch soundbites would have been “Even POTUS isn’t above the law” “This is just like Nixon/Watergate” “Abuse of Power and Obstruction!”

                  OR, get him in a “Perjury trap” and “President LIED”.

                  THATS what Republicon Senate needed, in order to SAY they would vote to impeach, in order to get PDJT to resign.

                  The whole thing was modeled after Watergate. Remember all the Republican Senators that went down in the History books, voting to impeach Nixon?
                  EXACTLY; they get him out of office, WITHOUT having to stand in the glare of history, and before their constituents as having voted to convict.

                  Of coarse mueller also prevented any other hearings or investigations, etc.

                  Anyway, in the end I don’t think I am going to persuade you, and I doubt you are going to persuade me.

                  Eventually, hopefully the coarse of events will either prove me wrong, and I eat crow, or it will get to the point that even you will have to concede Barr/Durham is a head fake.

                  Mind you, I THINK there are still SOME clinging to Jeff was actually working to help Trump, trust the plan.

                  Anyway, you haven’t persuaded me. The goal wasn’t JUST to drive PDJT from office,..if that were it Ryan could have kept speakership and initiated Impeachment, himself.

                  The goal was to drive him from office, WITHOUT exposing that Republicons were behind the effort. Much trickier, more challenging thing to do.

                  Like

          • WRB says:

            This has gone above Barr.

            Do you just make stuff up?

            The Solicitor General of the United States is the fourth-highest-ranking official in the United States Department of Justice. His boss is the AG (that would be Barr.)

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solicitor_General_of_the_United_States

            Like

            • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

              Ummmm……
              The SG who argues before SUPREME COURT
              is arguing before a LOWER COURT.
              So it’s gone above Barr.
              Perhaps “beyond” is more preferable?
              Either way the message has been sent.

              Like

    • BitterC says:

      Yes, it definitely has put Barr in a corner. He is going to have to air their dirty laundry if he is serious about seeing justice for Flynn.

      Not being a lawyer and just reading it objectively, it would seem Beth made some valid points

      Liked by 2 people

      • Dutchman says:

        I think so, too (as far as valid points).
        General observation; you watch a lot of criminal trials, and after the Prosecution presents THEIR case, you are absolutely convinced the SOB is guilty,……
        THEN, the Defence presents THEIR case, and you say “SOB, now I just don’t know!,…”
        In the long run, its possible this DOES result in MORE exposure, something Barr DOESN’T want, and we do. So, POLITICALLY perhaps a good thing, although it prolongs Gen Flynns in limbo status, bad for him certainly, and uncertain whether good or bad, politically.

        This case is textbook example of “Oh, what a tangled web we weave,…”

        Liked by 2 people

        • Chip Bennett says:

          I am unpersuaded. At the end of the day, this is a case in which both parties before the Court want the case dismissed, and the Court has no Constitutional agency to act in any way other than to grant the shared pleadings of the two parties.

          Liked by 1 person

          • Dutchman says:

            In the beginning of Watergate, both the Prosecution and the Defence submitted a “plea agreement” to Judge Serrica.

            He COULD have simply accepted it, as routine. He smelled something fishy, and so DENIED the plea agreement, and since the Defendants pled guilty, “threatened” them with full sentences for burglary.

            One of the defendants slipped him a hand written note, and literally the rest is history.

            Would we had had a Judge like that, when the SSIC guy got two months, on a plea bargain!

            Anyway, the Judge has SOME discretion, lets see where it goes.

            Liked by 1 person

        • BitterC says:

          LOL…you’re right about SOB, now I just don’t know!

          Am still reading the DOJ filing and they make some good points too…some that might even top Beth’s

          It explained that Rule 48(a) allows a court to deny leave inorder “

          ‘to protect a defendant against prosecutorial harassment,’

          ” but that “the‘leave of court’ authority gives no power to deny [dismissal] based on adisagreement with the prosecution’s exercise of charging authority” or “toscrutinize and countermand the prosecution’s exercise of its traditional authorityover charging and enforcement decisions
          ,

          Liked by 1 person

        • bruzedorange says:

          The question is, does DURHAM want more information released.
          Just shooting from the hip, but to me that’s what always made this strange course of action worthwhile–for Lawfare to learn more of what Durham/Barr has. And they are thorough in their prep, so I expect there are specifics they are looking for.

          Like

          • Dutchman says:

            A)Lawfare doesn’t CARE what Durham has; they don’t work that way.
            Their M.O. is “damn the LAW (if it doesn’t say what we want, we’ll make it up!) And damn the facts, we’ll make THEM up, too.
            B) I suspect Lawfare can read the tealeaves in the swamp, as well as any swamp creature, and KNOW that Durham isn’t going to be issueing any INDICTMENTS, just a REPORT, which will be an expanded version of a Declination memo.

            Like

            • bruzedorange says:

              “Lawfare” is a twist on the word “warfare” and I believe that best describes their mission, methods, and culture.

              In war, any intel you can obtain about what your enemy has, knows, or intends is worth significant expenditure (like, sending a cooperative judge into an early, if suspect, retirement).

              Heck, Lawfare may be more interested in discerning what Barr/Durham do NOT yet know.

              Like

              • Dutchman says:

                I know that was the derivative of the name, by those who created it.
                However, they have COSISTENTLY, with every one of their stupid, ill fated plans, shown a complete ignorance of, or perhaps contempt for, standard maxims if war, evolved over thousands of years;
                Never underestimate your enemy.
                KNOW your enemy.
                Never COMMIT your troops, based on what you ANTICIPATE your enemy will do.
                ALWAYS have a plan “B”.
                So, a bunch of desk jocky lawyers, with -0- combat experience, were going to “go to war”, using the LAW, and call it “Lawfare”; and the result is like the coyote, they order flawed plan after flawed plan, from the ACME nefarious plans co., and keep faceplanting, while PDJT says “Beep, beep, mothertruckers!”

                Like

      • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

        definitely has put Barr in a corner.

        BS
        The US took the DC circuit up on their offer:
        “The government is invited to respond in the same ten day period”

        They did.
        And it was filed by the Solicitor General and his minions.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Darren says:

      I disagree. The case law is clear on this issue. The brief doesn’t invalidate the case law cited in the writ. I expect a 3-0 for Flynn here.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Dutchman says:

        Well, ….lets see what happens.
        And I reiterate, a ruling “against” Judge Flynn, is not the “end of the World”, and should not cause (but undoubtedly WILL cause) many to post dispirited, depressing posts.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      More reading to do….

      The US joined the Writ

      Like

      • Dutchman says:

        Thanks, I’m ON it!

        Liked by 1 person

        • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

          It’s the SOLICITOR GENERAL who “filed” it.
          So SCOTUS is on NOTICE.

          Liked by 2 people

          • Dutchman says:

            Yes, I noticed that immediately, when I started reading.
            Judges ‘warn’ juries not to reach a conclusion, until they have heard all arguments/evidence, for the reason I alluded to, earlier.
            ONE argument can be very compelling, until you hear the OTHER one.
            And a case, with two really good lawyers, can be very challenging for the jury.
            Here, we have some of the best lawyers in the country, in Sidney and the Solicitor General, and,I assume in Beth Wilkerson,…
            Its two to one, but the appeals court shouldn’t let that be deterirmanitive.

            I’d say its “6 to 1 and pickem”,…
            While the court could, and might grant the writ as a simple order, without comment or explanation, I can’t see them denying it, without explaning their ruling…..
            That alone may weigh in favor of granting the motion, lol.

            For both a Political and Legal ‘junkie’ like me, this is like,…seeing two, no THREE teams at Harlem Globetrotter level, or fighters at Ali level, duking it out! Fascinating,…I’m going to re-read Sidneys petition for writ of mandamus, again!

            Liked by 1 person

            • Chip Bennett says:

              Interestingly – and keep in mind, IANAL – I think granting the writ without any explanation or further dicta is the most likely outcome. Sullivan is making a mockery of the most prestigious appellate court in the country, after all; but they are still the DC circuit. I think they’ll grant the writ, but they’re not going to chastise him (as much as I think they should, and wish they would).

              Like

        • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

          Pg 12
          “After returning to the FBI, the agents drafted an FD-302…and continued to revise it thereafter”

          Interesting…..have they found the original 302 or confirmed that it existed at one point?

          Like

      • Dutchman says:

        Read part way, DOJ it seems is trying to put it all on the,FBI; Comey, Stroxz Page, and while I didn’t read it all, thats certainly the initial thrust.

        So, they are going to say this 3 year clusterf*ck, miscarriage of Justice railroading of Gen. Flynn, and the DOJ’S participation IN it, was all cause they trusted the FBI, and the FBI misled them?

        I don’t think THAT is going to fly, at all. But, more reading to do,…

        Like

    • I hope you are wrong.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. necsumadeoinformis says:

    The dirt just keeps on comin’

    Liked by 4 people

  6. rcogburn says:

    Footage from Sullivan’s courtroom can be found here:

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Roger Duroid says:

    Yes, force barr to make those sob DOJ “career prosecutors” prostrate themselves in front of the world and confess to their malicious prosecution actions. Confession to the extortion of General Flynn with bogus fbi bs is the least they can do. Then barr fires their asses. I can dream.

    Liked by 5 people

    • TheWanderingStar says:

      I wonder if Barr were to name names, would Sullivan then be provided the highest excuse of, “But I was misled by an overzealous Trump DOJ see! No harm, no foul on my part.” Final ruling 3 days before the election. Case dismissed.

      Like

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      Then barr fires their asses. I can dream

      Dream???? What are you talking about?

      They are ALREADY gone.
      Note: The Motion to Dismiss has the BARE MINIMUM argument for reasons to dismiss the case….
      VanGrack and his malfeasance is not mentioned because IT IS NOT NECESSARY
      Either Barr is covering up for VG or VG is under investigation himself as…
      VG suddenly withdrew from all his cases.

      Having said that….
      ALL THE EXHIBITS included with the motion
      shoves right in Sullivan’s face that VanGrack et al DID NOT COMPLY with Sullivan’s order to turn over all material and LIED to the court.
      Most of them are stamped with Bob Mueller’s sigal: DOJSCO

      It’s like Stockholm Syndrome has taken over these here parts.

      Like

  8. calbear84 says:

    Sullivan has no business in a court of law. He should be impeached. Of course, our treasonous House of Reps would rather give him a medal.

    Liked by 10 people

  9. margarite1 says:

    Geez! This is beyond belief! Does anyone think the appeals court won’t tell Sullivan to give it up?

    Liked by 2 people

    • Dan_Kurt says:

      RE: “Does anyone think the appeals court won’t tell Sullivan to give it up?” margarite1

      I am convinced that the Appeals Court will just continue the farce along as that is what courts and lawyers do. They string things along and delay, delay, delay as if a make work scheme by a labor union. Dickens wrote about it in his ponderous novel, Bleak House, not to be missed, and in his comedic The Pickwick Papers on the injustice of the justice system.

      Law School is a but train camp for Liars Club. Sophistry is what is inculcated and the result is exposed in this the Sullivan Circus. Oh, Justices of the Appeals Court prove me wrong.

      Dan Kurt

      Liked by 1 person

      • margarite1 says:

        I know you hope you’re wrong as much as I do.

        Ultimately I think this is the big stall so Flynn won’t tell the truth before the election so maybe they can cheat the senile one into being the figurehead for leader of the free world. Wasn’t there a movie about a guy put into power who was actually incompetent? These people are monsters – no wonder they loved Hillary.

        Like

  10. TonyE says:

    I thought judges are supposed to be IMPARTIAL?

    I wonder what John Roberts thinks of Sullivan? Surely not an independent judge, huh?

    Liked by 3 people

  11. citizen817 says:

    Liked by 23 people

    • Greg1 says:

      Sullivan won’t allow it like he didn’t allow some 24 previous ones in support of Flynn.

      He will only allow the ones he invited AGAINST Flynn. It’s alllllll about justice and such……sorta like the riots and destruction are about Floyd……..

      Like

  12. Derangement Syndrome says:

    If Barr is forced to out the corrupt prosecutors because of Sullivan’s insolence, you know the “trust the planners” will say that was Sullivan’s intention the whole time.

    Liked by 2 people

    • tom f says:

      And ‘outing the prosecutors’ is a bad thing?
      If it happens that way will anyone be upset?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Derangement Syndrome says:

        Of course I want the corrupt prosecutors held accountable, but I’m sure there is some unwritten DOJ rule where they “don’t do stuff like that” to prosecutors. It’s all about department morale and such, not truth and justice.

        Like

      • Joe Blow says:

        Some people would rather be right than happy.

        Like

    • Krashman Von Stinkputin says:

      If Barr is FORCED….

      LOL

      By who?
      The MSM? Lou Dobbs? Sean Hannity? Jerry Nadler? An anonymous blogger?

      I thought a cleaner was supposed to CLEAN and he is the Attorney GENERAL…
      “clothed in immense powers”

      Hell if a Director of the FBI can pretend he is the Attorney General and sweep HRC’s “email” crimes under the rug…
      Can’t a guy who is the ACTUAL Attorney General do the same?

      And wait……if Barr is the fixer…..isn’t he and Sullivan on the same team?
      This pretzel logic is getting so confusing.

      Like

  13. When the SCOTUS says the First Amendment doesn’t apply to Christian Churches we should not be surprised at flapdoodle like this.
    Always expect the worst from any democrat or other variety of leftist. Rule of Law as we knew it is basically gone, we need to restore from the foundations on up.

    Liked by 12 people

  14. Ronald Phillips says:

    Disgustingly corrupt what is it that we dont know about comrade sullivan?

    Liked by 3 people

  15. MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

    Does that ignorant bastid just make this stuff up on the fly? The Appeals court should use take those 40 pages and make paper airplanes of them and throw them back at he and his lawyer.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. frances says:

    Nuts, just nuts, guessing whatever the deep state may have on this oaf must be really interesting.

    Liked by 4 people

  17. Deep State scumbags like Sullivan and the Mueller gang are as unAmerican as you can get. They would have fit right in with the old Soviet Union “legal” system.

    Liked by 4 people

  18. Pale rider says:

    Who will enforce Sullivan’s mandates? They should ignore this moron and be done with it. If the actual prosecutor is satisfied then it’s done?

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Anonoma says:

    I vaguely recall an earlier statement by Sullivan that made me wonder if he was baiting DoJ into admitting the case was baseless. This also makes me wonder.

    Not that I’m hopeful here. I’m not a Q-ist.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. Deplorable_Infidel says:

    “AG Barr may be forced to directly put specific details of corrupt behavior by the Mueller prosecutors in a response.”

    How about specific details of bias by the judge, in the courtroom proceedings, against the defendant?

    Liked by 3 people

    • Joebkonobi says:

      If Barr puts out specific details of the corrupt behavior he then has to explain why no disciplinary action was or is being taken.

      Like

  21. hagarthorrible says:

    Justice? Does it even exist anymore in this once great free country? This vile contempt for American citiizens cannot end well…how long do we just back and watch our nation destroyed day by day?

    Liked by 2 people

    • sturmudgeon says:

      hagar: Well, I don’t see any of these hired highjackers that are destroying private and public property being shot (as they should be). We MUST get back to using force against force, in order to have these scum receive the message. Where have all the Patriots gone?

      Liked by 1 person

  22. Chieftain says:

    Rule of law still dead.
    Two tier Justice still operative.

    Liked by 3 people

  23. Ragle Gumm says:

    What he is doing to the law is what antifa is doing in the streets. What the blue governors, mayors, and DA’s are doing to the justify the actions by twisting interpretations to support antifa are now what other lawyers, like Beth Wilkonson, and justices doing to support Sullivan.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Scarlet says:

    Bump in the road. Sidney is smarter. Stay tuned. Keep the faith.

    Liked by 9 people

  25. Zephyrbreeze says:

    Weaponized government against the people.
    Corruption.

    Liked by 5 people

  26. MACAULAY says:

    Right after the DOJ moved to dismiss the Flynn case, Benjamin Wittes, BFF of disgraced and disgraceful James Comey, and spokesperson for Lawfare said this:

    “…if you think Flynn is about to be “cleared,” sober up. Because while you might not know much about federal law enforcement and it’s standard practices, Judge Emmet Sullivan does. And he won’t be surprised by these supposed “revelations.”

    I only post to show an indication that the Lawfare group already had this Judge in their hip pocket and so knew what he was going to do—likely because they would be doing it for him.

    I say Judge Sullivan is just a foot soldier in the Obama/Clinton Mafia.

    Liked by 7 people

  27. Publius2016 says:

    the Supreme Court 9-0 decision forced the dropping of the Flynn case…

    “Judge” Sullivan is asserting that since Gen. Flynn can appeal, the “Judge” should have leeway to continue his investigation…since when did judges investigate anything???

    Honestly, the appeals court should reject “Judge” response and declare it unresponsive and move the case to another “Judge”…

    unfortunately, I can honestly see Judge Berman being given the Flynn Case! all the FISA parts place “Judge” Berman next in line!

    Liked by 3 people

  28. CM-TX says:

    I feel like the woman (at the very end) on watching this never-ending “Justice” debacle! 🤦🏻‍♀️

    Hey Barr, “that’s not how it works… that’s not how any of this works!”

    Liked by 1 person

    • wondering999 says:

      Well… apparently, that’s how it *used to work* —
      we appear to be on the precipice, rolling over into some very different system

      Like

  29. Heika says:

    “If there is one positive that might come out of this nonsense it’s that AG Barr may be forced to directly put specific details of corrupt behavior by the Mueller prosecutors in a response.”

    Now, this is more like it. I recall Sundance laying out the options the DOJ had a while back before they tried to retreat, and one of the downsides of the withdrawal was YES that no sunlight would be shone into the den of vipers that created the lie in the first place. They would just quietly slink away if they dropped it. Very interesting development.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. berniekopell says:

    The DOJ brief is coming soon as a DOJ lawyer entered her appearance a few minutes ago (4:55 pm).

    Case Name: In re: Michael Flynn
    Case Number: 20-5143
    Document(s): Document(s)
    Docket Text:
    ENTRY OF APPEARANCE [1845173] filed by Jocelyn Ballantine on behalf of Respondent USA. [20-5143] (Ballantine, Jocelyn)

    Since Suspicious Sillvan filed first, the DOJ may be taking a few extra minutes/hours to beat back some of the arguments made by Suspicious Sullivan.

    Liked by 3 people

  31. A 12 minute-speech divided by the $100,000.00 fee = $8,333.33 per minute or $138.88 per second..

    That’s the fee that Booking Agent Sullivan got for his client Jim Comey.

    You’re in the wrong bidness, Judge.

    Liked by 3 people

  32. BuckNutGuy says:

    Everyday, in court room around the country, lawyers try to shrink the rule of law with novel arguments of innocence or guilt. The difference this time? We are all watching!

    Liked by 4 people

  33. Big Bubba says:

    OMG! It’s like a bad dream only I can’t wake up. Why doesn’t the deep state and the uniparty stop trolling us and just declare a new nation already – one that will endure for a thousand years! The corruption is so blatantly “In your face” – they’re not even trying to hide it anymore. To put it more succinctly – It’s like someone constantly throwing a ball at your face and then scolding you for not following the rules when you try to stop them!

    Liked by 5 people

    • Big Bubba says: “Why doesn’t the deep state and the uniparty stop trolling us and just declare a new nation already – one that will endure for a thousand years!”

      Yes how soon we forget…

      Like

  34. zimbalistjunior says:

    so he questions the ‘bona fides’ of the govts motion to dismiss now bc of the ‘unusual developments of the case’?
    but he doesnt question the govts prosecution from the beginning? he didnt think it an ‘unusual development’ for the establishment DOJ and Special Counsel to pursue a case against a newly appointed Intel head of a new admin for an anti establishment President?!

    noone can be this stupid..just not possible

    Liked by 3 people

    • guest4ever says:

      zimbalistjunior—-So, I’m guessing they are scared $&(^)#$$!!!! What are they afraid of? Must be totally evil, IMHO.

      Sure seems like Sidney, et al, are over the target.

      Liked by 1 person

      • zimbalistjunior says:

        once again its lawfare directing this stupidity…making tons of money off some morons

        it aint gonna work guys

        Like

    • Anon says:

      And what will the investigation of the “bona fides” of the governments motion to dismiss entail? Will Judge Sullivan require 40 FBI agents (or court clerks for this) and 2 years? Will the investigation be adversarial or impartial? If adversarial, we he only look at facts that support his predetermined conviction? If adversarial, will Sullivan appoint a Public Defender for Flynn, as he is already millions of dollars in debt? If impartial, who decides when the investigation will end? Who will decide that the investigation was sufficient enough to be impartial? (The DC circuit?)

      If this goes forward all of the above questions need to be addressed and it will devolve to become an extra-judicial circus. IMHO

      Like

  35. Dutchman says:

    Be prepared for the writ of mandamus to be denied,…so you WON’T be disappointed or upset.

    He makes the argument (or Beth Wilkerson does) that it is premature and unwarranted, and its a pretty decent argument, as such things go.

    I still think he’s an idiot, clueless AND corrupt,….and a denial of the writ, assuming they do, is not a terrible set back, it just means it goes back to Sullivan, who then has Gleesons presentation, in opposition to the motion to dismiss, to recieve and consider.

    Regretable it draws the case out, even longer,…may ultimately be SCOTUS bound,…and with wishy-washy Roberts, we REALLY need another Justice on “our” side,…

    Liked by 2 people

    • Johnny says:

      Not a good arguments at all. Executive branch of our government decides who to put on trial, not a Judge.

      Judges do not decide to try a defendant when the prosecution has withdrawn a prosecution. There is no longer a trial for the docket. The case is moot.

      STUPID DAMN corrupt judge.
      Stick to your lane or branch of government. What is this corrupt judge hiding?

      Liked by 2 people

    • Mortimer says:

      Nonsense. The writ is NEITHER premature or unwarranted. The proof of that is in the very legal precedent as set forth by the Fokker case and the recent SCOTUS ruling.

      A mandamus writ is warranted when a dismissal or ruling by a lower court is unjustifiably delayed.

      Prepare YOURSELF all you want, but that has nothing to do with what is supposed to take place here …. as per the higher courts themselves.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dutchman says:

        Have you READ Sullivans filing?
        Discusses the Fokker case, and points out the differences, and makes the argument why it doesn’t apply.

        A Mandamus ruling is very rarely granted, as its an extreme measure, a measure of last resort.
        I suggest you set aside emotions, and READ the filing.

        Like

    • Chip Bennett says:

      Again, I am unpersuaded. The response failed to clear the separation of powers hurdle. Just because Sullivan is *really, really, super-duper concerned* about the “bona fides” of the government action in dismissing the case doesn’t grant the Court the Constitutional agency to act as prosecutor. Both parties have withdrawn. He cannot “sally forth” on his own.

      That he has taken explicit actions to circumvent constitutional limits on the Court when his only allowable action is to grant the motion to dismiss indicates that the writ is, in fact, ripe, now.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Road Runner says:

      Nonsense… Sullivan’s response is lacking on many levels… I presume you read the DOJ’s filing… It clearly lays out why the refusal to dismiss is in error and why a plethora of case law backs the granting of the writ…

      I expect the writ to be granted…

      Like

    • WRB says:

      Be prepared for the writ of mandamus to be denied,…so you WON’T be disappointed or upset.

      This is pure cynicism, untethered from reality. Or, to say it another way, the mere fact that the Appeals Court is considering the writ of mandamus, and that not everybody is a commie bent on insurrection, tells us the Court will do the right thing.

      Like

      • Dutchman says:

        Well, I posted that after reading Sullivans responce, and before reading the DOJ responce, with the Solicitor Generals name at the top.
        And, as I said if you observe criminal trials, after one,side presents THEIR case (Prosecution) your convinced the SOB is guilty, but then the Defence presents their case, and your like “SOB, maybe they DIDN’T do it!”
        I don’t know HOW the appeals court will rule, only guarantee is be prepared for it to go either way, and its going to be FASCINATING!

        Like

  36. lfhbrave says:

    Flynn is the victim of DOJ’s misconduct and the Judge is now punishing Flynn for DOC’s misconduct because Flynn was coerced into agreeing to a plea deal? What a thuggish logic this unhinged judge is using. Why can he just dismiss the case and order DOJ to explain in his post-judgment “evaluation” of his corrupted “findings”, without subjecting Flynn to further suffering, both financially and emotionally?

    The corruption has been complete in this nation before the 2016 election, The Congress, the executive branch (DOS, DOD, DOJ, Treasury, FBI, CIA, NSA), and the judiciary. POTUS only exposes that reality.

    Liked by 4 people

    • hagarthorrible says:

      that is how American ‘justice’ has always worked; if they indict you, then you are guilty! if the jury/judge does not punish you, they will! I’ve lived this tale for 45 years…the dirty prosecutors never back off, they never quit!

      Like

  37. InfidelDefiler says:

    I’m thinking Sullivan might try to go to Vegas and argue that he should be allowed at a Black Jack table to be both the player and the dealer

    Liked by 2 people

  38. Trygve says:

    He’s making a mockery if the whole U.S. Justice System. And if they can do this to a General, what can’t they do to us average folks? This is rather terrifying, actually. Can’t wait to hear Sidney on Lou Dobbs, now. And I can’t wait to see Lou rolling his eyes and huffing and puffing.

    Liked by 2 people

  39. Elric VIII says:

    If the appeals court doesn’t smack Judge Sullivan down hard and fast we will know that there is a much larger problem awaiting to be exposed.

    Liked by 7 people

  40. lawton says:

    A joke Lawfare response just for use in the media to try and disparage Flynn. I think the Appeals Court is going to go ahead and dismiss it or at least give it to another Judge to do that.

    Liked by 2 people

  41. BitterC says:

    Liked by 4 people

  42. Rj says:

    So the judge couldn’t come up with this on his own but they want Mr Flynn to defend himself ?

    Liked by 2 people

  43. Nigella says:

    So where does this leave Flynn?

    Liked by 1 person

    • WRB says:

      Waiting for a judgement from the Circuit Court, which decides if Judge Sullivan must dismiss or carry on with what he was doing.

      They have to (if they are doing their job) read through all of the briefs, have their clerks check the law, discuss with each other, write up an opinion. That last part could just be a single paragraph…I don’t know how wordy they will want to be with this one.

      Like

  44. cheryl says:

    There are many days lately that I feel that I woke up in the Twilight Zone. This is one of them. I hope Flynn finally gets the exoneration he deserves soon.

    Liked by 4 people

  45. Michael Hennessy says:

    The ultimate irony of ironies!

    Judge Sullivan is demanding information he refused to order (at the behest of Flynn’s honey badger attorney) the FBI turn over!

    The resistance runs wide and deep!

    Man your harpoons!

    Liked by 2 people

  46. Some old guy says:

    The Judge’s response appears extremely light on both the law and the facts. His appeal to the public interest falls short, especially when its application would upend centuries of American criminal jurisprudence in addition to trashing the public interest in affording criminal defendants fundamental fairness and due process. If this is the best argument money could buy, there’s no real support for his actions.

    Liked by 1 person

  47. berniekopell says:

    DOJ just filed it brief.

    The following transaction was entered on 06/01/2020 at 5:23:25 PM EDT and filed on 06/01/2020
    Case Name: In re: Michael Flynn
    Case Number: 20-5143
    Document(s): Document(s)

    Docket Text:
    RESPONSE [1845183] to filed by USA [Service Date: 06/01/2020 by CM/ECF NDA] Length Certification: 7,790 Words. [20-5143] (Ballantine, Jocelyn)

    Liked by 2 people

  48. Bucknutguy says:

    Well, until maybe we “protest” like the folks are doing for George, then this is what we will get…

    Liked by 2 people

  49. John Wilson says:

    OR… and this is a really big OR, Sullivan is not ticked off at Flynn, but at DOJ. He knows there is only one way to get Barr to outline who lied to him from the DOJ and that is to play this game. Barr will have to play Sullivan’s game if they want to drop this. Flynn is just the unfortunate sap caught in the middle of a bar brawl.

    Like I said… a really big OR.

    Like

  50. Ken Maritch says:

    If Mr. Flynn is not in custody, he should just…. walk away…. leave…

    Liked by 1 person

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