Oral Arguments Scheduled – Flynn’s Attorney, Sidney Powell, Interview With Lou Dobbs…

Michael Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell appears with Lou Dobbs to discuss the legal briefs filed by Judge Sullivan and U.S. Solicitor General Noel Francisco with the DC circuit court.

The U.S. Dept. of Justice and Sidney Powell, on behalf of her client, have agreed to a dismissal of the charges.  Judge Sullivan is fighting their unopposed motions.  As a result the DOJ and Ms. Powell have joined to request intervention from the DC circuit court.

.

UPDATE: Moments after this interview ended the DC Circuit Court scheduled oral arguments on the writ of mandamus for Friday June 12, 2020, at 9:30am EDT.

This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Activist Judges, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, Election 2020, FBI, Legislation, media bias, Notorious Liars, Spygate, Spying, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

302 Responses to Oral Arguments Scheduled – Flynn’s Attorney, Sidney Powell, Interview With Lou Dobbs…

  1. Brenda Purington says:

    I’m confused. Can someone explain each of the orders in order. It sounds like the DC court is accepting the request for amici

    Liked by 4 people

    • WRB says:

      A number of people/organizations submitted amici curiae, and the first order means they are accepted.
      The 2nd order says the court will take any others if submitted by June 5.
      The 3rd order says that Sidney Powell (Flynn’s lawyer), the DOJ and the Judge have until June 10 to respond to what has been submitted.
      The last sets June 12 as the date of oral arguments, where the parties make verbal arguments and are questioned by the 3 judge panel.

      Unlike the district court, the appeals court can ask and accept “friends of the court” briefs to help illuminate the case. Though it looks like the court is going overboard here, and dragging the proceedings out much too long.

      Liked by 11 people

      • JL says:

        “dragging the proceedings out much too long.”

        Yes. It seems to be lost to the courts and even friendlies in congress and the DOJ, that there is an innocent man here at the center of all this. The entire criminal court system and much of our Constitution is there to protect the rights of the accused. The fact that there doesn’t seem to be much consideration for that speaks to a much larger issue.

        If the Government discovers a bunch of misconduct on the part of prosecutors that led to a coerced guilty plea, the government is right to move to dismiss a case.

        The fact that a Judge is ignoring the fact that the Gov is telling him that there was misconduct, is appalling. The very first order of business should have been to dismiss. They can worry about all these other issues later.

        Liked by 18 people

      • RetiredSAIC says:

        As others have commented, accepting amicus curiae briefs with respect to an appellate decision isn’t unusual. But there’s another reason I believe the DC Circuit is going through steps which might, at first glance, appear to be dragging out proceedings.

        It’s important to remember that this is just a panel of three judges selected from the entire court. When such a panel issues a ruling, the losing party has the option of requesting an “en banc” hearing before the entire court. Here’s a full list of judges for the DC Circuit:

        https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf/Content/Judges

        It’s my sense the panel is going the extra mile to allow briefs from the various parties and groups and then hear oral arguments. One benefit to this process is that no one can come back later and petition for a review by the full court by using as an excuse that certain views weren’t fully heard. They might argue the panel erred in their legal interpretations, but that’s always a possibility.

        The briefing schedule is actually pretty expedited, in federal court terms, and oral arguments are just a week and a half away. By being extra cautious and thorough the panel increases the chance their ruling(s) will be the final word on the case. If, for example, they issue a well-reasoned and fully-sourced ruling against Judge Sullivan, he will look spiteful and foolish (more than he already does) if he tries to push for further review. And, since the full court does not need to accept a petition for an “en banc” hearing, if the panel does their job well they will effectively foreclose that option.

        It’s therefore worth considering that a process that looks like it’s dragging things out may actually speed things up by preventing further shenanigans. A solid ruling and Writ of Mandamus would be the icing on the cake to demonstrate the grave injustice done to Lt. Gen. Flynn and highlight the grotesque misuse of both law enforcement and the courts.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Padric says:

        From what I’ve seen on a few Twitter threads by lawyers who’ve had very good and reliable takes on all this, an Appellate court scheduling oral arguments in 10 days is actually insanely fast. As one of them put it, telling a lawyer to be ready for Appellate court oral arguments in 10 days is the equivalent of telling a construction crew to tear down a library,redesign, rebuild and decorate it all while making sure you follow the exact blueprints and everything is up to code so it can be re-opened in 10 days.

        Most oral arguments are scheduled 30 days out or more, even for a Mandamus. They only do this kind of thing when there is either a pressing national need or they think the actions taken by the judge are so egregious that they have to be addressed immediately. Given the utterly ridiculous argument for why the Appellate’s Fokker ruling didn’t apply, I’m pretty sure they’re none too please with judge Sullivan OR his lawyer.

        I do know that Appellate court oral arguments are incredibly stressful for lawyers. The judges barely wait for you to get the gist of your argument out before another judge is firing another question at you. SCOTUS oral arguments are similar in that regard though they may let a lawyer go on ever so slightly longer just in case the point they’re trying to make is a complex one that requires a longer explanation. Flowery speech gets you no where, short and to the point is the rule there. I fully expect Sullivan’s lawyer is going to get positively peppered.

        Like

    • Anonoma says:

      The Appeals Court is accepting amici. Amicus briefs are pretty routine in appellate courts and the Supreme Court. It would be unusual to deny them wholesale. The briefs are submitted in writing and the amici don’t get to make oral arguments. The judges don’t have to pay any attention to them.

      The Appeals Court will hear oral arguments, presumably from Flynn, Sullivan (direct parties to the Petition), and the Department of Justice (third party to the Petition and specifically invited by the Court to submit the written arguments submitted yesterday by the Solicitor General).

      This is more or less separate from what’s going on in Sullivan’s court, procedurally speaking.

      Liked by 6 people

  2. Paul Gallant says:

    Case dismissed this will be over soon.

    On Nadler’s latest nonsense it appears to me the majority house Democrat leadership has lost their own members after the impeachment fiasco. Not in ideology of course but on their stomach to start any more nonsense in the House. Nadler bleats on but his own party in the house is not listening as the election draws near.

    Liked by 11 people

  3. Issy says:

    I understand the viewpoints the lawyers are giving here, but I don’t have to like it. As far as I’m concerned, these are just more legal shenanigans from a broken judicial system that is just a game to the players. All common sense is abandoned for following the procedure.

    Justice delayed is justice denied and I’m disgusted with all of this.

    Liked by 23 people

  4. Koot Katmando says:

    I dunno what to think. My thinking if this was as bad as some seem to think it is for Sullivan he would just back down and dismiss?

    Liked by 2 people

    • vml9000 says:

      I can’t help but thing the Circuit Court is also playing delaying games! They should have dismissed this immediately.

      Liked by 5 people

      • You “can’t help but think” that because it is obviously true; no need to be wishy-washy about it. We have been assured by experts that Sullivan doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on, and it follows that the circuit court doesn’t either. Nevertheless, we are still waiting for a court, any court, to do the right — and legal (damnit) thing. Nobody will call the Leftist Emperor naked, or its actions lawless. But I do: They are fundamentally, doggedly and insanely lawless, and hence illegitimate. And not in a good way.

        President Trump — since his loyal followers constitute the only viable (honest) political party in America now — needs to find a way to wage positive war upon them, instead of the current situation where everyone is afraid to be seen to be obstructing a non-existent “justice” (in fact, a demon Insane Left agenda masquerading as justice).

        Like

    • walt39 says:

      The reason Sullivan doesn’t just ‘dismiss’ is that something we don’t know about him that’s even worse is floating in the wind … a live little boy or a dead little girl, as they say.

      Liked by 3 people

    • MrF says:

      This is Sulivan’s Sally Yates, I am Spartacus moment.

      Liked by 1 person

    • sat0422 says:

      They must have some pretty deep crap on Sullivan and he is scared not to act like a jackass for “THEM.”

      Liked by 1 person

  5. FairTaxGuy60 says:

    Why June 12 and not tomorrow? Just more typical deep state feet-dragging to make it look like there is something valid in Sullivan’s argument. And when is Durham going to start indictments? They play us like a fiddle and nothing EVER happens to the bad guys.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Ohio Cyclist says:

      Scheduling oral arguments for tomorrow would not give time for amici briefs to be filed, or for Powell and DOJ to be able to respond to them.

      No matter what the circuit court either decides or doesn’t, it will be unpopular with some. Should their decision arrive late on June 12, it will be easily buried in the news cycle.

      I would like Flynn to be publicly exonerated quickly. But if he isn’t, it may be an opportunity to make public to a wider audience even more of the DOJ misdeeds. While none of these shenanigans are a surprise to those who have been following along, there are many who are just becoming aware of the depth of corruption.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. FairTaxGuy60 says:

    Why June 12 and not tomorrow? Just more typical deep state feet-dragging to make it look like there is something valid in Sullivan’s argument. And when is Durham going to start indictments? They play us like a fiddle and nothing EVER happens to the bad guys.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. FairTaxGuy60 says:

    Why June 12 and not tomorrow? Just more typical deep state feet-dragging to make it look like there is something valid in Sullivan’s argument. And when is Durham going to start indictments? They play us like a fiddle and nothing EVER happens to the bad guys.

    Like

  8. Donna in Oregon says:

    I think Sidney Powell was blogging on TCH with us. I am so glad she decided to take General Flynn’s case. She wrote a book called LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice. She knows her stuff and does it well! YEAH!!!

    Liked by 9 people

  9. David R. Graham says:

    Left/Sullivan have to keep Flynn in stir (gagged) until after 20JAN21. Otherwise, he talks and that is curtains for them.

    Liked by 6 people

  10. InAz says:

    Continued Prayers for General Flynn and Sidney Powell. And of course for the USA and President Trump.

    Liked by 6 people

  11. evergreen says:

    If the DOJ dropped the charges because it was found to be an unfounded investigation, no basis for interview, nothing material to warrant an interview, the truth was told by Flynn, the initial reporting was accurate, the subsequent transcripts were forged to indicate lying, and the prosecution–unfounded–resulted in damages to the tune of millions of dollars to Flynn,…who gets reprimanded, fired for color-of-law rights violations, prosecuted for same, and sued by Flynn?

    What’s an IG for, improper baseball tickets? Or, $2-3 million in direct, premeditated damages?

    Liked by 3 people

  12. hokkoda says:

    I’ve read several commenters tonight saying that Flynn is under a gag order. I know Roger Stone was, but Flynn? I have read anything about him being under a gag order. Is it somehow woven into his plea deal?

    Liked by 1 person

    • OmegaManBlue says:

      I don’t think he is under a order. I have seen others say he isn’t under order. He is wise to keep his mouth shut unlike Stone. His lawyer probably wants him to keep quiet. He will have time to talk when this is over.

      Liked by 8 people

  13. Perot Conservative says:

    Ms. Powell sporting a new hair style … becoming.

    Ms. Powell: ** “Durham over the target..
    Dome people cooperating.” **

    Cooperating … James Baker & Gina Haspel?

    Liked by 2 people

  14. Perot Conservative says:

    How about, instead:

    – a second Trump term
    – 2 more SC seats (RGB gone)
    – John Durham indictments for Comey, Clinesmith, Strzok, Page, Boente, Van Grack, etc.
    – POTUS flushing Never Trumpers at the start of his 2nd term
    – General Flynn, Ms. Powell, & Grenell in the Trump Administration
    – 500 – 1,000 more miles of wall
    – with unemployment well over 10%, ramped up deportations
    – trade deal w the UK

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Brant says:

    Any chance this will be public? I would hope we get to see these folks live. Will Sullivan have to verbalize? I hope so. A lot like what the 53 said on TV was different than what they said under oath. People are a bit brave when they write something. Different when they have to verbally defend it.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. regitiger says:

    Liked by 8 people

  17. clive hoskin says:

    I do believe you are correct.I see no other way forward at this point in time.Every time you think you have them by the Short and Curlies,it turns into a nothing burger.The fact that you have people like Graham and the rooster running their moths off,it always turns to $hit.

    Like

  18. Mortimer says:

    I finally read Wilkinsons fairytale

    She and Sullivan have one BIG problem that I’m sure the Circuit Court will also see: The filing by Wilkinson completely avoids answering what the Circuit Court ordered them to answer. That is, “Given the precedent set under previous rulings, why do you think you have the right to deny the motion to dismiss?”.

    Instead, Wilkinson babbles on and on about why she thinks the Circuit Court should not even consider this mandamus writ. That isn’t what the Circuit asked them to address.

    Liked by 5 people

  19. strateshooter says:

    this Flynn case is the clearest act of political persecution seen in the USA since Joe McCarthy was running amok.
    Every form of prosecutorial misconduct has been presented here..

    Entrapment
    Leaking ( pre-judicial scene setting)
    Witholding of Brady /exculpatory materials
    Evidence tampering/fabrication (the FD-302)
    Coercion of a plea deal via threats to family members
    Delay…delay…delay > to financial bankrupt the defendant and put him/her submission

    Folks..this is the Deep State in action..it is called LEGAL TERRORISM and it was applied to LTG Michael Flynn because he was guilty of one crime… the Obama Admin saw him as a threat to their power and they didn’t like him.

    If Flynn gets anything less than complete exoneration then the American Justice sytem should hang its head in shame.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Issy says:

      strateshooter: I am so disgusted with this delay, delay tactic I can’t even muster being mad about it anymore. There is no excuse for the courts anymore. They are corrupt by this alone forget anything else.

      They have no shame and will continue to tie everything in legal knots that make it appear they must be fair to give everyone the chance to answer and present their arguments. It is legal terrorism and I can only hope these tyrants receive their justice someday because it’s not happening in this case.

      Like

  20. Lucky Guy says:

    As an appellate litigator, given the clear D.C. Circuit precedent, the recent U.S. Supreme Court case, the clarity of the issue, the clarity of the law and the already submitted briefs, oral argument seems completely unnecessary and I think it sends the wrong message (I.e., that this is complicated, that it could go either way, that it’s a close call). Judge Sullivan went rogue. They should’ve said so simply and quickly.

    Liked by 3 people

  21. lfhbrave says:

    Sullivan is no dummy. Before he did this, he must be aware that Flynn would take this to the DC Circuit. I would guess he was reasonably sure, with the help of and perhaps mutual understanding among his allies both inside and outside the court system, that he would be able to move this thing much further along. He did his part, now it is his/Obama’s allies in the court system to carry on. The objective appears to be delaying and limiting the exposure and damages of Obamagate before the election.

    It now appears each step they took, Mueller, Ukraine, etc they did not expect it being successful, it is always a delay tactic or ground work for the final kill shot in the 2020 election. This tactic was proven successful in the 2018 election, with Congressional GOP’s covert assistance. So far in applying the same tactic in getting rid of POTUS it has been on schedule.

    Like

  22. two percent neanderthal says:

    Notice of the proceedings / charges and the opportunity to be heard are two basic underpinnings of ‘due process’. An allowance of 10 days to respond and an opportunity for oral arguement on June 12 show regularity and the hope of due process. While I would have been amused had the DC Circuit pomptly pulled down Sullivan’s pants, spanked his bare bottom, and ordered an immediate dismissal of all charges, it would not have been due process. There will be a wailing and gnashing of teeth later fom the leftists / statists when the mandamus relief is granted in part and the dismissal is ordered later this month regardless.

    Like

  23. chickenhawk says:

    find the dirt on sullivan and expose him. he is obviously compromised and the deep state is controlling him.

    Like

    • Trisha Anderson says:

      A person said something about Sullivans son the other day on Twitter,how the the Judge got him out of TROUBLE,but it is well buried.Thats why the left own him

      Like

  24. Pierre Vuk says:

    The panel is Justices Henderson (female, white, Reagan appointee), Wilkins (male, black, Obama appointee – started the cases for Driving While Black) and Rao (female, India, Trump appointee). 2-1 to dismiss.

    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