Michael Flynn Hearing Today 11:00am – Open Discussion Thread

The DOJ, Sidney Powell and the Sullivan appointed amicus John Gleeson will hold a hearing today in the courtroom of Judge Emmet Sullivan to argue the unopposed motion to dismiss the case against Michael Flynn. The hearing begins at 11:00am ET and you can call-in to hear the audio of the live courtroom events.  (details below)

  • 877-336-1839  – (access code 5524636)
  • 888-363-4734 –  (access code 6114909)
  • 877-336-1839  – (access code 1429888)
  • 877-402-9753  – (access code 2090166)
  • 888-557-8511  – (access code 4140864)
  • 888-273-3658  – (access code 1773796)

UPDATE: If you cannot get through on any phone line use this periscope link HERE

UPDATE 2: Technical issues at the court.  Recess called until 12:35pm ET to work on issues. I’m Dropping another link (YouTube) below that was not compromised during the “technical issues”.

UPDATE 3:  Some more technical glitches and a 15 min bio break until 2:45pm ET

UPDATE 4: Hearing ended abruptly.


If the true administration of justice was to prevail in this case, the judge should simply accept the unopposed motion and this would be the end of the malicious prosecution.  However, this case has so many precedents anything is possible.

If you are listening-in to the hearing, feel free to drop your thoughts and opinions into the comment section to share.

This entry was posted in 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, Activist Judges, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Conspiracy ?, Deep State, Dept Of Justice, FBI, Live Streaming, media bias, propaganda, Spygate, Spying, THE BIG UGLY, Uncategorized, White House Coverup. Bookmark the permalink.

1,675 Responses to Michael Flynn Hearing Today 11:00am – Open Discussion Thread

  1. novanglus86 says:

    Sullivan’s dismissive attitude toward Powell reeked of misogyny. I did not hear him speak to male attorneys with such a tone.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. cjzak says:

    I am no lawyer or have any legal experience, but how is this judge getting away with all this mess? His hostility is very evident. His twisting of every precedent is very evident. Who is in charge of this man? Roberts?

    Sullivan’s behavior is beyond bizarre it seems. Sidney can hold her own, but if this man is allowed to go off rogue on how a judge is supposed to conduct a case like this, how do you fight that?

    Did the DOJ hotshot get to say anything? Did he bring some more information to the table? Did he again ask that the case be closed? Haven’t been able to listen, but following along here on CTH.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. deeperinfo says:

    Ah, DOJ now bringing up threats against Flynn’s son and side agreement.
    Conflict of Interest with prior Counsel.

    Not supporting at this time, but Court would have to deal with if not withdrawn.


  4. magic8192 says:

    All the questions about Trump and Barr. Is this just to rattle Powell or was he setting a perjury trap?
    Maybe both?


    • cboldt says:

      It’s to make news. Bad faith all around.
      The news is that judge questions Flynn’s lawer ethics, contact with Trump, and contact with Trump’s toadie, Barr.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Niagara Frontier says:

      I would not be surprised if Sullivan doesn’t call for both POTUS and Barr to sit for depositions on the matter. It’s not only a perjury trap, it’s another impeachment trap based on obstruction of justice. Remember, our opposition knows no boundaries….not even the U.S. Constitution deters them.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Battleship Wisconsin says:

        Niagara Frontier says: “I would not be surprised if Sullivan doesn’t call for both POTUS and Barr to sit for depositions on the matter. It’s not only a perjury trap, it’s another impeachment trap based on obstruction of justice. Remember, our opposition knows no boundaries….not even the U.S. Constitution deters them.”

        Yes … This could be what Sullivan’s game is all about. He is giving the Democrats in the House ammunition to impeach both AG Barr and President Trump on charges of obstruction of justice in the Flynn case.

        This brings up another question.

        What will Joe Biden be saying in tonight’s debate about the Democrat’s previous attempt at the impeachment and removal of Donald Trump? Will Biden be making further accusations which justify another attempt at impeachment and removal?


    • trapper says:

      He’s an Obamabot who will do anything he can to protect the FBP.


  5. cboldt says:

    Sullivan wants to know, if court denies government motion to dismiss, what happens next?
    Should Flynn be allowed to withdraw his plea based on ineffective assistance of counsel.
    Government says motion to dismiss guilty plea are to be liberally granted. Governmnet knows of no case wehre a defendnat who has moved to dismiss was sentenced without a trial. Also says that Flynn’s plea is alleged to have been made under duress. See notes filed on this case record. It is concerning that there are deals between lawyers not disclosed to the court. Sullivan would have to revisit that if he does not grant the motion to dismiss.
    Government says there is no prosecutor for this case, if the motion to dismiss is not granted. There are zero cases wehre private prosecutors were allowed.

    Liked by 5 people

  6. novanglus86 says:

    Powell will immediately appeal to SCOTUS. Escalate.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. deeperinfo says:

    DOJ asks: how do you prosecute without a Prosecutor?

    Liked by 5 people

  8. waterthelibertytree01 says:

    The COUP Continues.

    Liked by 7 people

  9. PatriotKate says:

    The judge is just pissed that the original plan did not work. Had Covington stayed involved, they would have “managed” Flynn’s prosecution the “right way” (wink, wink) and he’d have been in prison for over a year now. Sidney had the audacity to actually defend her client.

    I have to agree that Justice and the Rule of Law appear to be dead in today’s America.

    Liked by 8 people

  10. berniekopell says:

    Suspicious Sullivan now asks the DOJ what happens if I deny the motion, should i reconsider the motion to withdraw? Long DOJ explanation about motions to withdraw being liberally granted. DOJ says as a practical matter there is no path forward if DOJ declines to prosecute.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. sundance says:

    Liked by 13 people

  12. Of course there’s not another case like this one!! The crimes and corruptions of the Government are UNPRECEDENTED.

    Liked by 13 people

  13. Blind no Longer says:

    This is just a total sham…General Flynn is a political prisoner.

    Liked by 5 people

  14. novanglus86 says:

    First time listening to Sullivan.

    Multiple choice:
    a) Corrupt
    b) Stupid
    c) Both

    Liked by 5 people

  15. bullnuke says:

    All this legal talk was discussed at the appeals court. Lawyers get caught up in process talk. This should stop. Where has a single argument been made discussing the the supposed purpose of this hearing. It’s either dismiss or not. The rest of it is bullshit.

    Liked by 3 people

    • William the Comptroller says:

      We need a FREE FLYNN RALLY this weekend throughout the country in every city. Period. This General’s accomplishments in the theatre of combat saved countless American lives by streamlining the acting upon intel gathered on the front lines and cut out lazy analysts in Langley who might get back to you tomorrow. We need to get ANGRY!!!!! Make it FRONTPAGE HEADLINES.

      Liked by 3 people

  16. booger71 says:

    In my thoughts, Sullivan will continue this ruse unless the DOJ indicts the players on why General Flynn originally plead guilty


  17. FPCHmom says:

    Liked by 3 people

  18. bulwarker says:

    Super impressed by the younger DOJ official speaking.

    Liked by 2 people

  19. lolli says:

    It should be dismissed with prejudice. No basis for this entire sh,tshow.

    Liked by 4 people

  20. deeperinfo says:

    DOJ: “Abuse of Discretion” if not dimissed WITH Prejudice

    Well, what if not even dismissed at all???

    Is Sullivan as risk of Abuse of Discretion, leading to ‘strong letter’?

    Liked by 1 person

    • mr.piddles says:

      A Strongly-Worded Letter??? What is it?!?

      It’s a letter with lots of words in it addressed to somebody in government … but that’s not important right now.

      Liked by 4 people

  21. gsonFIT says:

    Now Sullivan is the police too and bringing up “uncharged criminal conduct.”

    Liked by 3 people

  22. magic8192 says:

    If Sullivan doesn’t have a firm grip of how to dismiss, with or without prejudice, then he really is a stooge.

    Liked by 3 people

    • hazelnut22 says:

      Sullivan is doing this on purpose. Obama has his back and he knows it. As I posted earlier, Sullivan is a celebrity now and he is all theatrics now until a higher judicial authority strikes him down.

      Sullivan is what resistance, law-fare and judicial activism look like. To us, he looks like a jerk, to the left he looks like a guy who has brass balls.

      Liked by 2 people

  23. berniekopell says:

    Now he asks another question: Can I deny the motion without prejudice? DOJ says its is an abuse of discretion to refuse the grant the motion, especially when both sides agree.

    Now he is asking about “uncharged criminal conduct” (FARA violation) that Flynn admitted to, should any “future attorney general” of “future administration” decide to charge that conduct.

    Liked by 1 person

  24. Sam Gompers says:

    This future charging bit from Sullivan is just unbelievable.

    Liked by 4 people

  25. dufrst says:

    Sounds like Flynn will get the dismissal but the question is whether with or without prejudice.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. deeperinfo says:

    Now DOJ bringing up Covington conflicts again…


  27. booger71 says:

    Pretty cool when you can be the investigator prosecutor and judge.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. cboldt says:

    Sullivan now asserting that Flynn essentially pead guilty to uncharged criminal conduct. Can that be used against Flynn by another administration?
    Sullivan then says not to read much into the question, he’s just probing the diff between dismiss with prejudice and without prejudice.
    Dumb quesiton. Gove’t point out, those hypotheical cases aren’t affect by prejudice of not in this case – separate charges (FARA violations).
    Government points out some hinky stuff in FARA (Covington conflict). Never admitted intent, knowing false filing. Co-defendeant was not convicted on account of this fatal flaw, after jury verdict.

    Liked by 3 people

  29. bullnuke says:

    The more they talk, the more conflicts are discussed and it will allow judge to have further hearings to clear things up. More hearings, more talk without addressing the elephant in the room. Dismiss the damn charges with dispatch!


  30. NJMAGA says:

    This is what happens when no one is indicted for their crimes. They are all emboldened. Shame on you Barr.

    Liked by 8 people

    • vikingmom says:

      Every time someone gives in to a bully, in the hopes that they will then stop making demands, is an idiot! Winston Churchill understood this and Neville Chamberlain did not, which is why millions of people died while all of the talking heads attempted to appease a madman!

      Man up Barr and do your da*n job!!

      Liked by 4 people

  31. deeperinfo says:

    Ah, the key is Prosecutorial Discretion, not legal rules on “materiality”.

    They don’t want to bring the case anymore, whatever the evidence and rules.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. FPCHmom says:

    Liked by 4 people

    • Leaving says:

      I do not have the patience to be a trial lawyer.

      My response would be “Hell, dismiss with prejudice, without prejudice, with the way things are going nothing would the Biden administration from immediately sending Flynn to jail.”


  33. gsonFIT says:

    Hell to the yeah. Putting the materiality back of Sullivan sure shut the judge up.

    Liked by 3 people

  34. deeperinfo says:

    DOJ trying to give the Judge a way out – ‘misled’

    Liked by 1 person

  35. Zy says:

    No Justice, No Peace.

    Liked by 2 people

  36. mb says:

    Trump just needs to fire Wray and replace with Flynn…. easy-peasy.

    Liked by 2 people

  37. DJ says:

    This whole thing is a charade. They are going to get Flynn one way or another. Even if they have to invent a method to do it since Sullivan is essentially claiming that since there is no precedent for this particular set of circumstances, it is his prerogative to operate in any manner he himself sees fit.

    Liked by 1 person

    • DJ says:

      There is no argument that the Gov can make, no documents that they can file, that will move Sullivan from his course.

      There are those who believe that Sullivan is being blackmailed on some level and that explains his extreme behavior. If that is true, then the only thing that can change this is for that to be revealed.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Indimex says:

        I know! Since spying is the new norm, let’s have one of those contractors take a look-see at the NSA database and tell us exactly what who he’s beholden to.


  38. cboldt says:

    Government notes that Sullivan never closed the loop on getting the element of materiality. He asked SC prosecutors to address that, but he never closed the loop.

    Liked by 2 people

  39. FPCHmom says:

    Liked by 8 people

  40. Carly says:

    Kohl is brilliant. His objective is different than Sidney’s. Hers is to get this dismissed. His is to appeal to Sullivan to do the right thing. Total difference in tone. Kohl’s role is not to defend Flynn, lest he sound like he is collaborating with Sidney. It’s an awful delicate line to tread. Not sure that Mooppan is achieving this. He’s slightly more emotionally invested in tone.

    Kohl is walking Sullivan through how they discovered that these charges should be dismissed. He’s doing a good job of what he has to do, whether it impacts the outcome or not. He’s preserving the integrity of (Barr’s) DOJ decision to withdraw, impartially.

    Liked by 11 people

  41. berniekopell says:

    Now he is asking about “materiality” and takes another shot at Sidney for not moving to reconsider his prior decision on materiality. Cole now explains and goes back to the initial statement of offense. Notes that Suspicious Sullivan asked questions that “led to the unraveling” of this case. Cole notes that Crossfire Hurricane was not impacted by what Flynn said. Says DOJ can no longer prove materiality based upon what they know now — the truth. The truth is at odds with the Statement of Offense.

    Liked by 4 people

  42. bertdilbert says:

    They are making an example of Flynn as to what will happen to you if you oppose the system. Why our founders wanted small government.

    Liked by 3 people

    • mariinsc says:

      If you have not read it, get K. T. McFarland’s EXCELLENT book “Revolution: Trump, Washington, and “We the People””. I’m just at the point where Flynn was fired and McMaster appointed by my sister said the party where she is interviewed by the FBI is worse than we thought.

      Liked by 2 people

  43. Carly says:

    If Barr’s DOJ said it was prosecutorial misconduct, we wouldn’t be here. But Barr wanted to dismiss based on not being properly predicated, which is right but not muscular enough.


    • Pedro says:

      Yup. Judge Sullivan is exploiting the timidity inherent in AG Barr’s decision to protect institutions rather than see justice done by prosecuting Mueller’s crew.

      DOJ and the FBI have already suffered major reputational damage with millions of Americans, so what is Barr actually protecting?, the institutional equivalent of the Titanic’s reputation just after it hit the iceberg?

      The FBI is a badge gang.

      The FBI should be disbanded with prejudice.

      Liked by 1 person

  44. mark says:

    Wanna end this case pronto? Fire Wray and appoint General Flynn to interim FBI Director! General Flynn has been convicted of NOTHING and deserves a place back in the administration that was stolen from him via crossfire razor, you know the FBI. Sweet revenge if ever there is one! Come on man, to quote sleepy joe, do it President Trump.

    Liked by 6 people

  45. deeperinfo says:

    DOJ presenting very strong case based on evidence.
    Sullivan is having a hard time finding a rock to stand on.

    Now getting into Logan Act: “legit”

    Setting out the frame up before interview, and conflicting evidence of innocence.

    Now: “get him fired?”

    “Up to Director of FBI”

    “Not the FBI’s job.”

    Wow. Good.

    Liked by 4 people

  46. jackphatz says:

    Lemme guess that it would be Lindsay Graham to spearhead any impeachment actions against Sullivan.

    Liked by 3 people

  47. bullnuke says:

    The Court of Appeals is to blame for this clown show. They were stuck on process and not the person being denied his constitutional rights. Granting mandamus would have prevented this useless hearing.

    Liked by 7 people

  48. All Hype says:

    Judge Sullivan is just taking one for the team. Everyone knows it. Th real blame lies with the Appeals Court. They knew this stupidity was going to take place and they let it happen. Mamandus ruling should have held and I am not even a lawyer!!!

    Liked by 1 person

  49. Love that The Government is making Flynn’s case for him.

    Liked by 2 people

  50. Henry says:

    Letting the DOJ talk but constantly interrupted Sydney.


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