Rogue Judge Sullivan
American Spectator,
by
Jed Babbin
Original Article
Posted By: MissMolly,
5/18/2020 4:38:41 AM
Emmet Sullivan, the U.S. District Court judge presiding over the Michael Flynn criminal trial, has delayed ruling on the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss all charges against Flynn in order to get a third party’s views.
Sullivan’s action is unconstitutional, cruel, and an enormous abuse of his judicial power.
A federal criminal case has only two parties, the defendant and the federal prosecutors, for very fundamental reasons. The enforcement of federal law is a function of only the executive branch under Article 2 of the Constitution. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure enable some interested parties to intervene to protect their interests in civil cases. There is no analogous provision
Reply 1 - Posted by:
BarryNo 5/18/2020 5:28:47 AM (No. 414309)
He has SCOTUS chief justice Robert's to point too. That gentleman, in stead of ruling whether Obamacare was Constitutional as presented, took it upon himself to REWRITE parts of the Law as if he were the entire Legislative Branch.
Why should HE have all the fun?
50 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 5/18/2020 5:36:10 AM (No. 414314)
I find it encouraging that the DoJ is the party that should file for the writ of mandamus. It was not previously made clear that Flynn could no do it and I was wondering about backlash. Sullivan could be ticked off at the DoJ all he wants but he deserves the dope slap. What arrogance drives him to take such a clearly flawed and illegal move? It's disturbing when a judge who sits as arbiter of Constitutionality cannot see such an obvious breach of the Constitution, especially over such a pointless case over a non issue. I can understand when a judge might intervene over a broad and important issue like immigration, even though they know they have no legal leg to stand on. But Flynn's case is an absurdity. Flynn had every right to talk to the Russian ambassador. Even if he WAS guilty of "lying" to the FBI which is not true, it's a minor process crime, not a big issue sword to die on for the judge. Maybe Sullivan is angry that BO is getting sullied by the issue but that horse is already out of the barn. Sullivan has no power to fight that battle. This was just an arrogant and stupid decision.
It's time for justice for Flynn. If that path has to be cleared by driving over Sullivan, so be it. The sooner the better.
86 people like this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
WhamDBambam 5/18/2020 7:01:45 AM (No. 414364)
I have come to believe that Congress should restrict federal trial and appellate judges to hearing only personal injury and divorce cases. Unfortunately, they can't do anything about the Supreme Court's jurisdiction.
15 people like this.
Reply 4 - Posted by:
Strike3 5/18/2020 8:04:34 AM (No. 414412)
Somebody needs to check Sullivan's bank account. What does he gain by this stubborn, cruel action against Flynn?
29 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
TJ54 5/18/2020 8:18:27 AM (No. 414427)
Reply 3,
Congress could strip the Supreme Court of all power other than the original jurisdiction set forth in the US Constitution just like it could the Appellate and District Courts powers. It may be past time to do it,
14 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
Ida Lou Pino 5/18/2020 8:30:45 AM (No. 414443)
Little 0bie - - the Magnificent Lightbringer - - and former dope-addict foreign exchange student - - must be protected at all costs.
Nothing - - but NOTHING - - supersedes that.
32 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
HotRod 5/18/2020 8:54:46 AM (No. 414465)
Sullivan should face criminal charges for using taxpayer money, to hire judge John Gleeson, for unlawful and unconstitutional purposes. He cannot plead ignorance of the law. He should be indicted, prosecuted, and punished. He must be made to pay the money owed to Gleeson and removed from the bench immediately!
28 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
JunkYardDog 5/18/2020 9:01:11 AM (No. 414473)
#7 has hit right on point. The whole Flynn prosecution was the handiwork of Obama-undoing it will reveal Obama's hand in creating this abortion in the first place.
I can just see the race-baiters of the future claiming RACISM and DISCRIMINATION because black former American Presidents are OVER-REPRESENTED in prison!! Where are the former white American Presidents? Bill Clinton, for sure, should be there. Rapist.
14 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
Sunhan65 5/18/2020 9:08:32 AM (No. 414484)
#3, yes, they can. Congress can re-structure the supreme court or alter much of its jurisdiction by a simple act of legislation. Although the Constitution mandates the creation of a supreme court, with a very narrow and specific original jurisdiction (e.g. cases arising from Ambassadors), the entire federal judiciary has been created by a series of judiciary acts passed by Congress. Even the supreme court's appellate jurisdiction (The original reason it existed) is subject to "such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make...."
This is not idle speculation. Congress's 1789 Judiciary Act created the first supreme court with only six members. Congress changed its composition many times until 1869 when it settled on 9.
Congress can change the surpreme court's composition, and much of what it does, anytime it wants. They could also abolish the entire current federal district court system by simple majority vote. They don't, however. Because that would require the kind of Constitutional courage that Congress had failed to show since its inception. Instead, Congress prefers to continue to let unelected lifetime bureaucrats legislate from the bench. It gives them more to run for re-election.
11 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Rama41 5/18/2020 9:29:18 AM (No. 414506)
OK, you lawyers. What's the downside to a Writ of Mandamus from DOJ? Why would the DOJ hesitate? Enlighten us.
11 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
MDConservative 5/18/2020 9:30:26 AM (No. 414508)
Pure blather.
The Judge has every eight to know why his court was turned into a circus for two years by BOTH PARTIES. And he has every right to get to the bottom of DOJ's turnaround, as well as the reasons for the defendant Flynn TWICE maintaining his guilt in sworn pleas.
Simple fact: The trial phase that Babbin babbles about is over - Flynn pled GUILTY, supposedly of his own free will without pressure...TWICE. That's it. Government has no more to prove, never had to present evidence at trial, tainted or otherwise.
Another simple fact is that DOJ did not seek dismissal on the basis of Flynn's innocence, but based on their inability to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Read the decision. Let me know when DOJ exonerates him by saying he was framed and innocent...it hasn't happened. So the so-called crime is still outstanding...and Flynn pled GUILTY to committing it.
It's time for Flynn to man up. Tell the court exactly why he perjured himself with his two pleadings of Guilt. He can tell the judge the whole sordid story, how his son was essentially held hostage. And then he can tell the judge about his own participation in negotiations, his defense team's actions, and how he arrived at the decisions to sign false confessions. And he can ask forgiveness for lying to the court under such extenuating circumstances. I doubt anyone would assert a right to lie under oath in court for any reason.
There are two sides to this tale...and neither wants to particularly tell theirs. One wonders where the truth is in all this. Maybe, just maybe, that's what the judge is trying to ascertain.
7 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Dodge Boy 5/18/2020 9:51:50 AM (No. 414535)
Looks like Sullivan got told by Obie to put Flynn's case on hold until a "deal" could be made.
10 people like this.
Reply 13 - Posted by:
Rama41 5/18/2020 10:17:01 AM (No. 414576)
#12. Thanks.
2 people like this.
Reply 14 - Posted by:
snowoutlaw 5/18/2020 10:32:04 AM (No. 414597)
Dirty Harry would have loved this guy.
2 people like this.
Reply 15 - Posted by:
Arby 5/18/2020 10:34:36 AM (No. 414600)
And here, plain as day, is the reason why Mitch McConnell is right in focusing the majority of his energies on confirming originalist judges. The left can argue that supporting the Constitution is also 'political' but we know what we mean when we say 'political judges'. They are people who want to use the bench to create political realities that are independent of established law. This character is exhibit A. How did he ever get appointed in the first place (including by republicans)?
6 people like this.
Reply 16 - Posted by:
stablemoney 5/18/2020 10:37:47 AM (No. 414608)
There is a lot of things Flynn can do. Sidney Powell is very competent, so we should wait and see what is coming. For instance, Flynn could file countersuits against those that have framed him, which would stay any ruling in this suit, pending completion of those suits. It is never over in the legal system, until all parties quit.
4 people like this.
Reply 17 - Posted by:
moonlightflip 5/18/2020 10:44:34 AM (No. 414618)
Just waiting for Biden to win to restart dem corruption -- -- and forcing Pres. Trump to pardon Flynn. Impartial justice, my great aunt fanny!
4 people like this.
Reply 18 - Posted by:
Bohallx 5/18/2020 3:37:46 PM (No. 414957)
Some have said that the judge, up close, actually looks DERANGED.
Even from here, he looks DERANGED.
2 people like this.
Reply 19 - Posted by:
leonardo 5/18/2020 5:17:09 PM (No. 415030)
The puppeteer-seditionist from his Kalorama DC mansion has given the Rogue Judge his marching orders - taint Flynn even further, and by extension taint Trump. Maybe even prod Trump to pardon Flynn. Anti-America Obama, who characterized the Constitution as a "document of negative liberties," has a vendetta against Flynn, who threatened to "streamline" the US Intel community in an effort to de-politicize it, thus incurreing Obama's wrath who was invested in the status quo of these entities - Flynn just had to GO, and Obama was the man to do just that.
6 people like this.
Reply 20 - Posted by:
Justcurious 5/18/2020 11:48:12 PM (No. 415326)
No 12, you're off base. The DOJ believes no crime was committed, there was no falsehood...based upon the account of the original FBI agents. The FBI is guilty of misconduct, the prosecutor is guilty of misconduct. Flynn's original lawyers committed misconduct.
If Sullivan was interested in the truth, he would be examining all sides. He is seemingly focused on Flynn and incurious about anyone else's actions.
0 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "MissMolly"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)