- One of the judicial “Three Amigos” we warned about
- The judge wants some help from his posse
- Sullivan envisions himself as prosecutor and judge
- Judge Sullivan is a tyrant, beholding to neither law or consistency
Judge Puts Up Potential Roadblock to Dropping Charge Against Flynn
Unusual order invites other individuals and organizations to give views on dismissing case
– Judge Sullivan: “Oh, I’m s-o-o confused! I don’t know what to do! Asks “other” individuals and ‘organizations’ what he should do?
– Sullivan was one of those “straight-shooting”, “above reproach”, “no-nonsense” jurists both sides were sure would ‘do the right thing’
– He was nominated for judgeships by Presidents Reagan and G.W. Bush; he was named to the federal Bench by President Clinton
– In December, because Flynn’s company had been an unregistered lobbyist for Turkey, Sullivan asked prosecutors whether treason had been considered as a charge, to which they said it had not, and the judge told Flynn, “arguably you sold your country out…”
– Maybe Ilhan Omar Should be asked for her input on Flynn’s case; As an “expert” on the matter, perhaps congressperson Omar could examine the fact that, a) General Flynn is ‘white’, and Judge Sullivan is black…hmmm, and, b)former President Obama has weighed in on this case, and, well, you know….
– Bottom line, it is obvious from his remarks about Flynn’s ‘patriotism’, that the straight-shooting, above reproach, unassailably non-partisan jurist, Emmit Sullivan doesn’t like General Flynn! dlh
——
“Who’da thought?
Emmet Sullivan is one of those no-nonsense, ‘above reproach’, ‘respected’ by everyone in Washington type people us ‘flyover country’ bumpkins hear about all the time. Recall James Comey?, Bob Mueller?, Christopher Wray?, Chief Justice John Roberts?, and on and on?
Recall also the past Veritaspac article mentioned a few days ago, entitled Walton, Sullivan, Roberts: the Three Amigos of “no-nonsense” justice, Oct. 2014 ?
Judge Sullivan was one of the “amigos”.
Appointed to the federal bench by President Bill Clinton, Sullivan has, in our opinion, has served the left well, and more cleverly than your average ‘progressive’.
That might explain why he is considered such a “straight shooter”, above reproach guy. He presided over the the Ted Stevens case, where he won the hearts of Republicans in eventually deciding the Obama era federal prosecutors overreached and were found to be guilty of prosecutorial misconduct. Here’s the way Wikipedia described it:
“Sullivan presided over the 2008 trial of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens, who was convicted of seven felony ethics violations in October. During the trial, the judge refused requests by the defense for a mistrial to be declared, after information was revealed that the prosecution had withheld exculpatory Brady material.[5][6] Eight days after the guilty verdict, Stevens narrowly lost his reelection bid.[7] As more evidence of prosecutorial misconduct became known in early 2009, Judge Sullivan held four prosecutors in civil contempt of court.(Our Note: With Eric Holder’s consent) On April 1, 2009, following a Justice Department probe that found additional evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, the Department of Justice recommended that Stevens’ conviction be dismissed.[9] On April 7, 2009, Sullivan set aside the conviction and appointed a lawyer to investigate the prosecution team for criminal contempt.[10] Subsequently, one of the four prosecutors held in contempt committed suicide.[11] Ultimately, Sullivan dismissed the civil contempt charges,[12] and no additional charges were brought against the prosecutors.”
As for us, it didn’t win our hearts:
a) ‘Da judge’ refused defense requests for mistrial due to prosecutor’s “Brady violations” (should sound familiar, re: Flynn case)
b) Thus Stevens was convicted and lost his ‘surefire” reelection bid to US senate (when Obamacare passage was hanging by a thread)
c) Then later, when Stevens was ‘history’ …dead, and his senate seat was securely in Democrat hands, , a DOJ investigation found that, indeed, there was some ‘prosecutorial misconduct’. In our recollection, Sullivan was thus hailed as a non-partisan, fair-minded dude. He “set aside” the conviction of Stevens…as though that made a whit’s difference…and to top it off, Sullivan later dismissed the charge! dlh
But there is more
In 2014, Sullivan was presiding over a case, Judicial Watch v. IRS,[14] related to an ongoing investigation into the 2013 IRS controversy. There was an attempt to determine where the deleted emails of former IRS employee Lois Lerner had gone, what damage to her computer hard drive occurred, and what steps the IRS had taken to recover the information contained in the emails and on the hard drive.[15][16]Ultimately, the information iS still missing, no contempt charges were filed, case closed.
In 2015 Sullivan presided over a FOIA lawsuit involving the matter of Hillary Clinton’s private email use while Secretary of State.[17]
Ultimately, the Hillary emails are still missing; no one has been held responsible for their being destroyed, case closed (?)
According to the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a woman and her child fled domestic abuse in El Salvador to seek asylum in the U.S. However the mother was removed from her detention facility and likely put on a plane on August 9, 2018, despite Justice Department promises that she and others would not be deported before the judge could rule on their cases. Sullivan demanded, “Turn that plane around.” He threatened to hold those responsible for the removal in contempt of court, starting with Attorney General Jeff Sessions, if the situation was not rectified. A Department of Homeland Security official stated, “We are complying with the court’s requests…the plaintiffs will not disembark and will be promptly returned to the United States.” An ACLU suit challenged a recent decision by Sessions to make it nearly impossible for victims of domestic violence and gangs to qualify for asylum in the U.S. The lawsuit claims the woman and her young daughter came to the U.S. from El Salvador after twenty years of spousal abuse and her receiving death threats from a violent gang.”[18]
——
Today’s Judge Sullivan news:
JUDGE IN FLYNN CASE TO OPEN UP CASE FOR AMICUS SUBMISSIONS
D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan issued an order Tuesday indicating that he’ll soon accept “amicus curiae,” or “friend of the court” submissions, in the case of former national security adviser Michael Flynn — essentially allowing the court to use an “ask the audience” lifeline in what has already proved to be an unpredictable and chaotic prosecution.
Sullivan’s minute order indicated that an upcoming scheduling order would clarify the parameters of who specifically could submit the amicus briefs, which are submissions by non-parties that claim an interest in the case. Sullivan specifically said he anticipates that “individuals and organizations” will file briefs “for the benefit of the court.”
The move attracted some immediate criticism. The Federalist’s Sean Davis, for example, cautioned that Sullivan was inviting “left-wing lawyers write his final order against Flynn for him.”
In his order, Sullivan quoted his fellow judge on the D.C. District Court, Amy Berman Jackson, who previously admonished the parties in the case of Trump associate Roger Stone that allowing amicus submissions does not mean that the criminal case will become a “free for all.”
Flynn’s case, however, has sometimes seemed like just that. In a fireworks-filled sentencing hearing in December 2018, for example, Sullivan himself appeared open to the idea that Flynn could be charged with a death penalty-eligible offense.
“I’m not hiding my disgust, my disdain for this criminal offense,” Sullivan said during that hearing. He added that Flynn’s allegedly unregistered work with Turkey “arguably” had undermined “everything this flag over here stands for.”
The judge wants some help from his posse
Flynn’s defense team files motion against the delay
In response to Judge Emmet Sullivan announcing a delay in Flynn ruling to allow third party amicus briefs to be filed with the court, Michael Flynn’s defense counsel files a motion in opposition.
In opposition to the delay Attorney Sidney Powell notes Judge Sullivan’s earlier ruling of December 20, 2017, disallowing amicus briefs in this case.
Precedent, he don’t need no stinking precedent
Sullivan as judge and prosecutor
Misconstruing himself as the attorney for the government
The statute Sullivan cited, 18 U.S.C. § 401, reads as follows:
A court of the United States shall have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both, at its discretion, such contempt of its authority, and none other, as —
(1)Misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice;
(2)Misbehavior of any of its officers in their official transactions;
(3)Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command.
Criminal Procedure Rule 42 deals with criminal contempt proceedings. It requires, in part, that criminal contempt “be prosecuted by an attorney for the government, unless the interest of justice requires the appointment of another attorney.”
The rule also contains an escape hatch for the judge in the event the government refuses. “If the government declines the request, the court must appoint another attorney to prosecute the contempt.”
Never mind that the government has moved that prosecution and punishment was improper so now Sullivan is “prosecutor shopping” — he’s going to get his man no matter what. The problem as we see it is that the rule does not apply – Flynn’s charged offense was not against the judge but some FBI interviewers, and at that his plea was coerced. If someone connected to this case is to be charged with contempt of court it ought to be Obama, certain of his underlings, including in the FBI, and hizhonor for his contempt of justice.
