Trying mightily to avoid Trump’s having to pardon Flynn. If this goes on for a few more weeks or months, Trump will get impatient and preemptively pardon him.
20 Likes
“The district court has no authority to adopt the role of prosecutor or change the issues in the case…"
Oh, that’s rich. Last I checked, he pleaded guilty (twice?) to a crime. It’s the judge’s job to pass sentence, not play prosecutor.
20 Likes
From the above, ““The district court has no authority to adopt the role of prosecutor or change the issues in the case by inviting or appointing amici to perform the investigation or prosecution that the court deems appropriate,” the filing said.”
Is it not squarely in the district courts interest if the defendant committed perjury? Is that not squarely in their interest? One would think the it is also in the interest of this district court how the prosecution presented it’s case, in totality, from beginning to end. In this case the original prosecutors have left the case because of interference from the current DOJ. Again is it not in the district courts interest to play the proper role of the court in this case and rule on the presentations, the presenters, and the defendants actions, submitions, etc. in this particular case?
If the DC appelate court takes the case, which I think by all reasonable standards it should not, is that not the court that RAO just got appointed to? If so, we can expect a 2-1 decision with RAO in the minority with some crazy legal theory pushed by the most partisan of judges, in this case all the Trump appointees. Oh, and RAO is a crap jurist.
6 Likes
Who would argue to the appeals court on behalf of the lower court? Gleeson? Sullivan himself? Honest question.
11 Likes
“Trump will get impatient and preemptively pardon him”
"“Doing what feels good, what’s convenient, what’s easy — that’s how little kids think,”
Barack Obama 5/16/2020.
23 Likes
Good luck with that. My guess is the DC Circuit will hand this one right back to Judge Sullivan to proceed on.
14 Likes
So let’s see… General Flynn lied to the FBI (a felony) then he lied about lying to the FBI (got him fired) and if his confession about lying to the FBI was a lie, then he lied to the judge (perjury). No wonder the judge does not want to dismiss the case. Back in frontier days, if a cavalry officer disgraced his uniform they would cut off his buttons, break his sword, and drive him from the fort. If it was me, I would just LOCK HIM UP.
22 Likes
As previously noted, the rules do not prohibit it – mostly because they do not contemplate a DOJ as thoroughly corrupted as the one we’re saddled with at the moment.
20 Likes
In a court filing from before the Gleeson appointment, Flynn’s lawyers assert that the intervention of third parties would be unconstitutional. They write: “A criminal case is a dispute between the United States and a criminal defendant … For the Court to allow another to stand in the place of the government would be a violation of the separation of powers.”
This is constitutional nonsense. Neither the parties filing briefs, nor the retired judge advising Sullivan, are “stand[ing] in the place of the government.” They are, rather, providing information and counsel. But there is more here at stake: In monitoring the integrity of Flynn’s prosecution, Sullivan is also working to preserve the integrity of the court system he represents. In doing so, Sullivan’s effort to protect the integrity of the prosecution is an important reminder that prosecution is an executive function, but it’s a judicial one too.
The idea that federal prosecution is exclusively an executive-branch concern is not accurate. The public prosecutor was generally a far less significant government figure throughout the late 18th and most of the 19th centuries than it is today, and most definitely not seen as an inherent bearer of executive power in 1789. The British common-law tradition was one of private prosecution. Although a variety of public prosecutors appeared during the colonial period, private prosecution in the United States persisted throughout much of the 19th century. The early version of the public prosecutor in the United States was considered a judicial officer. In Joan Jacoby’s 1980 The American Prosecutor: A Search for Identity , still a leading history of American prosecutors, she explains: “At the beginning of the nineteenth century in America, the district attorney was viewed as a minor figure in the court, an adjunct to the judge. His position was primarily judicial, and perhaps only quasi-executive.”
Early state constitutions bear out the quasi-judicial character of government lawyering. These constitutions commonly authorized state legislatures to appoint certain civil officers directly or to determine by statute how officers should be appointed. The likeliest officials to be singled out this way were state fiscal officers and attorneys general. Six of the first 13 state constitutions mention an attorney general specifically, and each speaks of the attorney general in the same breath as it refers to state judges.
13 Likes
Chump: “How do I know she isn’t a Russian agent? Because I am one, and she is never at any of the meetings”
29 Likes
It’s OK. He’s a Republican.
1 Like
The request for Mandamus complains of (among other things) the district court’s “failure to grant” the government’s motion to dismiss. Usually, an appeal complains about the “denial” of a motion.
The difference is important. Review is inappropriate here because the district court has not denied the motion to dismiss and in fact may never do so.
The real purpose of this request for mandamus it to prevent the district court from unearthing the facts about the dismissal before ruling on it. That could be embarrassing.
21 Likes
They keep forgetting that Flynn pleaded guilty and confirmed his wrongdoing on the record, twice. The only thing left to do was for the judge to sentence him, and that is in the judge’s discretion, not the DOJ. They can ask to disregard the guilty plea and dismiss the underlying charge, they can’t demand it. The judge is allowed to dismiss their specious motion.
The only real question is whether the judge can appoint an amici to essentially take the advocacy role the DOJ has belatedly abandoned.
19 Likes
Another episode in “Let’s Tribalize the Court System” produced and directed by Mitch “Moscow” McConnell.
25 Likes
This is a 2000 to 1 gambit.
7 Likes
It’s OK for the GOP to lie and lie, according to the GOP.
6 Likes
Oh, yes, and as I posted in The Hive, he’s already criticizing Judge Sullivan. Me? I think he should have just kept his mouth shut.
29 Likes
I’m sure it’s also the same sugar daddy who paid Trump’s $25,000,000 to his Trump university claimants!
3 Likes
Bad Call
Especially in light of Sullivan’s latest move.
“You move too fast…you lose your cool.”
6 Likes
Who would argue to the appeals court on behalf of the lower court? … Honest question.
And a very good question it is. Flynn’s lawyers may have just given the court (district or appeals) a most excellent reason for appointing an amicus. How else can this request for Mandamus be argued?
22 Likes