Article

2020-08-11 -Lurid Crime Tales-

Oral Arguments heard by the en banc D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals--Gen. Michael Flynn Today

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by JohnQC 2020-08-11 07:12|| || Front Page|| [5 views ] Top

#1 4-Obama appointees
3-Clinton appointees
1-G.W. Bush appointee
1-G.H.W. Bush appointee
1-Trump appointee

Did Sullivan show bias? Was a mandamus an appropriate way to resolve the claim of bias? Should Sullivan have acted as an umpire who adds more innings? Did Sullivan follow the law as established by SCOTUS? Did Sullivan act appropriately by trying to appoint Gleeson to act as what is essentially a special prosecutor. Did Sullivan act properly by establishing an amicus process to gather more information to decide whether or not to dismiss the non-case of the Justice Department? Was exculpatory Brady material withheld from Sullivan's?

Posted by JohnQC 2020-08-11 11:13|| 2020-08-11 11:13|| Front Page Top

#2 /\ Will this make the Black Robed Mafia™ look bad in the Press? My bet is on the judges closing ranks around Sullivan...

Posted by magpie 2020-08-11 12:23|| 2020-08-11 12:23|| Front Page Top

#3 Seems that way magpie. There is a tortured interpretation of the law by the appeals court which seems only to protect Sullivan from what Is a "very hard slap for judicial abuse in the appeals court" and to insert more delays into the judicial process. There seems to be little recognition of the earlier decision made by the panel of three judges.

I'm reading comments in other places and in stories about the ongoing hearing. They are not very favorable towards the D.C. District Court of Appeals. I doubt that they care.

More of "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime." Lawfare at nearly the highest level.

Posted by JohnQC 2020-08-11 13:03|| 2020-08-11 13:03|| Front Page Top

#4 Back before the fall of the Roman Empire, or something like that, a federal judge in my corner of the world had a case against what we would now call a black activist pending before him. Probably after a cocktail or two, that judge was heard to say "I'm going to get that [African-American]." His impartiality was reasonably called into question, and a second federal judge (a really great one) chose to disbelieve the first judge's denial. Story here. Other than the races being reversed and Judge Sullivan being a touch more subtle about his intentions, I don't see much difference.

Posted by Matt 2020-08-11 14:21|| 2020-08-11 14:21|| Front Page Top

#5 Other than the races being reversed and Judge Sullivan being a touch more subtle about his intentions, I don't see much difference.

The difference is that Flynn is a white male Trump guy.

The one group of people in this country with zero protections and rights.

Posted by charger 2020-08-11 14:32|| 2020-08-11 14:32|| Front Page Top

#6 Aside from affording Sullivan protection from the overt scolding as a partisan operative in this case, the judges seem likely to scurry to find a thread to return this case to Sullivan for more delaying tactics, while keeping the gag order in effect as long as possible. The are desperate for a Pardon by Trump to use for ammunition in the upcoming election as a proof of both corruption and a validation of the Russia-hoax ruse for just a little while longer. Another institutional veil slips and the clarity that Washington is so much more like Imperial Rome besides the neo-classical architecture remnants built when we were a confident, proud and united nation.

Posted by NoMoreBS 2020-08-11 14:52|| 2020-08-11 14:52|| Front Page Top

#7 This was just posted by a news site:
https://saraacarter.com/doj-lawyers-reveal-explosive-news-of-possible-evidence-that-led-barr-to-drop-charges-against-michael-flynn/

"The Justice Department attorney Jeffery Wall, along with Powell argued and answered questions of the panel that was grilling them on all the details of the case. It was during the trial that Wall hinted at the new evidence in support of Flynn.

He told the judges that Barr’s decision to drop the charges against Flynn, were in part, due to information that the DOJ hasn’t yet shared with the public. Wall said “the Attorney General sees this in the context of nonpublic information from other investigations.”

“It may be possible that the attorney general had before him information that he was not able to share with the court and so what we put in front of the court were the reasons that we could, but it may not be the whole picture available to the executive branch,” he added. “The attorney general made that decision or that judgment on the basis of lots of information. Some of it is public and fleshed out in the motion. Some of it is not.”

Posted by NoMoreBS 2020-08-11 14:59|| 2020-08-11 14:59|| Front Page Top

#8 Federal appeals court skeptical of Michael Flynn's effort to immediately dismiss criminal charge

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2020-08-11 15:46|| 2020-08-11 15:46|| Front Page Top

#9 Of course it is.

Posted by Glenmore 2020-08-11 16:14|| 2020-08-11 16:14|| Front Page Top

#10
He told the judges that Barr’s decision to drop the charges against Flynn, were in part, due to information that the DOJ hasn’t yet shared with the public.

Then Barr just double dog dared them. If and when he releases it, it will further erode any legitimacy of the courts if they continue to play this game.

Posted by Procopius2k 2020-08-11 16:25|| 2020-08-11 16:25|| Front Page Top

23:59 gorb
23:58 gorb
23:57 gorb
23:56 gorb
23:44 Muggsy Hupins6632
23:39 Phimp de Medici1706
23:36 trailing wife
23:29 Menhadden Hatfield4592
23:00 SteveS
22:56 Chris
22:55 SteveS
22:46 James
22:39 Clem
22:38 SteveS
22:35 Clem
22:15 James
21:41 USN, Ret.
21:39 USN, Ret.
21:37 USN, Ret.
21:25 Thaith Elmeresing6163
20:34 KBK
20:33 KBK
20:24 European Conservative
20:14 Chris