If you thought the Michael Flynn case could get any more bizarre, you’d be wrong.
Judge Emmet Sullivan has lost his mind. He is the presiding judge in the Michael Flynn entrapment case and he has now descended into the “Stranger Things” world of judicial activism.
Sullivan is doing his best to ignore the mountain of evidence that proves Lt. General Michael Flynn was set up from day one. Flynn is another victim of the wretched Mueller team and Sullivan has only added to that tragedy. Sullivan has totally lost it and his behavior has been nothing short of egregious. He said of Flynn
“arguably you sold your country out.”
He also questioned whether Flynn could be charged with treason. On that day Sullivan should have recused himself in favor of someone sane.
But no. he wasn’t done being stupid.
A week ago the Department of Justice decided to drop the case against Flynn in recognition of the entrapment plot:
The Justice Department on Thursday moved to drop its case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, in a stunning development that comes after internal memos were released raising serious questions about the nature of the investigation that led to Flynn’s late 2017 guilty plea of lying to the FBI.
The announcement came in a court filing “after a considered review of all the facts and circumstances of this case, including newly discovered and disclosed information,” as the department put it. DOJ officials said they concluded that Flynn’s interview by the FBI was “untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn” and that the interview was “conducted without any legitimate investigative basis.”
Thus both the prosecution and defense both want the case dismissed. Sullivan wasn’t going to have any of that. He designated a Clinton judge to argue against the dismissal
Attorney General William Barr called for Flynn’s case to be dismissed after new evidence suggested that the retired general had been set up by the FBI — but instead of dismissing the case outright, Sullivan announced that he would open the door to hear outside arguments against doing so.
Sullivan followed that announcement with an order appointing retired Judge John Gleeson, who was appointed to serve in the Eastern District of New York by former President Bill Clinton in 1994. He resigned from the bench in 2016 and returned to private practice.
Sullivan now wants Flynn charged with perjury, i.e. that Flynn lied when he pled guilty to lying to the FBI.
A former US attorney takes exception to Sullivan’s actions:
Former U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman thought he had “seen everything” over the course of his career until a federal judge opened the door Tuesday for legal experts and other outside parties to oppose the Justice Department’s motion to drop the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn.
Appearing on “Fox & Friends,” Tolman said he believed Judge Emmet Sullivan’s decision was “outrageous” and that the Washington D.C. judge had turned himself into an “activist,” willing to set aside rules, ethics, and precedent in favor of partisanship.
Sullivan is on very thin legal ice:
U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan disregarded two controlling precedents from higher courts with his decision to appoint John Gleeson as amicus curiae in the U.S. v. Michael Flynn case this week. Judicial conduct similar to J. Sullivan’s in these prior, far less politically charged cases was roundly and unanimously condemned by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, D.C. Circuit Judge Sri Srinivasan, and their colleagues across the ideological spectrum. So, whether or not one agrees with the Department of Justice’s call to drop its charges against President Trump’s former National Security Advisor, Gen. Michael Flynn, there should be widespread agreement that J. Sullivan has veered way out of line.
Gleeson is openly biased against Flynn
The same day Judge Sullivan named Judge Gleeson to serve in the amicus curiae role, the Washington Post ran an op-ed co-authored by Gleeson, entitled, “The Flynn case isn’t over until the judge says it’s over.” “The Justice Department’s move to dismiss the prosecution of former national security adviser Michael Flynn does not need to be the end of the case—and it shouldn’t be,” he opened. Then, after misrepresenting the Rule 48(b)’s “leave of court” requirement, Gleeson suggests dismissal of the Flynn case would be inappropriate because “the record reeks of improper political influence.”
In fact, the Supreme Court ruled against such actions
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled unanimously last week against the improper use of amicus briefs by judges to shape a court case as they wish — which is what Judge Emmet G. Sullivan is doing, critics say, in the ongoing Michael Flynn case.
On Tuesday, Judge Sullivan announced that he would accept amicus briefs about whether he should grant the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) motion to dismiss the case against Flynn. On Wednesday, Sullivan went a step further, appointing retired judge John Gleeson as amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) to argue against dismissal, and to argue Flynn be held in criminal contempt.
(Gleeson had already expressed his views in an op-ed in the Washington Post on Monday, attacking the DOJ’s motion.)
But last week, in the case of U.S. v. Sineneng-Smith, the Supreme Court held that the Ninth Circuit acted improperly by appointing three amici and directing them to brief issues that the judges wanted to consider — but the litigants had not raised.
Sullivan is ignoring the precedents. Will Chamberlain notes that Sullivan is bound by them.
Rachel Maddow was hoping that Judge Sullivan would refuse to dismiss the charges against General Flynn
That won't work
Judge Sullivan is bound by DC Circuit law, which PROHIBITS district court judges from second-guessing a decision not to prosecute because doing so is lenient pic.twitter.com/V2aCvYz7pV
— Will Chamberlain (@willchamberlain) May 8, 2020
Mike Cernovich is filing an ethics complaint against Sullivan
Judge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn. This is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules. We will be filing a complaint against Sullivan.
— Cernovich (@Cernovich) May 13, 2020
More on Sullivan’s unethical actions from Margot Cleveland and Jonathan Turley
Robert Mueller assembled a corrupt team of lawyers to who set out not for anything resembling justice, but instead were out to destroy Donald Trump and his Presidency. One of those corrupt lawyers, the point person for the Flynn trial, was Brandon Van Grack.
Back in January, AG Bill Barr appointed Jeff Jensen, the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, to be a Special Prosecutor for the Flynn case and to review it. Jensen did so, and on April 24 Barr handed a collection of selaed douments to Flynn’s lawyer Sidney Powell. There was a bombshell in them.
Van Grack lied to the court.
Van Grack made a side deal with Covington and Burling (Eric Holder’s law firm) :
The prosecutors had threatened to charge both Flynn and his son, Mike Flynn Jr., with multiple felony crimes related to illegal lobbying and assign them both stiff prison sentences unless Flynn agreed to plead guilty to the far less serious crime of making a false statement during an interview with federal agents.
The huge problem here for the Mueller Special Counsel and Flynn’s former lawyers was that this secret side deal to force Flynn into a guilty plea by threatening his son was not disclosed to the court. Lead prosecutor Brandon Van Grack had filed an official plea agreement with the court in which he swore that every deal or any understanding reached between the prosecution and the defense was contained in writing within that document.
Prosecutors are bound by law to disclose all deals.
A key paragraph in the plea deal agreement between Flynn’s lawyers and the Mueller Special Counsel clearly states:
“No agreements, promises, understandings, or representations have been made by the parties or their counsel other than those contained in writing herein, nor will any such agreements, promises, understandings, or representations be made unless committed to writing and signed by your client, defense counsel, and the Special Counsel’s Office.”
On May 7, Van Grack withdrew from the case.
This is one big clusterf**k. I wish I knew recommended Covington to Michael Flynn. Covington has been hiding documents from Flynn and the court repeatedly. They are working against Flynn and Flynn’s Constitutional rights are being murdered. It’s a sad day for the rule of law when the government and your own lawyers are working to get you framed.
Thank God for Sidney Powell.
Sol Wisenberg, a frequent guest on The Ingraham Angle, opined that Sullivan is attempting to force Trump to pardon Flynn.
Emmet Sullivan should thrown off the Flynn case and frankly, disbarred. He is out of his mind.