• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Two angry Republican Judges go after Emmett Sullivan

apdst said:
Sullivan has no authority over Barr.
Click to expand...

Oh, so now the Attorney General is also above the law. Are you of the opinion that all cabinet members are also immune from prosecution?

I personally would like Sullivan to subpoena Barr and all the DOJ attorneys who prosecuted Flynn and let them have at each other. Let the fur fly!
 
apdst said:
I bet you never thought the charges against Flynn would get dropped, either.
Click to expand...

Didn't follow the trial, I could give two ***** about Flynn. This caught my eye due to Barr's continued perversion of the rule of law.

You see Flynn, I do not believe he would invite me to dinner. Give me the time of day. Know my name. I believe we mutually do not give a **** about each other.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
Oh, so now the Attorney General is also above the law. Are you of the opinion that all cabinet members are also immune from prosecution?

I personally would like Sullivan to subpoena Barr and all the DOJ attorneys who prosecuted Flynn and let them have at each other. Let the fur fly!
Click to expand...

The only possibility is during the appeal process, in front of appelate court, Sullivan's attorney calls Barr as a witness involving Judge Sullivan's case to not dismiss, without an amicus brief.
 
Stealers Wheel said:
Oh, so now the Attorney General is also above the law. Are you of the opinion that all cabinet members are also immune from prosecution?

I personally would like Sullivan to subpoena Barr and all the DOJ attorneys who prosecuted Flynn and let them have at each other. Let the fur fly!
Click to expand...

What law gives a judge authority over the AG? Post it.
 
jamesbyoung said:
Sullivan is in charge, not Barr.

No exculpatory evidence was withheld; Flynn lied, which he offense he admitted under oath twice.

Judges are not going to overthrow the rule of law for Trump and Barr.

Judge Sullivan is going to fare well exceedingly.
Click to expand...

^^^^^
 
apdst said:
I bet you never thought the charges against Flynn would get dropped, either.
Click to expand...

They are not dropped. Only a motion to do so has been made, and the Judge does not at all inclined to grant the motion.

And I own all the bridges.
 
jamesbyoung said:
They are not dropped. Only a motion to do so has been made, and the Judge does not at all inclined to grant the motion.

And I own all the bridges.
Click to expand...

The judge can't force the DOJ to prosecute the case.
 
jamesbyoung said:
They are not dropped. Only a motion to do so has been made, and the Judge does not at all inclined to grant the motion.

And I own all the bridges.
Click to expand...

per the dc courts own ruling he has no choice but to accept.

With specific regard to Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which requires “leave of court” to dismiss criminal charges against a defendant, J. Srinivasan said, “[D]ecisions to dismiss pending criminal charges … lie squarely within the ken of prosecutorial discretion.” And the leave of court language “gives no power to a district court to deny a prosecutor’s Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the prosecution’s exercise of charging authority. For instance, a court cannot deny leave of court because of a view that the defendant should stand trial notwithstanding the prosecution’s desire to dismiss the charges[.]”

sorry but as we all know buying bridges is a scam and you fell for it. you own nothing.

ps this was the dc court of appeals. you know the same court that is asking sullivan to justify himself.

this is why you need to look up facts.
 
apdst said:
What law gives a judge authority over the AG? Post it.
Click to expand...

The law that keeps this case active. If it were not so, Barr would gone to get Flynn himself and escorted him out of the courtroom. But that didn't happen. Apparently, AG Barr is under the impression that he can be held in contempt. I wonder why that is?
 
apdst said:
The judge can't force the DOJ to prosecute the case.
Click to expand...

What is left for the prosecution to do? They convinced Flynn to plead guilty, to allocute his crimes under oath and in front of the judge, and the judge accepted the plea deal. As far as I can tell, the only thing left is the sentencing. Who is responsible for the sentencing of the defendant?
 
Stealers Wheel said:
What is left for the prosecution to do? They convinced Flynn to plead guilty, to allocute his crimes under oath and in front of the judge, and the judge accepted the plea deal. As far as I can tell, the only thing left is the sentencing. Who is responsible for the sentencing of the defendant?
Click to expand...

The ball is in the judge's court. There are a number of motions that he has yet to rule on, for example a four month old motion by the defense to change Flynn's plea.

Yeah...it's about time a higher court make Sullivan explain himself.
 
Sand Castle said:
The lawyer for Sullivan will present the legal need for amicus briefs. This is not a disciplinary matter.

The appelate judges will determine whether Sullivan used the law correctly. If not, Flynn case dismissed.
If yes, amicus briefs.

Appelate courts are not inplace to censor or punish judges.
Click to expand...

Not true.

Keep in mind that this same DC court system is the one who told the first judge in this Flynn case to recuse himself back on December 7, 2017.

This appellate court certainly has the power to do that to Sullivan now.
 
Learn the law, ludin, because your understanding is speculatively very shallow.

ludin said:
per the dc courts own ruling he has no choice but to accept.

With specific regard to Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, which requires “leave of court” to dismiss criminal charges against a defendant, J. Srinivasan said, “[D]ecisions to dismiss pending criminal charges … lie squarely within the ken of prosecutorial discretion.” And the leave of court language “gives no power to a district court to deny a prosecutor’s Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss charges based on a disagreement with the prosecution’s exercise of charging authority. For instance, a court cannot deny leave of court because of a view that the defendant should stand trial notwithstanding the prosecution’s desire to dismiss the charges[.]”

sorry but as we all know buying bridges is a scam and you fell for it. you own nothing.

ps this was the dc court of appeals. you know the same court that is asking sullivan to justify himself.

this is why you need to look up facts.
Click to expand...
 
Mycroft said:
Not true.

Keep in mind that this same DC court system is the one who told the first judge in this Flynn case to recuse himself back on December 7, 2017.

This appellate court certainly has the power to do that to Sullivan now.
Click to expand...

Nope.
 
jamesbyoung said:
Nope.
Click to expand...

Oh?

Are you denying that the first judge in the Flynn case was recused by the court? Or are you just unaware that actually happened?
 
Sand Castle said:
To kick Judge Sullivans ass, would set an interesting precedent. The three appelate judges, if they just kick ass, would then begin a new justice system.

The two angry Republican judges plus one, single handedly, would set a precedent allowing a politically appointed Attorney General to re-write an investigation and trial. An investigation and trial started under a different AG.

AG Bill Barr in coordination with Powell the defendants attorney, eliminated career prosecutors in the case, judges decisions were polluted inorder to torpedo the case that had been tried and conviction.

I am not convinced that Judges are inclined to undermine their own authority and judicial independence.

So, for another hypothetical ass kicking and with Judge Sullivan hiring a high powered attorney, may we soon see Trump defense attorney Barr under oath.

Barr under oath explaining why he discounted Judge Sullivans rulings, undermined his own career prosecutors, ignored the Horowitcz report, had private discussions with Flynn's attorney Powell and then hired a cronie to make the ends justify his means.

And then under oath Barr explaining how he defends: Barr argued that the lie that Flynn was prosecuted for telling investigators wasn't actually "material" or influential to an investigation. They did not have a basis for a counterintelligence investigation against Flynn at that stage," Barr said, referring to the FBI

Barr can also explain what this has to do with justice: "Well, history is written by the winner," Barr replied. "So it largely depends on who's writing the history.

Under oath: Jeff Jensen -- the US attorney Barr named to review the handling of the Flynn case who said Thursday that he recommended that the case be dismissed

Barr defends dropping Flynn case: 'I'm doing the law's bidding' - CNNPolitics

Under oath: Barr “twisted my words” to justify dropping Flynn case, former top Justice Department official says
There was no disagreement on whether Flynn's false statements were a "counterintelligence threat," Mary McCord says

Barr “twisted my words” to justify dropping Flynn case, former top Justice Department official says | Salon.com

Shea under oath: Note that just Acting US Attorney Timothy Shea signed this filing, SHEA CLAIMS THERE’S NEW MATERIAL BUT POINTS TO NONE
As noted, Shea repeatedly justifies this move by claiming there is “newly discovered” material. offered none.

To Justify Dismissing Mike Flynn's Prosecution, Timothy Shea Claims Information DOJ Has Always Had Is "New" | emptywheel

Under oath- The Justice Department prosecutor, Brandon Van Grack
Click to expand...

There was never a reason to go after Flynn other than Obama hating his guts, and Comey's goons looking for brownie points within the party.

It was a sham from the get go.

Did the FBI target Michael Flynn to protect Obama's policies, not national security? | TheHill
 
Sand Castle said:
The lawyer for Sullivan will present the legal need for amicus briefs. This is not a disciplinary matter.

The appelate judges will determine whether Sullivan used the law correctly. If not, Flynn case dismissed.
If yes, amicus briefs.

Appelate courts are not inplace to censor or punish judges.
Click to expand...

I dont think the absence of amicus briefs will have any effect on Sullivans authority to decide on the Justice Department attempts to prevent amicus briefs from being presented.
 
Mycroft said:
Not true.

Keep in mind that this same DC court system is the one who told the first judge in this Flynn case to recuse himself back on December 7, 2017.

This appellate court certainly has the power to do that to Sullivan now.
Click to expand...

that is a possibilty, I guess
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom