Black Judge in Flynn case continues to defy higher court order to drop the flawed case

[RaleBulgarian]

Maybe so, but the judge also appears to be racist by the same loose standard.

Help stop the propagation of race-baiting narratives. Vote republican in 2020.

“Loose standard”?!? Trump qualifies as a racist by the most stringent standards imaginable.

 

[Aurora]

Bigotry is more stylish among the right wing.

your goto default.

 

[ultmd]

Judge Sullivan's suspect attitudes towards whites are just as relevant as Trump's suspect attitudes towards blacks if we are going to legitimize suspect attitudes.

Sulivan's "suspect attitudes toward whites"? Like what? Be specific. What is "suspect" (to bigots and racists) is ANY black man presiding over ANY white man. That's the real issue here.

I'm still waiting for you to identify Sullivan's "suspect attitudes toward whites". Why do you keep running from that challenge?

First you thought it necessary to inject Sullivan's race into the issue, but when challenged to explain...you started running like a bad kid. Why?

Then you suggested that Sullivan, the LIFELONG CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN who was appointed to the D.C. court by Reagan...then elevated to the D.C. Court of Appeals by Bush...is focused on appeasing Democrats. And when that LIE was challenged, you started shifting your story and running away. Why?

So why are you so afraid to answer my questions? Could it be that the answer to both is that Sullivan is African-American, and you ASSUMED the rest?

I think so.

Typical white natty "logic". :lamo

Am I right?

:lamo
No, you're a white natty.

Democrats have been falsely accusing Trump and his administration of racism.

Democrats, Liberals and Republicans of decent moral fiber have correctly identified Trump as a racist. His history of racism dates back to the 70's. He was raised that way, by a father who was once arrested at a KKK riot against Catholics. He has governed as president, as a racist. Anyone who doesn't see Trump as a racist....is either a fool, or a racist himself. Which are you?

Could this be why the black judge refuses to obey the court order to drop the charges against a former Trump official?

:lamo
Don't try to pretend you understand the legal aspects here. Judge Sullivan is completely within is authority as the presiding judge in this case. There is no "court order" for him to do anything. Stop saying stupid things. It makes you seem stupid.

Again...what is clear about this case is that YOU are so obsessed with race that you are triggered by Sullivan's.

It bears consideration.

Only to bigots and racists, and other angry, white-grievance types, like you.

To everyone else, your "logic" is very thinly-veiled, at best. It makes one wonder why people like you, who hold such strongly bigoted personal views, never have the balls to just OWN them, and stand behind them. Why are you people such cowards about this? It makes no sense to be ignorant bigots...and then pretend not to be.

CNBC has really declined in the last ten years, and I was hoping they wouldn't hire another 'fake' journalist like John Harwood (who has found his proper leftwing home at CNN). Oh well, its now a network of politicized crap and virtue posturing drivel.

 

[marke]

“Loose standard”?!? Trump qualifies as a racist by the most stringent standards imaginable.

"Stringent standard?" What stringent standard, democrat mob opinion without facts? If democrats can accuse anyone they like of racism without reasonable facts, then why cannot republicans accuse democrats of racism with plenty of facts and evidence?

Help restore honesty and integrity in virulent mob assessments of others. Vote republican in 2020.

 

[CaughtInThe]

i think big fonts help the Trump/Republican/Confederate cause.

 

[marke]

Sulivan's "suspect attitudes toward whites"? Like what? Be specific. What is "suspect" (to bigots and racists) is ANY black man presiding over ANY white man. That's the real issue here.

I'm still waiting for you to identify Sullivan's "suspect attitudes toward whites". Why do you keep running from that challenge?

First you thought it necessary to inject Sullivan's race into the issue, but when challenged to explain...you started running like a bad kid. Why?

Then you suggested that Sullivan, the LIFELONG CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN who was appointed to the D.C. court by Reagan...then elevated to the D.C. Court of Appeals by Bush...is focused on appeasing Democrats. And when that LIE was challenged, you started shifting your story and running away. Why?

So why are you so afraid to answer my questions? Could it be that the answer to both is that Sullivan is African-American, and you ASSUMED the rest?

I think so.

Typical white natty "logic". :lamo


:lamo
No, you're a white natty.


Democrats, Liberals and Republicans of decent moral fiber have correctly identified Trump as a racist. His history of racism dates back to the 70's. He was raised that way, by a father who was once arrested at a KKK riot against Catholics. He has governed as president, as a racist. Anyone who doesn't see Trump as a racist....is either a fool, or a racist himself. Which are you?


:lamo
Don't try to pretend you understand the legal aspects here. Judge Sullivan is completely within is authority as the presiding judge in this case. There is no "court order" for him to do anything. Stop saying stupid things. It makes you seem stupid.

Again...what is clear about this case is that YOU are so obsessed with race that you are triggered by Sullivan's.



Only to bigots and racists, and other angry, white-grievance types, like you.

To everyone else, your "logic" is very thinly-veiled, at best. It makes one wonder why people like you, who hold such strongly bigoted personal views, never have the balls to just OWN them, and stand behind them. Why are you people such cowards about this? It makes no sense to be ignorant bigots...and then pretend not to be.

How can we know whether a public official is racist or not? Certainly not by blind mob assessment based upon political bias. Let me suggest this: Black Lives Matter leaders openly advocate the dishonest removal of President Trump. Those people are proponents of Black privilege over other races because they angrily reject memes like "cops' lives matter' or 'all lives matter.' I refer to that kind of attitude as black racism.

Is Sullivan sympathetic towards black racist views? Who knows? But we can see that he is prejudiced against Trump and sides with the BLM crowd Trump-haters and democrat enemies of Trump who dishonestly and crookedly framed and prosecuted Flynn in efforts to hurt Trump. That makes him guilty of partisan bias, whether racist or not.

Help restore respect for the office of the President of the US and for good judgment in the judicial system. Vote republican in 2020.

 

[maxparrish]

Sulivan's "suspect attitudes toward whites"? Like what? Be specific. What is "suspect" (to bigots and racists) is ANY black man presiding over ANY white man. That's the real issue here.

I'm still waiting for you to identify Sullivan's "suspect attitudes toward whites". Why do you keep running from that challenge?

First you thought it necessary to inject Sullivan's race into the issue, but when challenged to explain...you started running like a bad kid. Why?

Then you suggested that Sullivan, the LIFELONG CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN who was appointed to the D.C. court by Reagan...then elevated to the D.C. Court of Appeals by Bush...is focused on appeasing Democrats. And when that LIE was challenged, you started shifting your story and running away. Why?

So why are you so afraid to answer my questions? Could it be that the answer to both is that Sullivan is African-American, and you ASSUMED the rest?

I think so.

Typical white natty "logic". :lamo


:lamo
No, you're a white natty.


Democrats, Liberals and Republicans of decent moral fiber have correctly identified Trump as a racist. His history of racism dates back to the 70's. He was raised that way, by a father who was once arrested at a KKK riot against Catholics. He has governed as president, as a racist. Anyone who doesn't see Trump as a racist....is either a fool, or a racist himself. Which are you?


:lamo
Don't try to pretend you understand the legal aspects here. Judge Sullivan is completely within is authority as the presiding judge in this case. There is no "court order" for him to do anything. Stop saying stupid things. It makes you seem stupid.

Again...what is clear about this case is that YOU are so obsessed with race that you are triggered by Sullivan's.



Only to bigots and racists, and other angry, white-grievance types, like you.

To everyone else, your "logic" is very thinly-veiled, at best. It makes one wonder why people like you, who hold such strongly bigoted personal views, never have the balls to just OWN them, and stand behind them. Why are you people such cowards about this? It makes no sense to be ignorant bigots...and then pretend not to be.

I have no idea why a quote by me, on another subject, is included in your post to Marke.

 

[calamity]

Will an American judge defy the law to illegally and immorally pursue a political agenda? Obviously.

What is his motivation? To please democrats? To further vent his vengeful wrath against an innocent victim he despises? Congress needs to impeach this lawless bozo.

Michael Flynn Case: Judge Refuses to Dismiss Case | National Review

Judge Emmett Sullivan refuses to roll over on DC Circuit Flynn ruling. Asks for En Banc hearing before the Appellate Court. If denied, it likely ends. If accepted, this could go on for some time.


Democrats falsely claim Trump is prejudiced against blacks, even though they have no actual evidence to support that felonious claim. However, it looks like this clown of a judge must be prejudiced against whites. Can we not safely draw that conclusion from the facts?

Why did you chose such a racist title?

 

[RAMOSS]

Plenty, but remember... you are the racist (as well as I, and anyone else not "very conservative.")

And, black people who take special precautions not to be shot by police are racist.

 

[ultmd]

How can we know whether a public official is racist or not? Certainly not by blind mob assessment based upon political bias.

You're blinded by racism and ignorance.

You're accusing a LIFELONG CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN judge (and long-standing Federalist Society member, btw) of being a racist, simply because he's black.

And you don't have the balls to just own up to that. It's pathetic.

If there is one thing I've learned over the years it's that the most vocal bigots and racists are ALWAYS the most gutless ones.

Let me suggest this: Black Lives Matter leaders openly advocate the dishonest removal of President Trump. Those people are proponents of Black privilege over other races because they angrily reject memes like "cops' lives matter' or 'all lives matter.' I refer to that kind of attitude as black racism.

Moronic comments.

First, you inject the race of the judge into it...now you bring #BLM into this discussion about the Flynn trial? You are not a rational human being.

Sorry, but your ignorant "suggestions" happen to be BOTH baseless and irrelevant to this discussion.

The reality of this is that the people who respond to "Black Lives Matter" with "cops lives matter" and "all lives matter" tend to be a bunch of ignorant, fragile, pathetic little white dudes who would never have the balls to stand behind their words in public.

Is Sullivan sympathetic towards black racist views? Who knows?

Too late for this weasel talk now. You've already accused Sullivan of "racist attitudes/behavior toward whites".

But we can see that he is prejudiced against Trump and sides with the BLM crowd Trump-haters and democrat enemies of Trump who dishonestly and crookedly framed and prosecuted Flynn in efforts to hurt Trump. That makes him guilty of partisan bias, whether racist or not.

Moronic nonsense.

When you say "We", you mean "me and other white nationalist loser types", right?

Help restore respect for the office of the President of the US and for good judgment in the judicial system. Vote republican in 2020. [/QUOTE]

You're going to be one sad puppy on November 4.

:lamo

 

[marke]

Why did you chose such a racist title?

I am just as angry at black racism as blacks are at white racism.

 

[marke]

And, black people who take special precautions not to be shot by police are racist.

Black people who murder cops for being white cops are racist savage barbarian baboons. Black people who burn down American businesses because they think some cop did a black man wrong are idiots.

 

[marke]

You're blinded by racism and ignorance.

You're accusing a LIFELONG CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN judge (and long-standing Federalist Society member, btw) of being a racist, simply because he's black.

And you don't have the balls to just own up to that. It's pathetic.

If there is one thing I've learned over the years it's that the most vocal bigots and racists are ALWAYS the most gutless ones.



Moronic comments.

First, you inject the race of the judge into it...now you bring #BLM into this discussion about the Flynn trial? You are not a rational human being.

Sorry, but your ignorant "suggestions" happen to be BOTH baseless and irrelevant to this discussion.

The reality of this is that the people who respond to "Black Lives Matter" with "cops lives matter" and "all lives matter" tend to be a bunch of ignorant, fragile, pathetic little white dudes who would never have the balls to stand behind their words in public.



Too late for this weasel talk now. You've already accused Sullivan of "racist attitudes/behavior toward whites".



Help restore respect for the office of the President of the US and for good judgment in the judicial system. Vote republican in 2020.

You're going to be one sad puppy on November 4.

:lamo[/QUOTE]

I'm not accusing Sullivan of racism so much as I am pointing out that accusing Sullivan of racism is just as easy as accusing Trump of racism. However, I am accusing Sullivan of bias because if he was not corrupted by bias he would have dropped the Flynn case like he was told by court order to do.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

"Stringent standard?" What stringent standard, democrat mob opinion without facts? If democrats can accuse anyone they like of racism without reasonable facts, then why cannot republicans accuse democrats of racism with plenty of facts and evidence?

Your post makes as much sense as the old cartoon Peanuts teacher.

 

[ultmd]

I'm not accusing Sullivan of racism so much as I am pointing out that accusing Sullivan of racism is just as easy as accusing Trump of racism.

You are really crab-walking now!

From your own OP:

Democrats falsely claim Trump is prejudiced against blacks, even though they have no actual evidence to support that felonious claim. However, it looks like this clown of a judge must be prejudiced against whites. Can we not safely draw that conclusion from the facts?

From your own post #13:

In order to show his apparent animus towards whites it is important to mention that he shows signs of being a racist black man.

Help put an end to black hatred and racism against whites. Vote republican in 2020.

From your own post #102:

Judge Sullivan's suspect attitudes towards whites...

Marke, it seems that you lie so much...and so casually...that you are all but incapable of being honest and forthcoming.

Throughout this entire thread, you have tried (and hilariously FAILED) to present Judge Sullivan as a racist. In fact, you have LIED or spoken in ignorance about everything you've said, thus far.

• -You thought he was a Democratic judge (simply because he's African-American) who was trying to "please Democrats", when in FACT, Sullivan is a LIFELONG CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICAN and Federalist Society member who owe his appointments to RONALD REAGAN and George Bush. So your OP was both ignorant, and dishonest.
• -You claimed that a federal judge is obligated to follow the edicts of the DOJ...which is just pure ignorance.
• -You suggested that Sullivan has a history of prejudice "attitudes" against whites...with ZERO evidence.
• -You claimed that Sullivan's conduct/behavior/decisions thus far are "illegal"...which is both ignorant and a lie.

And that's just a few of what could be a much longer list of moronic arguments from you in this thread.

Now lately, been trying to modify and walk away from your earlier remarks. But that's not going to work for you, either.

However, I am accusing Sullivan of bias because if he was not corrupted by bias he would have dropped the Flynn case like he was told by court order to do.

This is such a simple-minded "analysis".

A federal judge's job is to evaluate all sides of a case. No federal judge is obliged to obey the wishes of the prosecution...EVER. That is not how our system of justice works. Just like Sullivan is charged to evaluate the merit of the plaintiff's case and the professional conduct of the plaintiff's counsel, so too is he charged with doing the same with respect to the prosecution. In this case, there is EXTREMELY STRONG evidence of "corruption and bias" coming from the DOJ's legal team, not the plaintiff's legal team. So Sullivan is doing the right thing. There are no signs of "bias" on his part. None. If there were, he would have been removed from the case by his peers on the D.C. Court of Appeals. The FACT that that has not happened, LITERALLY discredits your entire bat-shat-crazy, white-grievance, white-victimhood conspiracy theory.

And for all of the ignorant white-grievance, white-victimhood types out there who might share your FauxNews inspired grievance iwith Judge Sullivan about this issue...let me remind that Sullivan is considered such a solid conservative that he was actually the "other" black judge in consideration at the time.

But now...he's a "racist Democrat" with "animus toward whites"...:roll:

You white grievance, white-victimhood types are so darned transparent...you're practically translucent.:lamo

 

[ludin]

Nobody can justly deny this case is not about justice but is about partisan politics. All sorts of criminal wrongdoings have been given passes from prosecution on technicalities, so when chasrges are not dropped on an innocent man you know there is something crooked going on behind the scenes.

Appeals court shows skepticism about forcing lower court to drop Flynn case | WLNS 6 News

Judge Neomi Rao asked Beth Wilkinson, who appeared as counsel on behalf of Sullivan, what Gleeson’s appointment signified, since many have leveled the criticism that his involvement in the case is tainted by politics. Days before Sullivan announced his involvement, Gleeson co-authored an op-ed in The Washington Post criticizing the Justice Department’s decision to drop Flynn’s charges.

This is what is called a strawman argument.

No where did i argue that it was 100% political. Everyone but the leftist know that this was a political hit job at this point.

What i argued is and that you argued to begin with is that Sullivan is in violation.
He isn't. He 100% has the right to request a full court review.
If the court doesn't hear it then he must abide by the panel ruling.

Until this court rules on whether or not they will hear it he hasn't broke any laws yet.

 

[ludin]

Democrats had a 'right' to impeach Trump without a cause and this judge has a 'right' to refuse to obey court order to drop the case if he insists on taking matters into his own hands which violate standard judicial practices. But these kinds of bitter partisan moves are not healthy for America in any stretch of the imagination.

Help restore impartial, fair and righteous judgment to our political and judicial systems. Vote republican in 2020.

He is not refusing to obey a court order. He has appeal the panel decision to the full court which he is allowed to do.

 

[ludin]

But, I believe it will be reviewed

what you believe or not believe is irrelevant. Unless there is due cause the full court won't take it up.
They usually do not take up en blanc hearings. this time it could be different due to the nature of this case.

there is a slim chance but it is slim. It depends on whether or not the court sides with politics or the law.
if they side with politics they will take it up.
if they side with the law they will decline.

 

[marke]

This is such a simple-minded "analysis".

A federal judge's job is to evaluate all sides of a case. No federal judge is obliged to obey the wishes of the prosecution...EVER. That is not how our system of justice works. Just like Sullivan is charged to evaluate the merit of the plaintiff's case and the professional conduct of the plaintiff's counsel, so too is he charged with doing the same with respect to the prosecution. In this case, there is EXTREMELY STRONG evidence of "corruption and bias" coming from the DOJ's legal team, not the plaintiff's legal team. So Sullivan is doing the right thing. There are no signs of "bias" on his part. None. If there were, he would have been removed from the case by his peers on the D.C. Court of Appeals. The FACT that that has not happened, LITERALLY discredits your entire bat-shat-crazy, white-grievance, white-victimhood conspiracy theory.

It is not the judge's job to try a case even if the prosecutor and Department of Justice drops it. Sullivan is taking matters in his own hands and he is doubly to be blamed because he has to defy a court order to keep doing his own stupid and illegal thing here.

He needs to be removed from the bench. He is giving judges a bad name by committing such immoral and unethical acts of pure partisanship hatred.

 

[marke]

This is what is called a strawman argument.

No where did i argue that it was 100% political. Everyone but the leftist know that this was a political hit job at this point.

What i argued is and that you argued to begin with is that Sullivan is in violation.
He isn't. He 100% has the right to request a full court review.
If the court doesn't hear it then he must abide by the panel ruling.

Until this court rules on whether or not they will hear it he hasn't broke any laws yet.

Sullivan may be operating under an obscure rule that allows him to defy court orders, but it is obvious he is intent on persecuting an innocent man to the fullest extent of his biased power for as long as he can. He is violating common decency, rules of judicial ethics, and laws against bias in judicial actions.


Biased anti-Flynn rogue judge exceeds authority by refusing to dismiss wrongful charges - Gregg Jarrett

Sullivan, who presides over what the Justice Department now admits was the wrongful prosecution of President Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, refuses to dismiss the case despite an outstanding order from a higher court to do so.
Sullivan seems determined to send an innocent man to prison — evidence and the law be damned. Judges like Sullivan led Darrow to conclude that the illusive pursuit of justice in an American courtroom is a “horrible business.”

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

Sullivan may be operating under an obscure rule...

Gotta stop you right there - an appeal is not an "obscure rule".

 

[marke]

From your own post #13:
From your own post #102:
Marke, it seems that you lie so much...and so casually...that you are all but incapable of being honest and forthcoming.

Throughout this entire thread, you have tried (and hilariously FAILED) to present Judge Sullivan as a racist.

Like I said earlier, I don't think Sullivan is any more a racist than Trump is but if democrats insist on claiming Trump is a racist without logical evidence then I suggest to them that Sullivan can also be called a racist by their loose standards of judgment.

 

[marke]

Gotta stop you right there - an appeal is not an "obscure rule".

Taking the matters into his own hands as substitute prosecutor himself is not something condoned by any rule of judicial conduct.

 

[ultmd]

It is not the judge's job to try a case even if the prosecutor and Department of Justice drops it. Sullivan is taking matters in his own hands and he is doubly to be blamed because he has to defy a court order to keep doing his own stupid and illegal thing here.

Once again, your argument fails because it is built upon a completely false premise. Judge Sullivan is not "trying" the case, and there is no "court order" to be violated. You really should stop lying so much. It's less and less compelling, each time. Judge Sullivan is presiding over this case, and has not violated any rules or ethical standards.

You've been corrected about this a few dozen times in this thread. Every time you come back with a new lie, you fool only yourself.

He needs to be removed from the bench. He is giving judges a bad name by committing such immoral and unethical acts of pure partisanship hatred.

:lamo
No one (especially Judge Sullivan himself) is at all concerned about what people like you think or believe. You're a fakenewser.

 

[TheDoctorWasIn]

Taking the matters into his own hands as substitute prosecutor himself is not something condoned by any rule of judicial conduct.

Well, ok. That's not what happened.

He appealed the writ of mandamus to the full circuit, and it was accepted.