Mueller dismisses top FBI agent in Russia probe for anti-Trump texts
7,767,462 Views |
49440 Replies |
Last: 6 min ago by aggiehawg
It's truly unbelievable that we are where we are today with the Flynn case, but the denial of the motion was actually expected and not at all a surprise. Just need to move to the final step nowJJMt said:
Wow. Unbelievable.
I assume it's the final step, right? This has to be the end of the road for Sullivan. RIGHT?!?!?!?!?!?! Just needs to finally rule and then Flynn can begin his appeal process if needed?
Ok so what's next? Flynn gets to air the DOJ's and former prosecutor's dirty laundry in court? How is this a bad thing?
What's Flynn's next move? Appeal to SCOTUS? Wait for Sullivan to rule on the motion to dismiss?
IIRC the ball is in Sullivan's court now.TRM said:
What's Flynn's next move? Appeal to SCOTUS? Wait for Sullivan to rule on the motion to dismiss?
The question is under what timeline does Sullivan have to make a decision by?
Beth Wilkinson made that argument but then backed off it. As such it is argument not facts before the court.Quote:
Here, Petitioner and the Government have an adequate
alternate means of relief with respect to both the Rule 48(a)
motion and the appointment of amicus: the District Court
could grant the motion, reject amicus's arguments, and dismiss
the case. At oral argument, the District Judge's Attorney
effectively represented that all these things may happen. See
Oral Arg. Transcript at 122:2425, 123:19. Even if the
District Court were to deny the motion, there would still be an
adequate alternate means of review perhaps via the collateral-
order doctrine or a fresh petition for mandamus challenging the
denial, see United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., 818 F.3d 733,
74849 (D.C. Cir. 2016); United States v. Dupris, 664 F.2d
169, 17374 (8th Cir. 1981), and certainly on direct appeal by
Petitioner following sentencing (at which point he could raise
amicus's appointment as error), see 28 U.S.C. 1291.
Petitioner has not cited any case in which our Court, or any
court, issued the writ to compel a district court to decide an
undecided motion in a particular wayi.e., when the district
court might yet decide the motion in that way on its own.
Indeed, in Platt, the Supreme Court took the opposite course,
vacating a writ of mandamus as improper where, after the
district court denied a motion, the court of appeals undertook
its own de novo examination and issued the writ to grant the
motion instead of remanding the motion to the district court for
reconsideration. 376 U.S. at 24546. The interest in allowing
the District Court to decide a pending motion in the first
instance is especially pronounced here, given that neither
Petitioner nor the Government raised an objection in the
District Court to the appointment of the amicus or more
generally to the course of proceedings for resolving the Rule
48(a) motion.
So Sullivan wins and when he does inevitably deny the Rule 48(a) motion, Flynn and DOJ will appeal right back to the 2nd Circuit. And then it will go to SCOTUS is my guess.
Procedurally this case is so messed up and that got Flynn in the end even though it was the judge's fault.
What is troubling to me is the signal that Sullivan's open invitation for amici briefs was not clear error. That flies in the face of the recent Ginsberg SCOTUS decision.
I assume that means Sullivan needs to issue a ruling promptly?Quote:
"we expect the District Court to proceed with appropriate dispatch."
No. That's not what that means. It's an "expect(ation)" not an order. There's a huge difference. Sullivan can take all the time in the world if he wants to.Tailgate88 said:I assume that means Sullivan needs to issue a ruling promptly?Quote:
"we expect the District Court to proceed with appropriate dispatch."
Can he drag this out til after the election and inauguration(of Biden) hoping that a new AG will be appointed and pick up the case?
No because irrespective of who wins the election, Trump will pardon him. But this horrible precedent is now on the books.will25u said:
Can he drag this out til after the election and inauguration(of Biden) hoping that a new AG will be appointed and pick up the case?
Since Sullivan was a party, Sydney should serve him with discovery requests.
LGB
lol, wouldn't that be somethingAggie Jurist said:
Since Sullivan was a party, Sydney should serve him with discovery requests.
These BS rulings better light a bigger fire under Barr's a** and he better start expediting the declassification's of documents. Crap like this has gone on for FAR too long and those that propagated this lie need to start feeling the financial pain they have caused. These people are the scum of the earth.
It's sad watching the downfall of the form of government that used to be the best hope of the world.
Didn't Flynn have a motion to withdraw? Did Sullivan rule on that? Or was the motion to dismiss filed too soon after that?
I want to agree, but I have more optimism. This fight wouldn't even be happening without the current administration fighting back.BQ78 said:
It's sad watching the downfall of the form of government that used to be the best hope of the world.
The very fact that Flynn's case is being dragged out the way it is--in my opinion--is because the cast of usual suspects from the swamp can't afford to have the truth come out. I believe this administration doesn't believe it can afford to lose either.
I still want the receipts, but I trust our leaders at the moment.
Just proves lady justice is NOT blind, but is in fact a prejudiced bit*ch. Be afraid folks...VERY afraid.BQ78 said:
It's sad watching the downfall of the form of government that used to be the best hope of the world.
I like this idea a whole lot.Aggie Jurist said:
Since Sullivan was a party, Sydney should serve him with discovery requests.
At this point, the more opportunity Powell has to embarrass the judiciary (this particular judiciary), the happier I'll be. I know, really bad idea on her part, but I'm not her.
There are a ton of outstanding motions on which Sullivan has refused to rule. Mostly on the Brady and Giglio material that Sidney got anyway, courtesy of US Attorney Jensen and Barr declassifying them with an assist from Grenell and now Ratcliffe.TRM said:
Didn't Flynn have a motion to withdraw? Did Sullivan rule on that? Or was the motion to dismiss filed too soon after that?
Right now re-election looks good but if Trump loses in November, no one goes to jail and we never learn the whole truth on Spygate unless some historian digs it up after I am dead and gone.
Absolutely no reflection on you...but how was Justice and the public served by any of this?aggiehawg said:No because irrespective of who wins the election, Trump will pardon him. But this horrible precedent is now on the books.will25u said:
Can he drag this out til after the election and inauguration(of Biden) hoping that a new AG will be appointed and pick up the case?
It wasn't. I have never seen an appellate court so willing to let an OOC district court judge to go so far off of the rails with little to no guidance to get him back on track.whatthehey78 said:Absolutely no reflection on you...but how was Justice and the public served by any of this?aggiehawg said:No because irrespective of who wins the election, Trump will pardon him. But this horrible precedent is now on the books.will25u said:
Can he drag this out til after the election and inauguration(of Biden) hoping that a new AG will be appointed and pick up the case?
As I said, a very bad precedent and for intents and purposes, mandamus is not an available remedy under those circumstances within the DC Circuit.
There is only one outcome that is possible, and they let it drag out because they are more interested in having this judge save face than the rights of the defendant.
I don't know, Hawg.
Sounds like Mandamus may be useful if if the judge was appointed by a Republican. Not being cyncial.
Sounds like Mandamus may be useful if if the judge was appointed by a Republican. Not being cyncial.
ALL of this 'jackassery' seems so Middle Ages to this 'ole timer'...and by that, I'm NOT saying my comparison means I've 'first hand' recollection.aggiehawg said:It wasn't. I have never seen an appellate court so willing to let an OOC district court judge to go so far off of the rails with little to no guidance to get him back on track.whatthehey78 said:Absolutely no reflection on you...but how was Justice and the public served by any of this?aggiehawg said:No because irrespective of who wins the election, Trump will pardon him. But this horrible precedent is now on the books.will25u said:
Can he drag this out til after the election and inauguration(of Biden) hoping that a new AG will be appointed and pick up the case?
As I said, a very bad precedent and for intents and purposes, mandamus is not an available remedy under those circumstances within the DC Circuit.
PS - Thanks ah for your response.
So if the DoJ will not prosecute / motion to drop the case which they have already done....does this ruling allow the judge to become the prosecutor?aggiehawg said:It wasn't. I have never seen an appellate court so willing to let an OOC district court judge to go so far off of the rails with little to no guidance to get him back on track.whatthehey78 said:Absolutely no reflection on you...but how was Justice and the public served by any of this?aggiehawg said:No because irrespective of who wins the election, Trump will pardon him. But this horrible precedent is now on the books.will25u said:
Can he drag this out til after the election and inauguration(of Biden) hoping that a new AG will be appointed and pick up the case?
As I said, a very bad precedent and for intents and purposes, mandamus is not an available remedy under those circumstances within the DC Circuit.
How in the living hell can this withstand scrutiny? Bad precedent does not even begin to describe this jackassery by the DC circuit.
Is the Supreme Court the only recourse here? And if it gets there the four lefties will side the DC Circuit Court.
Am I correct that the "best case scenario" at this point for Flynn would be for Sullivan to actually move quickly and grant the DOJ's request to withdraw charges. Effectively saying "I was going to do this all along but you wouldn't let me finish my planned process."
I've seen nothing from Sullivan that indicates this is what he'll do and I believe this ultimately has to go to appeal. Sullivan can sleep at night because he did his part and whatever is being held over his head remains hidden.
I've seen nothing from Sullivan that indicates this is what he'll do and I believe this ultimately has to go to appeal. Sullivan can sleep at night because he did his part and whatever is being held over his head remains hidden.
Staff - take out the trash.
Seems like both courts are interested in kicking this down the road to after the election. Flynn may never go free. If Biden wins Sullivan will ignore and prosecute.
Some Junkie Cosmonaut
Joined:
Apr 13, 2004
Posts:
44,895
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
i'm starting to think the only reason the guns haven't come out yet is people just don't know/understand this situation and the "intricacies". pretty much lying by omission by the press.
Best case is Sullivan to enter a minute order today scheduling a hearing on the MTD later this week or early next week. Hold that hearing and dismiss it with an opinion to follow (or he's already writing his opinion).Garrelli 5000 said:
Am I correct that the "best case scenario" at this point for Flynn would be for Sullivan to actually move quickly and grant the DOJ's request to withdraw charges. Effectively saying "I was going to do this all along but you wouldn't let me finish my planned process."
I've seen nothing from Sullivan that indicates this is what he'll do and I believe this ultimately has to go to appeal. Sullivan can sleep at night because he did his part and whatever is being held over his head remains hidden.
The old judge Sullivan would have been outraged that his court had been deceived by the prosecution and would have ended the case rapidly. That judge is gone. Now he's partisan and political and is wielding his bench and the powers emanating therefrom as a cudgel to rain blows on Flynn's head.
Disgraceful behavior by any judge. By a judge who did have a good reputation as a great jurist? Inexplicable.
Just the problem. Sullivan cannot prosecute, that's a separation of powers issue that he seems intent on flouting.WestAustinAg said:
Seems like both courts are interested in kicking this down the road to after the election. Flynn may never go free. If Biden wins Sullivan will ignore and prosecute.
Not when I'm done with it.
Which is why I think Chief Justice Roberts (who supervises the DC Circuit) should step in and squash this nonsense.Whens lunch said:Just the problem. Sullivan cannot prosecute, that's a separation of powers issue that he seems intent on flouting.WestAustinAg said:
Seems like both courts are interested in kicking this down the road to after the election. Flynn may never go free. If Biden wins Sullivan will ignore and prosecute.
For our legal eagles, does he have the ability to step in and correct this abuse of the legal system.
Featured Stories
See All