Judge in Flynn Case Goes Off the Rails

Judge in Flynn Case Goes Off the Rails

(NewsBreakDaily.org) – Judge Emmet Sullivan sits on the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and is presiding over the Gen. Michael Flynn case. He’s made a series of controversial rulings recently. Now, he’s refusing to accept the request by the Department of Justice (DOJ) to dismiss the charges against Flynn.

1st Order

Sullivan is refusing to allow the DOJ to simply end the prosecution of Gen. Flynn, who was all but exonerated by the recent release of unclassified documents. The Bill Clinton appointee, in a move the defense counsel contends is not permitted by federal court rules, declared he was ordering outside third-parties to give their input on the motion to dismiss — known as amicus curiae.

Others in the legal field are equally shocked as former Utah US Attorney Brett Tolman said it “is an outrageous decision by a judge…” A lawyer who specializes in national security issues, Brad Moss, was a bit more judicious in his opinion that “…the need for amici is usually only warranted in civil cases.”

2nd Order

The next curious move by the judge was to bring in a retired colleague, John Gleeson who sat on the federal bench for the Eastern District of New York. One of his jobs will be to argue against the DOJ motion, in essence prosecuting the prosecutors.

His second task is to decide if Flynn should be held in contempt of court. The apparent logic there is warped. Apparently, by recanting his guilty plea after documents indicating he may have been a victim of entrapment came to light, he’s now guilty of perjury because he was tricked into his statement.

More disconcerting to some is the fact Gleeson has publicly opined he feels the DOJ has made a mockery of the American jurisprudence. He wrote, “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.

3rd Order

In a final maneuver, Judge Sullivan permitted the law firm of Covington & Burling, LLC to enter into the fray as an “interested party.” There was no indication as to what information they might offer the court. Though, there are some issues with the firm that could raise ethical concerns depending on what they intend to offer:

  • This firm represented Flynn and allowed him to enter a “guilty” plea.
  • Subsequent to being fired by the general, they were retained by Joe Biden’s campaign.
  • The firm has several prominent veterans associated with the Obama Administration, including Eric Holder, former US attorney general.

When dealing with courts and judges, the presumption must be that they’ll be fair and unbiased, but it’s extremely foolish not to keep a watchful eye on them to ensure all American’s rights are vigorously protected. Especially one that’s fraught with national political ramifications, up to and including the fast-approaching presidential election.

Copyright 2020, NewsBreakDaily.org