![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/seen-coming.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
That problem is Judge Emmett Sullivan. Instead of just following the procedures laid down in the laws and from precedent, Sullivan has decided that he is going to help the Deep State \u201cGet\u201d General Flynn. He has decided that Flynn is guilty of perjury and should be sent to jail for it. To get this done, he has appointed a Trump hating retired judge to \u201cInvestigate\u201d the charge that Sullivan wants to bring. Here are some of the details from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n D.C. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan<\/a> issued an unusual order<\/a> Wednesday, <\/b>(May 13<\/b>th<\/b><\/sup> 2020),<\/b> appointing a law firm partner “to present arguments in opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss” the matter \u2013 and to consider whether the court should hold Flynn in contempt for perjury.<\/b><\/p>\n This has caused an explosion of shock and outrage among honest members of the court. (Few as they may be) It also flies in the face of a recent, (May 9th<\/sup>, 2020), unanimous decision by the United States Supreme Court of basically the same thing that Sullivan is trying to do. In a story separate from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n Authoring a unanimous Supreme Court opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg<\/a> tore into the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals for “drastically” straying from judicial norms when hearing a case involving a California immigration<\/a> consultant. <\/b><\/p>\n After Evelyn Sineneng-Smith had been convicted of violating a federal law related to encouraging illegal immigration, the Ninth Circuit reversed the decision, not based on arguments presented by Sineneng-Smith, but by third parties the court brought in to submit arguments that the panel of judges themselves had suggested. <\/b><\/p>\n The USSC decision revolved around the 9th<\/sup> Circus\u2019s usual contempt for the Constitution, precedent and the rule of law. To get both a unanimous decision and a judicial beat down by the most leftist member of the bench shows that the 9th<\/sup> Circus went to far…again. The problem here is, Judge Emmett Sullivan is ignoring the decision completely.<\/p>\n The partner, retired federal judge John Gleeson, has openly criticized<\/a> the Trump administration’s handling of Michael Flynn’s case, raising concerns that he was selected to improperly bolster Sullivan’s efforts to keep the Flynn case alive even though both the government and defendant want it dismissed. <\/b><\/p>\n Besides the contempt for President Bush and the Rule of law, there is something else these two have in common. They\u2019re Clinton Judges. Now the Clinton judges, unlike the Obama judges, can blow hot and cold. Sullivan is a classic case. He was the one who ruled in favor of the late Senator Stevens when it came out that the DoJ had also rigged that case as well. Of course, Ted Stevens was also quite dead so it really had no effect on his future.<\/p>\n What should have sent up flares was how Sullivan acted when he was appointed to handle the plea agreement. The first thing he did was accuse General Flynn of Treason<\/a>. He should have been immediately been disqualified and forced to recuse himself, however that was when Flynn\u2019s previous legal team was still on the job, and as we\u2019ve been finding out, they may have been working more for the prosecution then for the defense.<\/p>\n The precise reasons for the perjury review were not clear in Sullivan’s order. Last year, Flynn abruptly abandoned his plan to provide testimony against a former associate, after admitting that he had lied on federal forms required under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Flynn has said he received constitutionally inadequate legal advice. <\/b><\/p>\n Saying that Flynn received inadequate legal assistance is proving to be the understatement of the century. There is a very good chance that General Flynn and his new lawyer, (the one who has actually been doing her job), may be suing his old lawyers for malpractice and misfeasance. (My guess is he will win too)<\/p>\n Although Flynn was never charged with the FARA violations or perjury, he admitted to making \u201cmaterially false statements and omissions\u201d concerning his work in Turkey as part of his plea agreement. Flynn ultimately pleaded guilty only to one count of lying to FBI agents in the White House in January 2017 as his legal bills mounted, leading him to sell his home.<\/a> <\/b><\/p>\n And, as we have since learned, the Prosecution flat out threatened to go after General Flynn\u2019s son if he didn\u2019t take the plea and agree to help them in their coup against President Trump. The blatant lies, misconduct and civil rights violations by the Mueller Inquisition and the Obama InJustice department were so overwhelming, that Attorney general Barr, on advice of an independent investigator, ordered the charges dropped and removed the prosecutor who was mishandling the case. This brings us to the \u201cFair and balanced\u201d remarks of former judge Gleeson.<\/p>\n Gleeson, a retired New York federal district court judge, was specifically appointed as an “amicus curiae,” or friend of the court. Gleeson is now a partner<\/a> at the international law firm Debevoise & Plimpton. <\/b>Gleeson penned an op-ed<\/a> this week apparently pre-judging the Flynn case, writing that “the [Flynn] record reeks of improper political influence.” <\/b><\/p>\n “So if the court finds dismissal would result in a miscarriage of justice, it can deny the motion, refuse to permit withdrawal of the guilty plea and proceed to sentencing,” Gleeson wrote. <\/b><\/p>\n Actually, as I understand it, no, Sullivan can\u2019t. The Department of Justice is the group that decides to prosecute or to drop the charges. A judge can direct a verdict of not guilty and\/or drop the charges with prejudice, thereby ending any further moves against the defendant. What he can\u2019t do is ignore the DoJ when they decide to drop a case. (I will let the legal beagles correct me in the comments if I am in error)<\/p>\n The Twitter sleuth Techno_Fog pointed out<\/a> that Gleeson has recently worked with Andrew Weissmann, a former prosecutor on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team. And, attorney Ron Coleman noted that Debevoise has also represented Sally Yates — the former deputy attorney general who was fired after she took the extraordinary step of refusing to defend a Trump administration executive order in court. <\/b><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n