Flynn is off the hook.

Appeals court ruling this morn.
So where's his literary agent.
I'd buy his book to see which low lifes set him up.

I hope he has lawsuit availability

would love to see comey and strzok et al lose money

Appeals court ruling this morn.
So where's his literary agent.
I'd buy his book to see which low lifes set him up. Originally Posted by Unique_Carpenter

No link?!? Inquiring minds and all....
Oh, we will know who set him up soon enough.
BTW: The one that I think is Off-Da-Hook is his lawyer and she is a Baller too.

Interesting to note that they "ordered" the lower court versus "recommending"... Time will tell what repercussions for Judge Sullivan may be in order...

Federal appeals court orders dismissal of Michael Flynn case, likely ending prosecution of ex-Trump adviser

A federal appeals court has ordered the dismissal of the case against Michael Flynn, a decision that likely ends the long and fraught prosecution of President Donald Trump's former national security adviser.

In a 2-1 ruling Wednesday, the appeals court ordered U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, who has been presiding over the prosecution of Flynn, to dismiss the case. The opinion, authored by D.C. Circuit Court Judge Neomi Rao, called Sullivan's actions – appointing a third party to challenge the government's bid to drop its prosecution of Flynn – "unprecedented intrusions on individual liberty" and on the Justice Department's prosecutorial powers....

Finally, Flynn’s saga is over. Will Comey’s start soon?

Interesting to note that they "ordered" the lower court versus "recommending"... Time will tell what repercussions for Judge Sullivan may be in order...


In a 2-1 ruling Wednesday, the appeals court ordered U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, who has been presiding over the prosecution of Flynn, to dismiss the case. The opinion, authored by D.C. Circuit Court Judge Neomi Rao, called Sullivan's actions – appointing a third party to challenge the government's bid to drop its prosecution of Flynn – "unprecedented intrusions on individual liberty" and on the Justice Department's prosecutorial powers.... Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

who is the 1 judge ruling in favor of an unprecedented intrusion on individual liberty?

as far as Sullivan is concerned....partisanship causes grave errors

Finally, Flynn’s saga is over. Will Comey’s start soon? Originally Posted by bambino

They didn't kick Judge Sullivan off the case. Can he appeal? Can he come up with another shenanigan? Maybe simply not dismiss the case?

I don't think it's necessarily over but it's closer. The Dims have more Mueller Lawfare POSs waiting in the wings.

More importantly bambino, will your bet be paid off?

Actually, it might not be over. Sullivan can ignore the upper court or ask that all 21 judges hear the case. But the DOJ released to the appeals court new Strock memos that show Biden and Obama wanted to get Flynn.

Actually, it might not be over. Sullivan can ignore the upper court or ask that all 21 judges hear the case. But the DOJ released to the appeals court new Strock memos that show Biden and Obama wanted to get Flynn. Originally Posted by bambino

Bambino is right. Sullivan will seek an en banc review and the majority of the DC circuit will greatly differ from the majority of that panel. The only question is if the full court will actually hear the matter. If they do they will very likely reverse it but it is far from a certainty that they will agree to hear it.

Sullivan is making an ignorant ass of himself. He needs to learn the lyrics of ...

"The Gambler"! The first line fits and the remainder is perfect:

"On a warm summer's eve ...On a train bound for nowhere..." Kenny Rogers

Sullivan can inappropriately ignore the appeals' court decision and elect to continue litigating his denial of due process to Flynn. Unfortunately, a copy of the Court's ruling & opinion are not readily available, but they can be found. I will search and either post a link or copy and past into a post.

...Sullivan can inappropriately ignore the appeals' court decision and elect to continue litigating his denial of due process to Flynn.... Originally Posted by LexusLover

Vegas odds would be extremely long on: A) Sullivan ignoring the order, B) En Banc accepting it, much less reversing it. Pursuing A or B puts Sullivan in impeachment territory. So it becomes a question of ending his career over it or not.

The majority opinion was not written in fuzzy-techy lingo. It was pretty plain and solid:

Upon consideration of the emergency petition for a writ of mandamus, the responses thereto, and the reply, the briefs of amici curiae in support of the parties, and the argument by counsel, it is ORDERED that Flynn’s petition for a writ of mandamus be granted in part; the District Court is directed to grant the government’s Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss; and the District Court’s order appointing an amicus is hereby vacated as moot, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date...

...[T]his is plainly not the rare case where further judicial inquiry is warranted. To begin with, Flynn agrees with the government’s motion to dismiss, and there has been no allegation that the motion reflects prosecutorial harassment. Additionally, the government’s motion includes an extensive discussion of newly discovered evidence casting Flynn’s guilt into doubt....

...“The circumstances of this case demonstrate that mandamus is appropriate to prevent the judicial usurpation of executive power.”...


Not sure what number they need to overturn the ruling wither. More than simple majority?

What Did Michael Flynn Do? A Look Back at the Case


https://www.newsweek.com/what-did-mi...k-case-1513151

In a sentencing memo, special counsel Robert Mueller said Flynn made "multiple false statements, to multiple Department of Justice entities, on multiple occasions."

Sentencing?

What?

Dead white man memes - gotta get with the OBLM program, 9500.
understand that U @ could be treated as flynn - froced to confess under duress of financial ruins and also to his son .

but - as long as it happens to a republcan _U are just fine with FBI tactics designed to force confessions when false.

They came for One, , they came for 2, and when they came for me - thee was No One to speak for me!

Yep, Sullivan could be an ass and continue to fight this thinking he has the moral high ground and an appeal to at least hear the case before the full court will be made. It will take at least 6 justices to say they want the full court to hear the case, if they do not, I believe the matter is then closed since a decision by a 3 judge Appeals court, still Trumps a single federal judge.


Normally Flynn wouldn't be able to sue the DOJ but as Judge Napalitano put it, since the DOJ has decided there was no predicate to bring this case, the DOJ and Flynn's previous law firm are open to civil litigation and Flynn could get his 6.7 million plus, back.


I've been so right on all these legal matters, I think I deserve an honorary law degree from Harvard!

Vegas odds would be extremely long on: A) Sullivan ignoring the order, B) En Banc accepting it, much less reversing it. Pursuing A or B puts Sullivan in impeachment territory. So it becomes a question of ending his career over it or not. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

I question seriously whether the Trial Judge could be impeached for refusing to obey a mandamus of an appellate court even if his appeal or challenge to the order/mandate was meritless and/or frivolous.

Mandamus orders I've seen the past have given a trial judge so many days to comply with the finding/order with even a phrase that the appellate court hopes that a mandamus will not have to issue and the trial judge will go ahead and do what they ordered.

Like impeaching the President I take the impeachment or removal of any legally seated person in any of the branches as an extremely serious and grave matter that should be only based on a strict construction of the U.S. Constitution and the SCOTUS interpretations and/or guidance with respect to the same ... to the extent to which the SCOTUS has given any such guidance.

I do believe Sullivan should have given the motion to dismiss a hard look and if that required someone outside of his lawyers clerking for him then so be it in order for him to get an unbiased opinion outside of his influence. But that effort should not take long at all. That satisfies due process for all and looks better.

I recall the Federal Judge out in the Las Vegas area on the ranchers who were being prosecuted in which there was prosecutorial/investigatorial misconduct .... she warned and then when she heard the evidence and saw the evidence that was withheld ... she shit canned it ... and didn't take her long with a rather scathing remark if I recall.

What Did Michael Flynn Do? A Look Back at the Case Originally Posted by eccieuser9500

So what did he do? You just stated what Mueller said he did.

He doesn't matter what Flynn actually did or said he did.

The ultimate outcome had to do with what the Government did and said....and

... what the Government didn't do and didn't say!