May 15, 2020 (page 434)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bytor Peltor
What Judge Sullivan is attempting to do is unconditional!
(let that sink in)
Also, in our judicial system, a case or controversy is required to proceed. Judge Sullivan’s Court lacks jurisdiction —SIMPLE AS THAT— when the Executive Branch withdraws because there is no longer a case or controversy, IT’S OVER!!!
The Executive Branch dropping the charges ENDS IT!!!
Last but not least, the Department of Justice can get a Writ Of Mandamus from the federal appellate court in Washington DC to compel Judge Sullivan to do his job!!!
|
Desperation = a state of despair, typically one which results in rash or extreme behavior
Federal Judge Hires High-Powered D.C. Attorney To Defend His Actions In The Flynn Case
Why would a Federal Judge need to defend his actions in a case?
(let this sink in)
Is Judge Sullivan ignorant regarding his authority?
Is Judge Sullivan just playing politics??
To recap, Judge Sullivan appointed a retired Judge John Gleason to prosecute General Flynn because the Department Of Justice wanted to drop the charges. The DOJ was admitting there was no legitimate reason for their initial investigation.
It appears to me that Judge Sullivan got caught up trying to use his Civil Authority in a criminal case......but it can’t be this simple, can it?
So the Writ Of Mandamus is granted by the circuit court (appeals court) and it requires Judge Sullivan to explain his decision of appointing outside council. Also, Judge Sullivan must explain why as Judge of the case, he instructed the retired Judge John Gleason on how he should carry out his actions.
Now that Judge Sullivan has painted himself into a Judicial corner, and the circuit court is seeking answers......Judge Sullivan lawyers up???
A Federal Judge
”shouldn’t” need representation to respond to a Writ Of Mandamus......should he?
I’m guessing the
conflicts are numerous! Also, obvious reasons why Judge Sullivan should have recused himself and didn't, therefore overstepping his authority in his handling of this case.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Robert Schunk
My one point of agreement with Mr. Levin is that Judge Sullivan erred in appointing a strawman counsel to draught a brief opposing the motion, as it's properly the role of the judge himself with or without the assistance of his law clerks to consider causes for dismissing the motion.
|
Mr. Schunk, PLEASE help shed some light on this......by hiring an attorney, is Judge Sullivan now saying he is a party to the case?
Can a Judge be a party to the case and still preside over the case?
Granted, Judge Sullivan did bring in retired Judge John Gleason, but by doing so, did Judge Sullivan relinquish his authority over the case?
Lastly, and this is hard to imagine and I (doubt?) it’s legal......but Judge Sullivan can’t seek outside council regarding how he should rule??????