Connect with us

Flynn's

Michael Flynn’s lawyer says former judge is engaging in ‘flagrant personal and partisan assault’

Attorneys for President Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn Wednesday accused an ex-federal judge appointed to argue against the Justice Department’s bid to drop the case of engaging in a “flagrant personal and partisan assault.” John Gleeson, a retired judge appointed to act as a friend of the court, last week accused Flynn of…

Michael Flynn’s lawyer says former judge is engaging in ‘flagrant personal and partisan assault’

Attorneys for President Trump’s former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn Wednesday accused an ex-federal judge appointed to argue against the Justice Department’s bid to drop the case of engaging in a “flagrant personal and partisan assault.”

John Gleeson, a retired judge appointed to act as a friend of the court, last week accused Flynn of perjury. He also blasted the Justice Department, saying its efforts to abandon the case that accused Flynn of lying to the FBI about his conversation with the then-Russia ambassador to the United States as a “gross abuse of prosecutorial power.”

In response, Flynn lawyer Sidney Powell slammed Mr. Gleeson’s argument as a “smear.”

“The irony and sheer duplicity of Amicus’s accusations against the Justice Department now — which is finally exposing the truth — is stunning,” Ms. Powell wrote. “Amicus’s filing is a ‘wrap-up smear.’ It is an affront to the Rule of Law and a ranging insult to the citizens of this country who see the abject corruption in this assassination by political prosecution of General Flynn.”

“This court exuviated any appearance of neutrality when it unlawfully appointed Amicus as its own adversary to make the scurrilous arguments,” Ms. Powell continued.

Mr. Gleeson’s brief last week was an unrelenting legal attack on the Justice Department saying it was an “unconvincing effort” to hide a decision based solely on the fact that Flynn is a political ally of Mr. Trump.

But Ms. Powell clapped back at Mr. Gleeson in her filing Wednesday. She citing a Washington Post op-ed authored by Mr. Gleeson and published just before his appointment suggesting “improper political influence” was a factor in the decision to drop the charges against Flynn.

Ms. Powell also lambasted U.S. Judge Emmet Sullivan, who is overseeing Flynn’s case and appointed Mr. Gleeson. She said Judge Sullivan only appointed Mr. Gleeson because he lacked the authority to do anything else.

“This court exceeded its authority under the Constitution to solicit amici and to appoint an Amicus. That chosen Amicus has now engaged in a flagrant personal and partisan assault on General Flynn, Attorney General Barr, and the President of the United States,” she wrote.

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Continue Reading…

Flynn's

Michael Flynn’s attorneys say federal judge has ‘hijacked’ case; they ask to deny bid for rehearing

Michael Flynn’s legal team Monday accused the federal judge overseeing his criminal case of “hijacking” it for political purposes and asked a federal appeals court to deny his bid to keep the Justice Department’s prosecution alive. “The district court has hijacked and extended a criminal prosecution for almost three months for its own purposes,” Flynn’s…

Michael Flynn’s attorneys say federal judge has ‘hijacked’ case; they ask to deny bid for rehearing

Michael Flynn’s legal team Monday accused the federal judge overseeing his criminal case of “hijacking” it for political purposes and asked a federal appeals court to deny his bid to keep the Justice Department’s prosecution alive.

“The district court has hijacked and extended a criminal prosecution for almost three months for its own purposes,” Flynn’s attorneys wrote in a filing with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Flynn, who briefly served as President Trump’s first national security adviser, said Judge Emmett Sullivan has no standing in the case.

Therefore, he can’t ask a full slate of judges on the appellate court to review a decision by a three-judge panel on the same court to dismiss the prosecution.

“To allow Judge Sullivan to delay and generate litigation against a criminal defendant is unconstitutional,” wrote Flynn attorney Sydney Powell. “This action itself diminishes the status of the federal judiciary as an independent bulwark for the rule of law.”

Judge Sullivan has resisted calls to dismiss the Flynn case even as the Justice Department sought to abandon the prosecution. Flynn had pleaded guilty twice to lying to the FBI about his conversations with the then-Russian ambassador just before the Trump administration took over.

The Justice Department in a surprise move earlier this year said the FBI never should have been interviewing Flynn in the first place and his statements were not material to the bureau’s Russia investigation.

Judge Sullivan still delayed terminating the case. But a three-judge Court of Appeals panel last month said he must dismiss the case because he didn’t have the authority to question the Justice Department’s decision.

He filed an appeal last week asking the full court to review the appellate court’s ruling. In his filing, he claimed the court’s decision threatened “to turn the ordinary judicial process upside down.”

Even if the court rejects Ms. Powell’s claim that Judge Sullivan lacks standing, the D.C. Circuit could still take up his case. Under judicial rules, any active D.C. federal judge can request a review by the full court, even if neither party has asked or has standing to do so.

A majority of judges must agree to rehear the case, but if the appellate court rejects the request, any judge who disagrees with that decision can write a dissent.

The D.C. Circuit is currently composed of seven judges appointed by Democrats and four Republican appointees.

Ms. Powell in the legal filing Monday that Judge Sullivan’s actions “smack of vindictive animus against General Flynn” and “judicial overreach that have no place in America’s justice system.”

Sign up for Daily Newsletters

Continue Reading…

Continue Reading

Trending