American, we are seeing a weaponized justice system like we never thought possible. A D.C. federal judge has now hired lawyers with U.S. taxpayer money and fought to continue to try a case against General Michael Flynn that the U.S. Justice Department has dropped.
A full panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit overturned an earlier appellate judgement Monday granting a writ of mandamus to Michael Flynn forcing the district court to allow the Department of Justice’s effort to drop the case.
In July as you remember, Flynn won a 2-1 decision before a three judge panel, which held that Judge Emmet Sullivan’s decision to invite a amicus curiae brief from a retired judge (with an anti-Trump bias) violated the separation of powers in the U.S. Constitution.
The brief would advise the court as to whether Flynn should be held in criminal contempt of court for withdrawing his guilty please — a right every defendant theoretically posses under the law.
The Department of Justice wanted to drop all charges on Flynn after a review of the case by United States Attorney Jeffrey Jenson found that the FBI lied and had failed to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence showing investigators believed Flynn had not lied, that he was not suspected of prior wrongdoing, and that they discussed whether they were attempting to set him up to be fired.
We’re at a level now in America where you cannot make this up anymore.
The amicus brief, filed by retired judge John Gleeson, seeks a broader investigation of the motives of the Justice Department in dropping the charges. One that could theoretically be abused to create new controversies around the Trump administration. Anyone shocked?
Sullivan appealed for an en banc and won an 8-2 decision en banc to overturn the writ.
The D.C. circuit court is also refusing to allow Flynn to have a different judge besides Sullivan. Sullivan accused Flynn of Treason and then later had to apologize, but hasn’t resigned from the case.
The majority wrote that Flynn “has not established that he has “no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires,” and that he could always challenge the district court’s final decision.
The two dissenting judges Rao and Henderson wrote the following:
“The majority gestures at the potential harms of such a judicial intrusion into the Executive Branch, but takes a wait-and-see approach, hoping and hinting that the district judge will not take the actions he clearly states he will take.” Ouch, now that’s well stated!
You can read more at Breitbart.com