No. You missed it.
1 Like
No, you missed it. Schumer didnât threaten Trump, he warned him.
You think â â â â head Strozk doesnât scare the hell out of pols on both sides of the aisle?
So in the recently release documents, Clapper said the Russians thought Trump would be easier to deal with than he is?
What happened to Putinâs Bitch?
Man you really left that one hanging out over the plate and itâs almost worth a TO⌠. 
Actually, the machine was originally designed to punish itself. Itâs been broken for a while. Trump is here to fix it so it does punish itself for law breaking.
1 Like
Things could be getting sticky for Obama admin officials in the near future.
Getting stick? Thick? Sticky?
1 Like
Actually, looks like its gonna be a little while. Sullivan is inviting amicus briefs.
1 Like
Yeah, I saw that. Heâs tripping over his ego. Like most of them do.
1 Like
Something he flat out refused to do when it ~MIGHT~ help Flynn. Now heâs accepting them when it might not help him.
Things that make you go hmmmmm
1 Like
Iâm not following your theory.
Any amici who wanted to file briefs before are welcome to do so now, but I think youâre vastly overestimating the importance of amici briefs.
Well except Brett Kavanaugh. Heâs dreamy.
1 Like
Sullivanâs minute order indicated that an upcoming scheduling order would clarify the parameters of who specifically could submit the amicus briefs,
Uhhh no. The judge has indicated that when he issued the ruling for amici briefs, they WILL be limited to who he says can submit them and probably the what they cover.
âJudge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn,â independent journalist Michael Cernovich wrote on Twitter Tuesday evening. âThis is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules. We will be filing a complaint against Sullivan. ⌠[He] is acting as a politician, not a judge.â
Is that equal justice @TheDoctorIsIn?
If they are not vastly important â then why deny them earlier and decide to take them now expecially when the judge said when they defense was asking for them in favor of Flynn . .
Sullivan had previously held that â[o]ptions exist for a private citizen to express his views about matters of public interest, but the Courtâs docket is not an available option.â
Does this mean that no âoptions exist for a private citizen to express his views about matters of public interestâ now?
This seems way out of Character for Sullivan, he needs to rethink this in a hurry.
Yes. Thatâs the point of amici briefs.
Theyâre not a ârightâ - and theyâre rarely allowed in criminal trials.
I imagine Sullivan is accepting them now because he is facing a question of law he doesnât have a clear answer to.
His point is Sullivan refused them earlier.
I disagree. Heâs accepting them to drag this out.
Heâs forgetting the objective.
And how are non judges, no legal experts going to help him decide? Defence AND prosecution saying the gulty plea should be allowed to be withdrawn so the charges can be dropped. Yet he is looking for reason to say â sorry, your both WRONG and this is how itâs going down.
Consistancy says if others have ways outside the court to get their views know then, they have those same avenues now.
Well, thatâs the thing you were just complaining about - why amici are so strictly gate-kept.
Because only people with legal expertise (particularly in that specific field) will be allowed to file.
As for the what the defense and the prosecutors want - the Judge doesnât answer to them. He doesnât have to do what they ask, even if they agree.
I was just browsing through the docket, and I checked those citations in Powellâs brief regarding those previously rejected amici briefs - and this one is my favorite. The bolded part is the title of the âfilingâ - and added by me. Typos from the original.
LEAVE TO FILE DENIED- Mankindâs Death Certificate was Signed on October 12, 2050 with not so much asa Whimper. as to MICHAEL T. FLYNN. âLeave to File Deniedâ by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 3/19/2018. This document is unavailable as the Court denied its filing. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 3/19/2018. (hsj) (Entered: 03/27/2018)
2 Likes
