On Legal Horse Manure And Underhanded Politicking From The Bench

Shipwreckedcrew (22 years as a federal prosecutor) has written another RedState article: Recent Decisions of The Court of Appeals for DC Circuit Show Sullivan Must Dismiss Flynn Case. Read it all if you can't get enough of lengthy discussions on minor legal procedural issues. Here's the part I liked a lot:

I’m seeing a lot of online “lawyering” on the legal question(s) before Judge Sullivan, with many focusing on the orders today with regard to accepting amicus curiae briefs, and later appointing retired federal Judge John Gleeson to serve as a “Friend of the Court” and offer a brief against the DOJ motion to dismiss the Flynn case. 

Notwithstanding all the online punditry, the issue before the Court as posed by the DOJ motion is very simple.  The fact that Judge Sullivan is accepting amicus briefs and claims he needs a “Friend of the Court” to brief the opposing view on a minor point of procedural law is a transparent revelation of his duplicitous motives.  To suggest that he needs “advice” on whether Gen. Flynn should be held in contempt of court for perjury simply ignores his own 33 years experience as a federal judge — signaling that in all that time he’s never figured out misconduct would be considered sufficient to cite a party before his court for contempt. 

I’m not going to do it as part of this story, but I’m certain some enterprising researcher is going to turn up a stat in the next couple days that reveals how many times in his career Judge Sullivan has already issued Orders to “Show Cause Re Contempt” in the tens of thousands of cases he has presided over in his more than three decades as a trial court judge.  To suggest he needs “advice” on this question is transparent horse manure.

Sounds absolutely on the money to me, and every judge and lawyer in the land knows this. This tells us about all we need to know re the desperation that the Deep State is feeling. They know beyond a doubt--and especially after Grenell's document releases--that Barr and Durham are serious. Sullivan's lawless ploys are about distraction and delay--not about any hope of ultimately winning on the legal issues. Again, signs of desperation.