US Justice Dept response to Judge Sullivan response in Flynn case June 1, 2020, “court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss”

US Justice Dept response to Judge Sullivan response in Flynn case June 1, 2020, “court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss”

“Immediately after President Trump won election, opponents inaugurated what they call ‘The Resistance’ and they rallied around an explicit strategy of using every tool and maneuver to sabotage the functioning of the executive branch.” …Attorney General Barr

And I’ve now found a witness who says the original 302 did in fact say that Flynn was honest with the agents.”...Attorney Sidney Powell

“Instead of doing so, the government has continued to defy its
constitutional, ethical and legal obligations to this Court and to the defense, and to hide evidence that it knows exonerates Mr. Flynn. As is the essence of the problem here, instead of protecting its citizens, the “government” is protecting its own criminal conduct and operatives.”…Attorney Sidney Powell October 23, 2019

 

From the

BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES

June 1, 2020.

US v Michael Flynn.

“The Constitution vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide
when—and when not—to prosecute potential crimes. Exercising that Article II
power here, the Executive filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, and
petitioner consented. Despite that exercise of prosecutorial discretion, and the
lack of any remaining Article III controversy between the parties, the district
court failed to grant the motion and bring the case to a close. It instead
appointed an amicus curiae to argue against dismissal and to consider additional
criminal charges.

This Court should issue a writ of mandamus compelling dismissal.
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a) provides that “[t]he government may,
with leave of court, dismiss an indictment.” That language does not authorize
a court to stand in the way of a dismissal the defendant does not oppose, and
any other reading of the Rule would violate both Article II and Article III.
Nor, under the circumstances of this case, may the district court assume the role
of prosecutor and initiate criminal charges of its own. Instead of inviting further
proceedings, the court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss.
And given the court’s infringement on the Executive’s performance of its
constitutional duties, a writ of mandamus is appropriate, as this Court held in
similar circumstances in United States v. Fokker Services B.V., 818 F.3d 733
(D.C. Cir. 2016).”

Read more:

https://www.scribd.com/document/463961745/CADC-USDOJ-Response-Flynn

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

5 responses to “US Justice Dept response to Judge Sullivan response in Flynn case June 1, 2020, “court should have granted the government’s motion to dismiss”

  1. Judge Sullivan response:

  2. “Minutes later, the DOJ submitted its own filing calling for the case to be dismissed, suggesting FBI agents may have manipulated a key document, and slamming efforts to keep the prosecution alive by doubting the DOJ’s integrity. The appellate court had invited the DOJ to weigh in on the matter.

    “This Court should issue a writ of mandamus compelling dismissal,” the DOJ wrote in a filing signed by Solicitor General Noel Francisco, who ordinarily represents the government before the Supreme Court. Francisco’s imprimatur was significant, and indicated the DOJ was taking Sullivan’s actions seriously.”

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/judge-sullivans-lawyers-cite-unusual-developments-as-providing-reason-to-question-dojs-motion-to-dismiss

  3. oldsailor88

    CW………
    ……….inasmuch that the DOJ had ordered Sullivan to dismiss the Flynn case, but instead of following the DOJ order, he chose to assume further litigation against Flynn. This failure of Sullivan puts him SQUARELY IN FRONT OF The Judicial Code of Conduct. If he is charged by the courts, he could be imprisoned up to 10 years for breaching the Judicial Code of Conduct. There is much additional penalty which could be brought to bear upon him.

  4. Live: Rod Rosenstein testifies before Senate committee on Russia probe

  5. oldsailor88

    CW
    ……….I watched part of his load of manure pass by. I really can’t bear to look at the little sneak. I turned to another channel.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s