Flynn reply brief US Court of Appeals filed by Attorney Sidney Powell June 10, 2020, ” If courts aspire to do more, then law will become what the
judges say it is”
“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
REPLY BRIEF OF MICHAEL T. FLYNN
filed by Attorney Sidney Powell June 10, 2020.
“Twenty percent—more than 500—of former criminal defendants
named in the National Registry of Exonerations had pleaded guilty.1
Even following a guilty plea, a Government motion to dismiss is neither
rare nor suspect. The Fourth and Fifth Circuits have ordered dismissals
specifically in those circumstances. App.81-83; United States v. Smith 55
F.3d 157 (4th Cir. 1995). This is especially true where that motion arises
from a lengthy independent review of the Government’s own file. “Here,
the Attorney General … tasked an experienced prosecutor with
investigating the matter, and then took decisive action to fulfil his duty
[of correcting injustice] with the filing of the government’s motion to
dismiss.” Brief Amicus Curiae of Former United States Attorney General
Edwin Meese III at 8. That motion disclosed stunning exculpatory
evidence—evidence Respondent and his quiver of Amici elide.”
“The Government’s Motion to Dismiss fulfills the highest and best
tradition of the Department of Justice: to seek justice—not convictions.
See Meese Amicus Brief at 8-9 (citing Attorney General (later Justice)
Jackson). As the Supreme Court wrote in Berger v. United States, 295
U.S. 78, 88 (1935), “The United States Attorney is the representative not
of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose
obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to
govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is
not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done.”
IV. Conclusion
As Attorney General Meese notes in his Amicus Brief, “[i]f the
courts [administer the law impartially], they will inspire the public’s confidence. If courts aspire to do more, then law will become what the
judges say it is, and that will lead the nation into judicial supremacy
where the people are ruled by judges, not by the rule of law.” Meese
Amicus Brief at 11. Respondent here aspires to do more, much more.
This Court must stop him before he further jeopardizes the legitimacy of
the federal judiciary. Accordingly, mandamus should issue to dismiss
this case with prejudice, vacate the plea, and order any further
proceedings conducted by a different judge.”
Read more:
https://www.scribd.com/document/465150398/Flynn-DC-Circuit-Reply-Brief
More here:
Citizen WElls 