Judge Sullivan should be recused from the General Flynn case

Judge Emmet Sullivan, the federal judge on the General Flynn case, should recuse himself because he is not an impartial judge.

During a hearing in December 2018, Sullivan asked the prosecutor if General Flynn could be charged with treason.

This shows an appalling lack of consideration for the meaning of treason, which is the only crime defined by the Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

Not even the Obama FBI/DOJ that entrapped General Flynn considered charging treason.  It is not the role of a judge to ask the prosecutor to charge more than he charged.  A judge is supposed to be neutral.  If a judge does intervene, it should be to protect the rights of the accused.  For example, a judge may appoint new defense counsel if he believes that the existing counsel is ineffective.  A judge is not supposed to act as the prosecutor. 

Given the conduct of the Obama FBI/DOJ, the Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss the indictment with prejudice.  The motion is clear and sets forth the facts and legal arguments to dismiss.

Since both the prosecutor and the defense counsel agree to the dismissal, the court must sign it unless it believes that the prosecutor is acting in bad faith to re-file charges.  But here the dismissal is with prejudice, which means that it cannot be refiled.

Yet Sullivan has deferred signing the order to dismiss because he wants to hear from others who are not parties to the case as "amici curiae," which means friends of the court.

Sullivan is giving the Obama gang the opportunity to make arguments to Sullivan for not signing the order to dismiss.

This does occur in civil cases where non-parties may have an interest in the decision, but not in criminal cases.

Sullivan should read United States v. Sineneng-Smith, where Justice Ginsburg wrote the opinion to reverse the 9th Circuit that allowed an amicus curiae to raise an issue on behalf of the defendant, even though the defendant had competent counsel.

Note that this was an outsider helping the defendant, not the prosecution.

Justice Ginsburg stated:

In our adversarial system of adjudication, we follow the principle of party presentation.  As this Court stated in Greenlaw v. United States, 554 U. S. 237 (2008), "in both civil and criminal cases, in the first instance and on appeal ..., we rely on the parties to frame the issues for decision and assign to courts the role of neutral arbiter of matters the parties present." ... In criminal cases, departures from the party presentation principle have usually occurred "to protect a pro se litigant's rights.

Sullivan did not ask amici curiae to help General Flynn.  Maybe he should have when Flynn was forced to plead guilty before he hired the brilliant, hardworking attorney Sidney Powell to represent him to withdraw the plea.

Sullivan is asking for outside help to keep alive the prosecution of General Flynn.  Sullivan has overstepped his role as a judge and wants to prosecute General Flynn to continue the prosecution.

Worse, Sullivan has appointed a retired Clinton appointed judge, John Gleeson, to argue against the dismissal.

Gleeson has already given his opinion that the indictment should not be dismissed.  Gleeson wrote in a recent op-ed in the Washington Post:

The department's motion to dismiss the Flynn case is actually just a request — one that requires 'leave of the court' before it is effective[.] ... There has been nothing regular about the department's effort to dismiss the Flynn case.  The record reeks of improper political influence.  If prosecutors attempt to dismiss a well-founded prosecution for impermissible or corrupt reasons, the people would be ill-served if a court blindly approved their dismissal request.

Sullivan has appointed a retired Clinton appointed judge who agrees with him and the Obama gang that Flynn should be prosecuted.  Gleeson will say what Sullivan wants him to say, which is the party line of the Obama gang that Flynn should be prosecuted.

General Flynn should file a motion to recuse Sullivan.  The chief judge of the D.C. Circuit should immediately remove Sullivan, reprimand him, and sign the order of dismissal.

Judge Emmet Sullivan, the federal judge on the General Flynn case, should recuse himself because he is not an impartial judge.

During a hearing in December 2018, Sullivan asked the prosecutor if General Flynn could be charged with treason.

This shows an appalling lack of consideration for the meaning of treason, which is the only crime defined by the Constitution:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

Not even the Obama FBI/DOJ that entrapped General Flynn considered charging treason.  It is not the role of a judge to ask the prosecutor to charge more than he charged.  A judge is supposed to be neutral.  If a judge does intervene, it should be to protect the rights of the accused.  For example, a judge may appoint new defense counsel if he believes that the existing counsel is ineffective.  A judge is not supposed to act as the prosecutor. 

Given the conduct of the Obama FBI/DOJ, the Department of Justice filed a motion to dismiss the indictment with prejudice.  The motion is clear and sets forth the facts and legal arguments to dismiss.

Since both the prosecutor and the defense counsel agree to the dismissal, the court must sign it unless it believes that the prosecutor is acting in bad faith to re-file charges.  But here the dismissal is with prejudice, which means that it cannot be refiled.

Yet Sullivan has deferred signing the order to dismiss because he wants to hear from others who are not parties to the case as "amici curiae," which means friends of the court.

Sullivan is giving the Obama gang the opportunity to make arguments to Sullivan for not signing the order to dismiss.

This does occur in civil cases where non-parties may have an interest in the decision, but not in criminal cases.

Sullivan should read United States v. Sineneng-Smith, where Justice Ginsburg wrote the opinion to reverse the 9th Circuit that allowed an amicus curiae to raise an issue on behalf of the defendant, even though the defendant had competent counsel.

Note that this was an outsider helping the defendant, not the prosecution.

Justice Ginsburg stated:

In our adversarial system of adjudication, we follow the principle of party presentation.  As this Court stated in Greenlaw v. United States, 554 U. S. 237 (2008), "in both civil and criminal cases, in the first instance and on appeal ..., we rely on the parties to frame the issues for decision and assign to courts the role of neutral arbiter of matters the parties present." ... In criminal cases, departures from the party presentation principle have usually occurred "to protect a pro se litigant's rights.

Sullivan did not ask amici curiae to help General Flynn.  Maybe he should have when Flynn was forced to plead guilty before he hired the brilliant, hardworking attorney Sidney Powell to represent him to withdraw the plea.

Sullivan is asking for outside help to keep alive the prosecution of General Flynn.  Sullivan has overstepped his role as a judge and wants to prosecute General Flynn to continue the prosecution.

Worse, Sullivan has appointed a retired Clinton appointed judge, John Gleeson, to argue against the dismissal.

Gleeson has already given his opinion that the indictment should not be dismissed.  Gleeson wrote in a recent op-ed in the Washington Post:

The department's motion to dismiss the Flynn case is actually just a request — one that requires 'leave of the court' before it is effective[.] ... There has been nothing regular about the department's effort to dismiss the Flynn case.  The record reeks of improper political influence.  If prosecutors attempt to dismiss a well-founded prosecution for impermissible or corrupt reasons, the people would be ill-served if a court blindly approved their dismissal request.

Sullivan has appointed a retired Clinton appointed judge who agrees with him and the Obama gang that Flynn should be prosecuted.  Gleeson will say what Sullivan wants him to say, which is the party line of the Obama gang that Flynn should be prosecuted.

General Flynn should file a motion to recuse Sullivan.  The chief judge of the D.C. Circuit should immediately remove Sullivan, reprimand him, and sign the order of dismissal.