19 hours ago, TKDfella said:

I have just read two articles (CNN, WP) that say that the Appeal court has given Judge Sullivan 10 days to respond in this case. Anyone care to comment on that?

A wild guess, but I'd say if Sullivan doesn't back off and sentences Flynn it's going to be back in the appeal court pronto. Given the SCOTUS ruling I fail to see why Sullivan procrastinates.

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

A wild guess, but I'd say if Sullivan doesn't back off and sentences Flynn it's going to be back in the appeal court pronto. Given the SCOTUS ruling I fail to see why Sullivan procrastinates.

Because he is in charge of his courtroom and judges take that power seriously

Stay tuned...The judge is lawyering up.

7 hours ago, nattaya09 said:

Stay tuned...The judge is lawyering up.

With a DC heavyweight, no less

 

https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2020/05/23/flynn-judge-emmet-sullivan-hires-veteran-trial-lawyer-beth-wilkinson/?slreturn=20200424203924

1 hour ago, Langsuan Man said:

With a DC heavyweight, no less

This would suggest the judge is girding his loins in preparation of a decision some presidents might not like.

57 minutes ago, J Town said:

This would suggest the judge is girding his loins in preparation of a decision some presidents might not like.

Yes that would seem the case. However I am not sure what's going on here because I thought the issue was a decision by Judge Sullivan (one way or the other) within 10 days. If say he has already made his decision (whatever that may be), could he not just do that anyway within the the 10 days? Do you think he may have hired a lawyer to advise on whether he can get around the 10 day limit?

On 5/23/2020 at 1:36 PM, Langsuan Man said:

Because he is in charge of his courtroom and judges take that power seriously

Actually the LAW is in charge of his court. The law is decided by the supreme court. They have apparently already dealt with the law in this situation and it isn't on Sullivan's side.

I'm going by information posted by others on that.

8 hours ago, J Town said:

This would suggest the judge is girding his loins in preparation of a decision some presidents might not like.

It could , not would, suggest that. It could also suggest he's looking for a clean way out of this without looking like a complete fool.

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Actually the LAW is in charge of his court. The law is decided by the supreme court. They have apparently already dealt with the law in this situation and it isn't on Sullivan's side.

I'm going by information posted by others on that.

I have read the same thing. I suspect we will see something like we saw in the Mueller report scam. Since they couldn't find any collusion, they wrote the most damning "report" possible as they crawled back under their rocks.

4 hours ago, Crazy Alex said:

I have read the same thing. I suspect we will see something like we saw in the Mueller report scam. Since they couldn't find any collusion, they wrote the most damning "report" possible as they crawled back under their rocks.

Just couldnt resist bringing up the republican mueller that has nothing to do with this thread. And you got it wrong.

I don't understand some posters insistence that SCOTUS is going to side with the DOJ

 

Courts has historically taken the stand that the judge is the interpreter of law, and juries are interpreters of fact

 

It's his courtroom and appeal courts are very reluctant to do anything that threatens judicial independence

and that is what this whole brouhaha is all about, not Flynn's guilt

21 hours ago, Langsuan Man said:

I don't understand some posters insistence that SCOTUS is going to side with the DOJ

 

Courts has historically taken the stand that the judge is the interpreter of law, and juries are interpreters of fact

 

It's his courtroom and appeal courts are very reluctant to do anything that threatens judicial independence

and that is what this whole brouhaha is all about, not Flynn's guilt

I would say that it is the judge that oversees the process as an impartial "manager", and ensures that the law is upheld. Judges should not be "interpreting" the law- that is what the SCOTUS is for.

On 5/25/2020 at 10:36 PM, Sujo said:

Just couldnt resist bringing up the republican mueller that has nothing to do with this thread. And you got it wrong.

You mean the case Mueller investigated for years and years? Involving Flynn?

 

If discussing Mueller makes you nervous wait till you hear criminal charges are now expected on his team.