JUDICIAL LAWLESSNESS: NATIONWIDE CRISIS

D2J BLOG THREAD SERIES:
Judge Emmet Sullivan Wears No Clothes
by Lisa Siegel Belanger, J.D.

Posted on June 9, 2020

DISSECTING 2nd PORTION OF
JUDGE SULLIVAN’S MAY 13, 2020 ORDER: MISUSE OF COURT PROCESS

As shown in said Order, Judge Sullivan, relies on 18 U.S.C. Section 401 for purported “authority” to pursue “criminal contempt” proceedings against General Flynn.Image

As shown in said Order, Judge Sullivan, relies on 18 U.S.C. Section 401 for purported “authority” to pursue “criminal contempt” proceedings against General Flynn.

8 U.S.C. Section 401 states:

Power of court –
A court of the United States shall have power to punish by fine or imprisonment, or both, at its discretion, such contempt of its authority, and none other, as—

(1) Misbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as to obstruct the administration of justice;

(2) Misbehavior of any of its officers in their official transactions;

3) Disobedience or resistance to its lawful writ, process, order, rule, decree, or command.

As shown above, the statutory language of 18 U.S.C. Section 401 plainly and unambiguously states that the supposed misconduct must specifically pertain to “contempt of [the Court’s] authority.”

Therefore, a generalized claim of purported “perjury” is in no manner whatsoever valid to pursue “criminal contempt” proceedings—creating to the Nth degree. constitutional due process violations of inadequate notice of charged misconduct.

Existing case law declares that 18 U.S.C. Section 401—cited by Judge Sullivan—is NOT intended as a catch-all to penalize for a claimed general commission of “perjury”. Bloom v. State of Illinois,          391 U.S. 194 (1968).

Bloom v. Illinois and later reaffirming cases establish proper application of 18 U.S.C. Section 401 requires Judge Sullivan to have set forth IN his MAY 13 2020 Order specific acts on which he relied to pursue “criminal contempt” re “perjury” IN DIRECT RELATION TO THE COURT.

As shown in the Order itself, Judge Sullivan failed to provide ANY information in that regard. As a matter of law, to allege the general term “perjury” is by no means adequate—and to reiterate such omission is unconstitutional of exponential proportions.

To reiterate, Judge Sullivan’s after-thoughts set forth in his filed response to the D.C. Court of Appeals are entirely irrelevant. Such claims were needed in the May 13, 2020 Order. Period. Judge Sullivan’s failure to do so de facto renders his Order fatally defective.

Of significance, SCOTUS emphasized in Bloom v. State of Illinois that 18 U.S.C. Section 401 is NOT to be used as “unbridled power to punish summarily for contempt.”

Discussing Mens Rea
They say: Timing Is Everything (Act 1)

Judge Sullivan’s chosen timing to issue his May 13, 2020 Order is a major lynchpin in showing that it is in fact a sham. As previously discussed, a key factor in relation to timing of the Order is Judge Sullivan’s frame of mind. That in reality: it is lawless retaliation.

With regard to established frame of mind, throughout Judge Sullivan’s filed response to the D.C. Court of Appeals, he blares his being specifically disgruntled as a result of the claimed supposed audacity of General Flynn to withdraw his “guilty plea”.

The over-the-top tone of arrogance exhibited in Judge Sullivan’s filed response is astounding. The lack of self-awareness could be humorous, but more so it’s appalling.

On page 1 of Justice Sullivan’s filed response to the D.C. Court of Appeals, he states and I quote:

“It is unusual for a criminal defendant to claim innocence and move to withdraw his guilty plea after repeatedly swearing under oath that he committed the crime.”

On pages 6 thru 10, Judge Sullivan and his counsel rant about the back-bending lengths that he supposedly took to make sure General Flynn had understood that by agreeing to the plea that it was: “knowingly, voluntarily, intelligently and with fulsome and satisfactory.”

In my professional time in the court swamp, I don’t think I’ve ever read or heard such a dramatic “plea colloquy”—almost Shakespearean-like. (OMG).

In fact, the HUGE RED FLAG WAVING is Judge Sullivan quoting himself (on page 8 of his filed response) as saying to General Flynn during the colloquy:

“I cannot recall any incident in which the Court has ever accepted a plea of guilty from someone who maintained that he was not guilty, and I don’t intend to start today.”

I submit that very quote by Judge Sullivan expresses he had a hunch (at the very least) that General Flynn was extorted into copping a plea.

It sticks out like a sore thumb–there’s no logical reason for him saying such a thing other than thinking General Flynn was innocent.

Conveniently Judge Sullivan and his counsel omitted from the filed response the established well-known info that the govt threatened General Flynn to indict his son. (Gen Flynn’s declaration https://bit.ly/3fcQMeV).

Also, conveniently left out in Judge Sullivan’s filed response is to address General Flynn’s filings showing he was sabotaged by his own former counsel. Filings viewable at: https://www.sidneypowell.com/the-michael-t-flynn-case

Further exuding umbrage to the 10th power for General Flynn daring to withdraw his “guilty plea” is on page 8:

“After being placed under oath again, Mr. Flynn confirmed that (1) he did not wish to “challenge the circumstances” surrounding his FBI interview by pleading guilty he would be giving up “forever” his right to challenge that interview; (3) he knew at the time of his interview that lying to the FBI was a crime; and (4) he was “satisfied with the services provided by [his] attorneys.”

Now throw in the timing factor–

in Judge Sullivan’s filed response, he makes irrefutable admissions of being aware of General Flynn’s filed sworn statements on January 14, 2020 & January 29, 2020 (pages 11-14)—sworn statements on which Judge Sullivan hinges his belated CYA claim.

Therefore, Judge Sullivan was fully aware of General Flynn’s filed sworn statements back in January 2020, yet Judge Sullivan fails to even address the fact that he waited more than 3 MONTHS to file his Order—that’s because there is NO legitimate justification.

Further magnifying the illegitimacy of the delayed May 13, 2020 Order is the befuddling admission by Judge Sullivan that he DELIBERATELY WITHHELD ruling on General Flynn’s motion to withdraw guilty plea—which he sworn statements were part of those filings!!

Nowhere in Judge Sullivan’s filed response does he say WHY he waited MORE THAN 3 MONTHS to pursue criminal contempt proceedings–not to mention his admitted deliberate stalling to rule on Ge

Judge Sullivan’s filed response after all shows his already made rulings regarding: criminal contempt and withdrawal of guilty plea.

Really?? What was the hold-up?? (pun intended) As shown, he knew what he rulings would be.

Conveniently, on pages 6 thru 10, Judge Sullivan and his counsel list out specific “reasons” for Judge Sullivan having already conclusively determined that General Flynn has supposedly “made materially false statements” . . .

Now, let’s think. . .hmm…during that 3-month time period, what significant event happened just prior to the May 13, 2020 Order. . .oh, that’s right. . .on May 7, 2020, the DOJ filed its MOTION TO DISMISS CHARGES AGAINST GENERAL FLYNN.

(intermission ACT 2 to follow)

Posted in Uncategorized.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

7 − 4 =