Anonymous ID: f49006 May 13, 2020, 6:52 a.m. No.9153581   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3612 >>3648

>>9153501

 

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1260338618025066498.html

 

https://twitter.com/RoscoeBDavis1/status/1260338618025066498

 

>MINUTE ORDER as to MICHAEL T. FLYNN. Given the current posture of this case, the Court anticipates that individuals and organizations will seek leave of the Court to file amicus curiae briefs pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7(o).

 

There is no analogous rule in the Local Criminal Rules, but "[the Local Civil] Rules govern all proceedings in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia." LCvR 1.1.

"An amicus curiae, defined as friend of the court,… does not represent the parties but participates only for the benefit of the Court." United States v. Microsoft Corp., No. 98-cv-1232(CKK), 2002 WL 319366, at *2 (D.D.C. Feb. 28, 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted).

 

Thus, "[i]t is solely within the court's discretion to determine the fact, extent, and manner of the participation." Jin v. Ministry of State Sec., 557 F. Supp. 2d 131, 136 (D.D.C. 2008) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

 

"'An amicus brief should normally be allowed when a party is not represented competently or is not represented at all, when the amicus has an interest in some other case that may be affected by the decision in the present case,

(though not enough affected to entitle the amicus to intervene and become a party in the present case), or when the amicus has unique information or perspective that can help the court beyond the help that the lawyers for the parties are able to provide.

 

Otherwise, leave to file an amicus curiae brief should be denied.'" Id. at 137 (quoting Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm'n, 125 F.3d 1062, 1064 (7th Cir. 1997)); see also LCvR 7(o). Although there is no corollary in the Local Criminal Rules to Local Civil Rule 7(o),

a person or entity may seek leave of the Court to file an amicus curiae brief in a criminal case. See Min. Order, United States v. Simmons, No. 18-cr-344 (EGS) (D.D.C. May 5, 2020); cf. United States v. Fokker Servs. B.V., 818 F.3d 733, 740 (D.C. Cir. 2016)

 

(appointing amicus curiae in a criminal case). As Judge Amy Berman Jackson has observed, "while there may be individuals with an interest in this matter, a criminal proceeding is not a free for all." Min. Order, United States v. Stone, No. 19-cr-18 (ABJ) (D.D.C. Feb. 28, 2019).

 

Accordingly, at the appropriate time, the Court will enter a Scheduling Order governing the submission of any amicus curiae briefs. Signed by Judge Emmet G. Sullivan on 5/12/2020. (lcegs3)

Judge Sullivan is crossing all the T’s and dotting all the I’s and is setting the stage to rain down hellfire on the prosecutors in this trial. He’ll hold a must watch hearing and Van Grack and company better wear asbestos

 

The clown show trying to compare this case to the Stevens case remember this.

 

Stevens was dead when his case was tossed. There was no threat of fallout with him.

 

Gen Flynn is very much alive so let it play out and then if I’m wrong I’ll be the first to admit it

Also Stevens was convicted by the Dubya Bush administration and the case was tossed by Holder.

 

Completely different scenarios

Okay I have been bombarded with DM's and Tweets telling me I'm out of my tree, out of my mind, they want to quote fear porn pundits and tweeters, so let me make m stand here and now and we will see what happens in the end, but I will attempt to explain my position

On Dec 18th 2018 at the General's sentencing hearing, that basically ended up triggering this extended delay in the Flynn case, ended up being the demise of Covington, and opened the door to the General hiring Sidney Powell a five months later.

 

So let's look at that hearing

People love to harp on the whole Sullivan accused Flynn of Treason. Actually he didn't. He brought up a hypothetical and then forced Van Grack to actually defend against it on the record.

 

There are people saying that violated Rule 11 but I disagree.

 

So let's review it.

Here starting on page 35 of the transcript Sullivan ventures off into the unknown.

 

I've color coded it for emphasis the pinks and purples are important…

Anonymous ID: f49006 May 13, 2020, 7:14 a.m. No.9153778   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>3924

>>9153505

>>9153730

>>9153558

 

sauce

 

Mar 18, 2018 - A federal judge may have recused himself from overseeing the case of former national … The federal judge, Rudolph Contreras, recused himself after accepting Mr. Flynn's guilty plea in … The case is now being overseen by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan. … Uncertain Times Call for Trusted Facts.

 

Dec 7, 2017 - Judge Emmet Sullivan was randomly assigned to take over the case after Judge Rudolph Contreras recused himself.

 

Dec 7, 2017 - Flynn's case, in which he has pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI, has been … Emmet G. Sullivan after Judge Rudolph Contreras recused himself. … A timeline of Michael Flynn's contacts with Russia, his ouster and guilty plea …

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-in-mike-flynns-case-recuses-himself/

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/07/michael-flynn-judge-sentencing-287001

Anonymous ID: f49006 May 13, 2020, 7:35 a.m. No.9153965   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>4002

>>9153947

 

In light of the Court's forthcoming Scheduling Order governing the submission of any amicus curiae briefs, leave to file the submission by proposed amici curiae is DENIED.

9:59 AM · May 13, 2020