Flynn case Anon talk:
I have been reading my fav lawfags assessments and here is what I can summarize for anons:
1- Sullivan and DS failed in getting a member of the Circuit Court to ask for an en banc review:
a) If a Court member had concerns about the legitimacy of process or decision they likely would have requested a vote to review 'en banc'.
b) DS failed to influence a member to do so (internally), for optics this would have been the best for [their] narrative.
2- Sullivan appealed the decision personally by asking for a en banc review. He waited about 14 days to do so:
a) Likely was hoping for someone other than his personal attorney to do so. In the legit legal field this is being viewed as moar corrupt.
b) The appeals wording was not very respectful of the panel members (2-1 majority opinion) and their decision and that could be viewed as being disrespectful of the Court since both are reputable and cited solid legal positions. Many analysts predicted the outcome based upon who appointed them, the BHO appointee was the dissenter. Yes courts are supposed to be impartial, yet they are political in reality. And in cases of many Liberal appointees they often ignore the rule of law, while others abide by law and form opinion based upon rule of law.
3- I do have concerns unanwered at this point:
a) When Flynn filed his writ of mandamus, many were surprised that the Court required Sullivan to personally respond to the request. Generally the Court itself is ordered to respond, which means the Judge handles it but is not peronally ordered to do so.
b) Sullivan then got an attorney to represent him, and she filed on behalf of Judge Sullivan. This was hailed as a potential win for Justice, in accountability since it was unusual for the Judge to be ordered to respond personally.
c) BUT, it seems to have also opened the door for this appeal of the panel ruling to be filed.
d) I read some conflicting reports on this but I believe that if it was not for Sullivan being personally named to repond to the original mandamus then he would not be an affected party and the Court he presides over could not appeal the decision.
e) So by the Circuit Court naming Sullivan to respond it also made it possible for him to appeal the Panel ruling since he is now a affected/involved party (as well as the judge-who is impartial)
f) It could have been a LawFare tactic by DS to make this possible.
g) However keep in mind that if so (a trick) they could have just gotten a Circuit Court member to do the same.
h) If the Court is DS comped, they would do it this way (install the backdoor/loophole for appeal) to keep the integrity of the court intact and if any blowback occurs it is on Sullivan perhaps.
i) Keep Tuned. Legal consensus seems to think that appeal for an en banc review will not get enough votes and the Panel Decision will be upheld, but in this game we never know. The deadline for dismissal was stayed until the Court decides on this matter, and if en banc is not granted Sullivan will be required to address motion to dismiss almost immediately. (this does not mean grant, it means hear the motion to dismiss)