Thread by @TPCLJ

1) D2J BLOG Thread

Judicial Lawlessness: A Nationwide Crisis
Part 1: Judge Emmet Sullivan Wears No Clothes
posted on May 30, 2020 by Lisa Siegel Belanger, J.D.

destination2justice.com/d2j-blog/
FULL ARTICLE HERE:
@TamraLeigh_llc @ThyConsigliori @GenFlynn @BarbaraRedgate @SidneyPowell1

2/ I might be the only accredited (juris doctorate) legal professional who will not sugar coat Judge Emmet Sullivan’s over-the-top abuse of power in his issuance of his May 13, 2020 order in the General Michael Flynn case entitled: “Order Appointing Amicus Curiae”.

3/ In this debut article, I’ll delve into how and why Judge Sullivan’s conduct is literally judicial thuggery. As indicated, this is Part 1 of an unlimited series of articles dedicated to empowering We The People in combatting judicial abuse of power.

4/ The irrefutable fact is that the judicial thuggery displayed in the General Flynn case is far from an aberration; in actuality, the General Flynn case is the poster child for systemic judicial thuggery that occurs day-in & day-out throughout the courts nationwide--all courts.

5/ As an actively licensed Massachusetts attorney of 24 years, admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court, I have personally and professionally battled—and continue to do so—in the guerilla warfare of judicial tyranny.

6/ I’m here to inform everyday citizens what the reality is: Judge Emmet Sullivan’s conduct in the General Flynn case is business as usual and long-embedded for more than three (3) decades.

7/ The very purpose for my writing this article is to have everyday Americans fully grasp the systemic, devastating prevalence of judicial abuse of power—and to fully understand that judicial abuse most certainly can happen to them.

8/ From the very first day of admittance to the Massachusetts Bar, my legal career has been focused on protecting the average citizen’s constitutional rights; and, particularly, for the past 9 years, my focus has been exposing judicial lawlessness as an attorney whistleblower;

9/ with the past three (3) years, the Massachusetts Board of Bar Overseers (BBO) lawlessly and maliciously persecuting me. (Details of the BBO Witch Trial are viewable at: destination2justice.com/retaliation-by…).

10/ My knowledge & experience regarding systemic judicial lawlessness has reached global audiences since the recent March 11, 2020 release of my featured narrative role in the one-hour documentary called: Guardian Inc (Episode of Dirty Money Season 2).

11/ Why all Americans should care about Judge Sullivan’s abuse of power:

Prevalent judicial lawlessness affects us all—it happens to the rich, the poor, all socioeconomic groups; it makes no difference the color of one’s skin, religion, age, gender or political party.

12/ Nationwide documented court records overwhelmingly establish that systemic judicial abuse of power has irreparably devastated countless citizens & their loved ones; public officials having no lawful basis ripping families apart, hastening death; causing financially ruin.

13/ See examples of nationwide systemic judicial lawlessness: stopguardianabuse.org &
destination2justice.com/free-marvin/fe…

14/ The harsh reality is that many people don’t realize it until they personally end up in the court system, whether it be of a civil and/or criminal nature. By the time the average person wakes up to the reality of being trapped in a rigged system, it’s often too late.

15/ Visualize this reality: you suddenly trip into quicksand, your own lawyer is standing there on solid ground, looking at you straight in the eye, hands in their pockets, not even offering to throw you a rope.

16/ The General Flynn case: a wake-up call for America

Attorney Sidney Powell’s bravery is not just a blessing for General Flynn and his family, but also for America.

17/ As a whistleblower exposing judicial corruption, I am forever grateful that Attorney Powell stepped in as counsel for General Flynn; she courageously & w/ fortitude, single-handedly exposed the heinous government frame-up of General Flynn & sabotage by his former counsel.

18/ There are no adequate words to express the extraordinary significance of Attorney Powell’s actions as true legal counsel—actions by legal counsel that is essentially nonexistent in the “legal profession”; such absence the core reason for absolute thriving judicial tyranny.

19/ It is my sincere hope that after people read this article, it will have a lasting impact that motivates citizens to become civilly active; speaking up, demanding justice for all (even if he/she hasn’t yet personally suffered at the hands of judicial abuse).

20/ Best explaining the sorely needed collective voice of We The People in demanding real oversight and accountability for judicial misconduct is the below meme:

21/ It is equally important to highlight the exceptional efforts of @ThyConsigliori & @TamaraLeigh_llc w/ pardonflynnnow.com. Together they have spearheaded the most powerful force for bringing forth justice through, as what I have coined: The Court of Public Accountability.

22/ The events that led to the DOJ filing a motion to dismiss the case against General Flynn is what every citizen should recognize as a true testament to the well-known adage: sunlight is the best disinfectant & that We The People do have the power to restore law & order..

23/ Judge Sullivan’s Order: Literal Judicial Thuggery

“Some will rob you with a six-gun, and some with a fountain pen” – Woodie Guthrie

24/ Here’s the real skinny behind Judge Sullivan’s court order

As shown above, in Judge Sullivan’s own words, he stated that the specific purpose of appointing an “amicus curiae” is to “present arguments in opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss.”

25/ In no uncertain terms, Judge Sullivan, himself, blatantly and flagrantly expressed that he already determined that he vehemently rejects the DOJ’s motion to dismiss.

26/ Therefore, in reality, such expressed definitive position would compel any “reasonable and ordinary” judge to formalize such conclusion in an official denial of the DOJ’s motion. What is so astounding is Judge Sullivan’s outright admission to his predisposition!

27/

Red Flag of “Amicus Curiae” Appointment by Its Own Definition

As specifically defined in the federal statute 50 U.S.C. Sec. 1803(4), the “duties of an “amicus curiae” is set forth as

28/

(2)(A), the amicus curiae shall provide to the court, as appropriate—
(A) legal arguments that advance the protection of individual privacy and civil liberties;
(B) information related to intelligence collection or communications technology; or

(C) legal arguments or information regarding any other area relevant to the issue presented to the court.

29/ As laid out by the above statutory definition of amicus curiae, a person does not need to have a law degree to understand that, in plain English, Judge Sullivan had no legitimate intention of having retired Judge John Gleeson act in the true capacity as an “amicus curiae”.

30/ By stating the “appointment” was specifically “to present arguments in opposition of the government’s Motion to Dismiss” is unethically & intellectually dishonest.

31/ The above statutory definition unambiguously & completely contradicts Judge Sullivan’s stated purpose for “appointing” retired Judge John Gleeson.

Judge Sullivan made no bones about his intention for retired Judge to play the role as a “special prosecutor”.

32/ Obviously, Judge Sullivan couldn’t come right out and call the appointment what it really is because he full well knows how absurd (even to a nonlawyer) that would look for a special prosecutor to be appointed to derail the prosecuting party (the DOJ)!

33/

Red Flag by DOJ’s well-founded and substantiated grounds for dismissal

34/ Without even needing to go through the history of what has happened in the General Flynn case, all one has to do to see the over-the-top judicial lawlessness is to examine Judge Sullivan’s “Order Appointing Amicus Curiae” in relation to the DOJ's Motion to Dismiss.

35/ With the link provided, you all can read the DOJ’s motion to dismiss with your own eyes (sidneypowell.com/wp-content/upl…)

36/ On page 2 of the DOJ’s Motion to Dismiss, it states:

. . . the Government has concluded that the interview of Mr. Flynn was untethered to, and unjustified by, the FBI’s counterintelligence investigation into Mr. Flynn . . .

37/ . . . The Government is not persuaded that the January 24, 2017 interview was conducted with a legitimate investigative basis and therefore does not believe Mr. Flynn’s statements were material even if untrue. . . . .

38/ As shown by the above direct quote from the DOJ’s motion, it sums up the crux of the irrefutable justified grounds necessitating a judge’s required allowance of the DOJ’s motion to dismiss.

39/ Specifically, the above quote—substantiated by the facts laid out in the rest of the DOJ’s motion—says in non-legalese:

•The prosecution does not have sufficient evidence to charge General Michael Flynn for the original charges brought (lying to the FBI); and

40/

•That the investigation of General Flynn was not only baseless, but was, in fact, unlawful FBI conduct.

41/ And that, my fellow Americans, is in the DOJ’s own words! (As a side note: usually, when a prosecutor does not have sufficient evidence to prove its case, the caption of the motion is usually: a nolle prosequi—a formal notice of abandonment by the prosecutor its action).

42/
The REAL rationale for Judge Sullivan not denying the DOJ’s Motion to Dismiss

It is very evident from a professional legal examination that Judge Sullivan deliberately chose to not deny the DOJ’s motion—

43/ and that was because his intention was to specifically evade personal accountability.

Denying the DOJ’s motion would have meant that it would have been directly appealable as a matter of right by General Flynn and the DOJ.

44/ Keeping in mind the who-knows-what is going on behind the scenes with Judge Sullivan and the DOJ—remember previously, the DOJ was adamant in its reluctance to end this charade in the first instance.

45/ It would have been far too apparent for the DOJ to not directly appeal an outright denial of its motion to dismiss; which speaks volumes since the DOJ has yet to file its position regarding the writ of mandamus filed by Attorney Powell on behalf of General Flynn—

46/ and I’d bet that the DOJ doesn’t file anything given the irony of the Court of Appeals having expressed in its Order that the DOJ was not required to file any pleading; that a filing is at the DOJ’s pleasure. sidneypowell.com/wp-content/upl…

47/ Furthermore, it is a well-known “little fact” in the legal arena that a writ of mandamus is a procedural avenue has slim odds of being granted—

48/ then add into the equation Judge Sullivan’s own written bio published on the Judicial Nominating Commission’s website (jnc.dc.gov/biography/hono…).

49/ Is it really any wonder that Judge Sullivan decided to play the odds and use diversionary tactics rather then the usual normal course of denying the motion?

50/ Where legal analysis can get a bit dry and boring, I’ll spare you (for now) a detailed blow-by-blow of the unconstitutional nature of Judge Sullivan’s own admission of trying to indirectly play prosecutor in a black robe through a retired judge henchman.

51/ The next blog installment: how Judge Sullivan intended to use the “amicus curiae” as an attempt to lawlessly punish General Flynn for the government filing its motion to dismiss—

52/ Judge’s Sullivan’s second prong of his order for the “amicus curiae” to help him “decide” whether there needs to be an Order for Show Cause of “criminal contempt for perjury”.

53/ THREAD ENDS AT No. 52

*@TamaraLeigh_llc

.@realDonaldTrump @PressSec

.@bostonbroadside @TheKuhnerReport

1/ Well @ThyConsigliori and @TamaraLeigh_llc, I just printed Judge Sullivan's filed "Brief In Response To May 21, 2020 Order" and rolling up my sleeves.

sidneypowell.com/wp-content/upl…

2/ Below is the actual order from the D.C. Court of Appeals.

I yet to go beyond the cover page of Judge Sullivan's filing with the D.C. Court of Appeals--and I already find the caption of Judge Sullivan's filing quite interesting. . .

3/ As shown the order states for Judge Sullivan to file "a response addressing petitioner's request" and counsel for Judge Sullivan chooses to describing the filing as
"Brief for Judge Emmet Sullivan In Response to Order". . .the court did not ask for a brief.

4/ Usually, appellate courts are very temperamental about following procedural Simon Says. If one looks at the banality of rules as to margins, number words, and the like, it speaks volumes that counsel for Judge Sullivan decided to use the term "brief" versus "response".

5/ Let me reiterate that I have not yet read beyond the cover page. But, as an appellate practitioner, I find it very odd the term "brief" instead of the requested "response." My take: Judge Sullivan, through counsel, is trying to create an illusion even on the cover page!!

6/ If a nonlawyer looks at the cover page, the term "brief" makes it appear as if the judge is just providing legal case law to assist the court--which is very different than the requested particular significance conveyed by "response" where one has to explain his lawlessness.

7/ Also worthy of noting is that there are three (3) attorneys listed on the "brief" filed on behalf of Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

Given the above thread, it reminds of that old joke: how many lawyers does it take to screw in a light bulb. . .