1/ Thread re: D.C. Court of Appeals below Order for oral argument in Gen Flynn case
By: Lisa Siegel Belanger, Esq. of
Destination2Justice.com
Posting Date: June 2, 2020
By: Lisa Siegel Belanger, Esq. of
Destination2Justice.com
Posting Date: June 2, 2020
2/
This is a P.S.A. thread for nonlawyers re my calling out RED FLAGS of bias by the Court of Appeals IN FAVOR of Justice Emmet Sullivan.
See link to view Judge Sullivan's deep & wide ties in his role w/ the D.C. Judicial Nomination Commission
bit.ly/3donnOe
This is a P.S.A. thread for nonlawyers re my calling out RED FLAGS of bias by the Court of Appeals IN FAVOR of Justice Emmet Sullivan.
See link to view Judge Sullivan's deep & wide ties in his role w/ the D.C. Judicial Nomination Commission
bit.ly/3donnOe
3/ Here is my prior thread regarding the General Flynn case:
4/ As shown from the Order, the Court of Appeals states a deadline for "Petitioner and any response by EITHER RESPONDENT"
5/ The significance of such reference by the Court of Appeals is disconcerting where the issue was previously raised as to the procedural legitimacy of Judge Sullivan hiring legal counsel.
The only way that counsel for the judge would be legitimate is if he were A RESPONDENT.
The only way that counsel for the judge would be legitimate is if he were A RESPONDENT.
6/ The problem is that DE FACTO Judge Sullivan is NOT a Respondent--which is established by the caption of the petition which is:
In Re Michael T. Flynn
Such caption means, there is NO RESPONDENT
If a respondent existed, the caption would be: Michael T. Flynn v. _____
In Re Michael T. Flynn
Such caption means, there is NO RESPONDENT
If a respondent existed, the caption would be: Michael T. Flynn v. _____
7/ As explained, it is fishy the Court of Appeals specifically referred to a deadline for "either respondent"..indicating the court's way of covering for Judge Sullivan's use of counsel.
*Appellate courts commonly ask trial judges to give clarifications --NO USE OF COUNSEL.
*Appellate courts commonly ask trial judges to give clarifications --NO USE OF COUNSEL.
8/ Next RED FLAG: the Court of Appeals stating that "on the court's own motion" it is EXTENDING the deadline for MORE amicus briefs.
"on court's own motion" means that NO ONE has asked the Court of Appeals for an extension to file an amicus brief.
"on court's own motion" means that NO ONE has asked the Court of Appeals for an extension to file an amicus brief.
9/ Since NO ONE has asked the Court of Appeals to file an amicus brief...the court is saying that it is seeking more amicus briefs because the COURT wants it...
Now what is so extraordinary is the LARGE number of amicus briefs already filed!
Now, why would they want more??
Now what is so extraordinary is the LARGE number of amicus briefs already filed!
Now, why would they want more??
10/ Barring any mistakes, it is my understanding that the HUGE number of filed amicus briefs are all in support of General Flynn.
Think about that...now how does that look...NO filed amicus briefs to support Judge Sullivan.
I suggest: not good for judicial brethren.
Think about that...now how does that look...NO filed amicus briefs to support Judge Sullivan.
I suggest: not good for judicial brethren.
11/ Reminder: extension for filing of MORE amicus briefs was on "the court's own motion". . .
Not because anyone asked to file...
Coincidence should any amicus briefs now be filed in support of Judge Sullivan???
Not because anyone asked to file...
Coincidence should any amicus briefs now be filed in support of Judge Sullivan???
D2J Thread ends at No. 11
13. UPDATED LIST OF AMICUS FILINGS:
14./ Question still remains applicable:
15/ REMAINING RED FLAGS
re: D.C. Court of Appeals Order for oral argument:
🚩 Why did the Court of Appeals reference a filing deadline for:
"Petitioner and either RESPONDENT"--where there is no Respondent per the caption of the case (In re Michael T. Flynn)
re: D.C. Court of Appeals Order for oral argument:
🚩 Why did the Court of Appeals reference a filing deadline for:
"Petitioner and either RESPONDENT"--where there is no Respondent per the caption of the case (In re Michael T. Flynn)
16/
🚩Given the sizeable number of amicus filings and no specific requests for extension of time for filing an amicus brief, why did the Court of Appeals on its "own motion" seek more time for additional amicus filings?
🚩 Judge Sullivan's role w/
👇
bit.ly/3donnOe
🚩Given the sizeable number of amicus filings and no specific requests for extension of time for filing an amicus brief, why did the Court of Appeals on its "own motion" seek more time for additional amicus filings?
🚩 Judge Sullivan's role w/
👇
bit.ly/3donnOe
@threadreaderapp Please unroll
