In the history of mankind, many republics have risen, have flourished for a less or greater time, and then have fallen because their citizens lost the power of governing themselves and thereby of governing their state. TR


Judge gives in and dismisses Michael Flynn case

Sounds like he’s pretty mad about it though.

Maybe he will buy Flynn a new house, since the war hero has lost his defending himself after being entrapped by federal law enforcement.

According to Fox News:

Judge Emmet Sullivan dismissed the criminal case against former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn on Tuesday, putting an end to a case that took a number of turns after Flynn’s initial guilty plea three years ago.

Trump pardoned Flynn in late November after Sullivan refused to automatically grant the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss Flynn’s case earlier this year.

“The history of the Constitution, its structure, and the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the pardon power make clear that President Trump’s decision to pardon Mr. Flynn is a political decision, not a legal one,” Sullivan said in his Tuesday order. “Because the law recognizes the President’s political power to pardon, the appropriate course is to dismiss this case as moot.”

4 thoughts on “Judge gives in and dismisses Michael Flynn case”

  1. Petty. Vindictive.

    Sullivan’s points include that a pardon acceptance implies an acknowledgement of guilt.

    So oh smart Sullivan — if a pardon is granted to a dead person, does that person also acknowledge guilt?

    Hoping that Trump empties prisons of non-violent criminals and also grants pardon-a-plenty before he leave office — whenever that might happen.

  2. On January 17, 2017, as one of the final acts of his presidency, Barack Obama commuted the sentence of 74-year-old Oscar Lopez Rivera, the Puerto Rican nationalist who had served 35 years of a 55-year conviction for the crime of “seditious conspiracy,” as well as attempted robbery, explosives and vehicle-theft charges. Thanks to Obama’s intercession, Lopez will be freed in May.

    And not a word from the press….


  3. The question I have is how does a jurist get away with displaying such a clear bias from the bench? A potential juror that displayed anything close to the animus of this judge would never be seated or would be removed from the case.

Comments are closed.