Connect with us

Courts

Michael Flynn’s Lawyer Blasts Judge’s Bias and Says She Told Trump NOT to Pardon Client

Lt. General Michael Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, slammed the biased judge in her client’s case.

Published

on

Lt. General Michael Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, slammed the biased judge in her client’s case and affirmed that she told President Donald Trump not to pardon the general because she is going to prevail in court despite the bias aligned against her.

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan attempted to grill Powell and intimated that he thinks she has been going through President Trump and U.S. Attorney General William Barr to get around his court.

“I can tell you I spoke one time to the president about this case to inform him about the general status of this litigation,” Powell replied.

The judge then asked if Powell urged Trump to assign new lawyers to the government’s case against the former national security adviser.

Trending: Watch Racist Biden Supporter Scream At Chinese Trump Supporter “You F**king Chinks!”

“Oh, heavens, no,” Powell exclaimed.

“I provided the White House with an update on the overall status of the litigation,” Powell added. “I never discussed this case with the president until recently, when I asked him not to issue a pardon.”

Sullivan once again ended the day’s hearings without making any decisions o whether or not he would close the case as the Department of Justice has repeatedly asked him to do.

Powell continued to pound the illicit case brought against her client.

“There was no case against General Flynn,” Powell and federal prosecutors wrote in the new joint motion filed just last week. “There was no crime. The FBI and the prosecutors knew that. This American hero and his entire family have suffered for four years from public abuse, slander, libel, and all means of defamation at the hands of the very government he pledged his life to defend.”

Powell also slammed the judge.

“It is an affront to the Rule of Law and a raging insult to the citizens of this country who see the abject corruption in this assassination by political prosecution of General Flynn,” Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell wrote, referring to the brief filed by court-appointed amicus John Gleeson. “This court exuviated any appearance of neutrality when it unlawfully appointed amicus as its own adversary to make these scurrilous arguments.”

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Don't forget to Like The Washington Sentinel on Facebook and Twitter, and visit our friends at The Republican Legion.

Become an insider!

Sign up for the free Washington Sentinel email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.

Advertisement

Courts

InfoWars’ Millie Weaver Utterly Exonerated, Media Ignores After Lambasting her for Arrest

InfoWars reporter Millie Weaver has been fully exonerated after being mysteriously arrested.

Published

on

InfoWars reporter Millie Weaver has been fully exonerated after being mysteriously arrested shortly after releasing a documentary entitled, Shadowgate. The media was filled with attacks on her after her arrest. But now that she has been released and the charges dismissed, the media is silent.

Weaver’s documentary chronicles the deep state operatives in the Obamagate coup attempt perpetrated against President Donald Trump.

According to reports, Weaver was arrested after a grand jury passed a secret indictment charging her with robbery and domestic violence.

Millie uploaded a video of her arrest in her home.

Posted by Millie Weaver on Friday, August 14, 2020

But now, just as mysteriously as were the arrest of Weaver and her two companions, the charges were dropped, and the case thrown out.

The case was dismissed on October 21 and Weaver and her co-defendants were released.

But now, all charges have been dropped and Weaver has been released from the threat of prosecution.

Weaver spoke about the incident in a video:

Weaver was furious that she had been “kidnapped and arrested from my home in front of my children,” and she said the initial charges were a “miscarriage of justice.” She also said, “Thank you everyone who stood by me” and acknowledged the contributions to her legal defense fund without which she said she would have been bankrupted.

Speaking of the costs, Weaver told supporters that “The financial burden placed on me — an innocent person — was insane.” she asked everyone to spread the news because “the mainstream media [her arrest was widely covered] is probably not going to cover the fact that these charges were dropped.”

She is right, too. No one is reporting her release.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Courts

Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s Legal Team Insist Judge Sullivan’s ‘Disqualification is Mandatory’ in Case

The legal team for former White House national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn is demanding that Judge Emmet Sullivan be removed from the case.

Published

on

The legal team for former White House national security adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn entered a new filing on Wednesday demanding that Judge Emmet Sullivan be summarily removed from the case for his dereliction of duty.

The filing insists that Sullivan recuse himself from “further participation” in the Flynn case, citing an “appearance of bias,” which the lawyers said is “terrifying and mandates disqualification.”

The filing added that Sullivan “cast an intolerable cloud of partiality over his subsequent judicial conduct” and “risked undermining the public’s confidence in the judicial process.”

“[A]ll that must be demonstrated to compel recusal,’ then, is ‘a showing of an appearance of bias …sufficient to permit the average citizen reasonably to question a judge’s impartiality,” the filing continued.

More:

The circumstances of this case lead any reasonable observer to believe that the current judge has a personal interest in the outcome, is irreparably biased against general Flynn, and is actively litigating against him. His continued presence in the case has become a national scandal undermining confidence in the impartiality of the federal judicial system and faith in the rule of law writ large. The Constitution compels, and all statutory bases require (‘shall recuse’), that Judge Sullivan recuse himself from any further proceedings even if he has granted the motion to dismiss with prejudice.

Judge Sullivan satisfied that standard when he actively litigated against General Flynn. He has since far exceeded it — rising to the level of demonstrating actual bias.

Flynn’s legal team added, “the court’s contempt and disdain for the defense was palpable throughout the hearing on September 29, 2020, including when defense counsel made an oral motion for his immediate disqualification, which he refused to allow even to be fully stated for the record.”

“Judge Sullivan’s Immediate Disqualification is Mandatory,” the lawyers exclaimed.

“Judge Sullivan’s increasingly hostile and unprecedented words and deeds in what has become his own prosecution of General Flynn mandate his disqualification from further participation in these proceedings and the referral of his conduct to the D.C. Circuit Judicial Council,” the filing continued. “The appearance of bias here is terrifying and mandates disqualification,” the paper concluded.

The case has needlessly dragged on for months because Judge Sullivan has refused to declare an end to the case even though the Department of Justice formally pulled its charges against the former Trump adviser and closed its case against him.

Still, despite that there is no longer a legal case against Flynn, Sullivan has refused to close the case and continues to try Flynn over what even the federal government now says are false charges.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

Continue Reading

Courts

WATCH (Or Read): Supreme Court Justice-To-Be Amy Coney Barrett’s Acceptance Speech

“I love the United States, and I love the United States Constitution.”

Published

on

“I love the United States, and I love the United States Constitution.”

The Text of Amy Coney Barrett’s remarks, delivered on September 26, 2020:

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I am deeply honored by the confidence that you have placed in me, and I am so grateful to you and the first lady, to the vice president and the second lady, and to so many others here for your kindness on this rather overwhelming occasion.

I fully understand that this is a momentous decision for a president, and if the Senate does me the honor of confirming me, I pledge to discharge the responsibilities of this job to the very best of my ability. I love the United States, and I love the United States’ Constitution. I am truly humbled by the prospect of serving on the Supreme Court. Should I be confirmed, I will be mindful of who came before me. The flag of the United States is still flying at half-staff in memory of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg to mark the end of a great American life. Justice Ginsburg began her career at a time when women were not welcome in the legal profession—but she not only broke glass ceilings, she smashed them. For that, she has won the admiration of women across the country, and indeed, all over the world. She was a woman of enormous talent and consequence, and her life of public service serves as an example to us all.

Particularly poignant to me was her long and deep friendship with Justice Antonin Scalia, my own mentor. Justices Scalia and Ginsburg disagreed fiercely in print without rancor in person. Their ability to maintain a warm and rich friendship despite their differences even inspired an opera. These two great Americans demonstrated that arguments, even about matters of great consequence, need not destroy affection. In both my personal and professional relationships, I strive to meet that standard.

I was lucky enough to clerk for Justice Scalia, and given his incalculable influence on my life, I am very moved to have members of the Scalia family here today, including his dear wife Maureen. I clerked for Justice Scalia more than 20 year ago, but the lessons I learned still resonate. His judicial philosophy is mine, too. A judge must apply the law as written. Judges are not policymakers, and they must be resolute in setting aside any policy views they might hold. The president has asked me to become the 9th justice, and as it happens, I’m used to being in a group of nine, my family.

Our family includes me, my husband Jesse, Emma, Vivian, Tess, John Peter, Liam, Juliet, and Benjamin. Vivian and John Peter, as the president said, were born in Haiti and they came to us five years apart when they were very young. And the most revealing fact about Benjamin, our youngest, is that his brothers and sisters unreservedly identify him as their favorite sibling. Our children obviously make our life very full. While I am a judge, I’m better known back home as a room parent, carpool driver, and birthday party planner. When schools went remote last spring, I tried on another hat: Jesse and I became co-principals of the Barrett e-learning academy—and yes, the list of enrolled students was a very long one. Our children are my greatest joy even though they deprive me of any reasonable amount of sleep.

I couldn’t manage this very full life without the unwavering support of my husband, Jesse. At the start of our marriage, I imagined that we would run our household as partners. As it has turned out, Jesse does far more than his share of the work. To my chagrin, I learned at dinner recently that my children consider him to be the better cook. For 21 years, Jesse has asked me every single morning what he can do for me that day. And though I almost always say “nothing,” he still finds ways to take things off my plate—and that’s not because he has a lot of free time. He has a busy law practice. It’s because he is a superb and generous husband, and I am very fortunate. Jesse and I have a life full of relationships, not only with our children, but with siblings, friends, and fearless baby-sitters, one of whom is with us today. I am particularly grateful to my parents, Mike and Linda Coney.

I have spent bulk of my adulthood as a Midwesterner, but I grew up in their New Orleans home. And as brother and sisters can also attest, mom and dad’s generosity extends not only to us, but to more people than any of us could count. They are an inspiration.

It is important at a moment like this to acknowledge family and friends, but this evening I also want to acknowledge you, my fellow Americans. The president has nominated me to serve on the United States Supreme Court, and that institution belongs to all of us. If confirmed, I would not assume that role for the sake of those in my own circle, and certainly not for my own sake. I would assume this role to serve you. I would discharge the judicial oath, which requires me to administer justice without respect to persons, do equal right to the poor and rich, and faithfully and impartially discharge my duties under the United States Constitution.

I have no illusions that the road ahead of me will be easy, either for the short-term or the long haul. I never imagined that I would find myself in this position, but now that I am, I assure you that I will meet the challenge with both humility and courage. Members of the United States Senate, I look forward to working with you during the confirmation process, and I will do my very best to demonstrate that I am worthy of your support.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Courts

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg Dead at 87 — Trump MUST Fill This Seat

With the death of left-wing U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Trump now has his best change to chance the Supreme Court for decades to come.

Published

on

Only months before a presidential election, left-wing U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died of complications from cancer. This gives Trump his best chance to change the Supreme Court for decades to come.

Ginsburg was a hard-charging champion of far-left causes and put her activism into action to remake America through activist court decisions going back since her elevation to the court in 1993 when she was appointed by President Bill Clinton.

But it was only a few years into her tenure on the high court that her health began troubling her when cancer and other issues cropped up as early as 1999. She had several falls breaking bones, suffered five bouts with cancer, and went through surgery to insert a stent to clear a blocked artery, all after she turned 75.

Ginsburg, though, toughed out each health scare and continued to serve on the nation’s highest court delivering leftward decisions, one after another.

Still, her last bout with cancer was her last. In July she announced that she was undergoing chemotherapy treatment for lesions on her liver. Complications from that illness have now taken her from us all. Ginsburg died of complications from metastatic pancreatic cancer on Friday at her home in Washington D.C.

Her death sets up a partisan firefight if President Trump decides to try and fill her position in the last months of his first term and, perhaps, even ahead of the Nov. 3 General Election.

Democrats will bray that it is unseemly that Trump try to fill the position before the nation has a chance to vote on his suitability for a second term. And they will for sure attack him if he continues to try and fill the position if he happens to lose the election to Joe Biden.

On the other hand, conservatives will rightly point out that they now have the power to fill another Supreme Court seat and they must strike now before they lose that power.

It’s also likely that Democrats and the Media will work to forestall any chance that Trump could fill the position — especially before Election Day which is only 45 days away.

One of the things that President Trump has done best for the conservative cause is to fill as many judicial seats as he can with conservative-minded judges. This is a MUST for the conservative cause. Waiting until Trump *maybe* loses the election is a bad deal for the conservative cause and the country.

Trump must forge ahead and fill this seat whether he wins on Nov. 3 or not.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Courts

Judge Orders Police Not to Use Batons, Shields, Gas, Rubber Bullets, Chokeholds, Or Sound Cannons Against BLM Protesters

Published

on

By

Judge Orders Police Not to Use Batons, Shields, Gas, Rubber Bullets, Chokeholds, Or Sound Cannons Against BLM Protesters

A federal judge temporarily banned Detroit police from using batons, shields, gas, rubber bullets, chokeholds, or sound cannons against Black Lives Matter protesters.

U.S. District Court Judge Laurie Michelson partially granted a temporary restraining order Detroit Will Breathe sought when it sued the city of Detroit, alleging that police were using excessive force to stop them from exercising their free speech rights. The order will be in effect for at least 14 days and forbids police from using force without probable cause.

If I was a cop I would walk off the job because it’s unsafe. These liberal judges should go out there and fight the rioters without any protection.
Breitbart:

A federal judge in Detroit has ordered the city’s police not to use batons, tear gas, shields, chokeholds, rubber bullets, sound cannons, or any other type of non-lethal force against protesters for the next two weeks.

The late Friday ruling granted a temporary restraining order to the activist group Detroit Will Breathe, which sued the city on Monday, claiming that excessive police force infringed upon their protesters’ First Amendment rights, the Detroit Free Press reported.

U.S. District Court Judge Laurie Michelson’s order stops police from using any type of force during protests without “probable cause.”

“For a short period, we know that the police will not be able to use the brutal tactics they have in the past against peaceful protesters without violating a court order,” said Jack Schulz, who filed the order on behalf of the group.

But Detroit Police Chief James Craig said the police have not used force against peaceful protesters.

“We’re going to continue to do our jobs the way we’ve done it,” he said. “We respect peaceful protesters. We understand the judge’s order and we’ll make sure the protesters understand if there’s any aggression or violation of law, they will get ample notice like we’ve done in the past.”

The lawsuit claimed that some of the officers’ use of force had left some protesters hospitalized. More

This is a perfect example of a feckless liberal judge substituting her personal feelings over the law as evidenced by “the order was entered without an evidentiary hearing.” Peaceful protesting is not violating the rights of others by blocking streets and highways, littering by throwing bricks and fireworks, torching city vehicles, and businesses.

Continue Reading

Courts

Steve Bannon Charged with Fraud Over ‘We Build The Wall’ Fundraising – Pleads Not Guilty

Steve Bannon was indicted and arrested on Thursday by the left-wing Manhattan District Attorney on charges that he allegedly defrauded border wall investors.

Published

on

Conservative raconteur Steve Bannon was indicted and arrested on Thursday by the left-wing Manhattan District Attorney on charges that he allegedly defrauded investors looking to build a private border wall in Texas.

Bannon, who has been hosting daily Internet broadcasts he calls the “War Room” covering China and the coronavirus, was arrested on a yacht off the coast of Connecticut on Thursday, NBC reported.

Bannon was a member of a group that had raised $25 million to build a private border wall. Now the Manhattan DA is alleging that the money has been mishandled:

Bannon is among four people indicted for allegedly defrauding hundreds of thousands of donors to the online “We Build the Wall” campaign.

Manhattan federal prosecutors and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service allege that Bannon, campaign leader Brian Kolfage, Andrew Badolato and Timothy Shea “received hundreds of thousands of dollars in donor funds from We Build the Wall, which they each used in a manner inconsistent with the organization’s public representations.”

Trump said he was “very sorry” for Bannon.

“I feel very badly,” Trump told reporters when asked about the news. “I haven’t been dealing with him for a very long period of time.”

But the president added that he was not a fan of the project.

“I thought that was a project that was being done for showboating reasons,” he said.

“I didn’t like it because I didn’t want to be associated with that,” he said, referring to the private project. “We’ve built a very powerful wall. It was a wall that is virtually impossible to get through. It’s very, very tough. It’s very strong.”

“We Build the Wall” began as a GoFundMe campaign in late 2018, designed to raise money directly from the public to build a border wall in the face of congressional opposition. It was started by Kolfage, a military veteran, with support from Shea, the owner of an energy drink company called Winning Energy whose cans feature a cartoon superhero image of Trump and claim to contain “12 oz. of liberal tears.” Bannon and Badolato later allegedly came in and took effective control of the campaign’s daily operations.

The indictment alleges that Kolfage took $350,000 of the funds and used them for personal use without disclosing it to investors.

Later on Thursday afternoon, Bannon pleaded not guilty to the charges.

He was released after posting $1.7 million in assets as bail.

It should be remembered that the DAs in New York are highly political and most all their actions against people like Bannon are calculated for political effect, not to bring lawbreakers to heel, but as weapons to destroy Republicans.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Courts

WATCH: Vice President Pence Slams Supreme Court Chief John Roberts as a ‘Disappointment’

Vice President Mike Pence said what every Republican thinks when he slammed U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts.

Published

on

Vice President Mike Pence said what every Republican thinks when he slammed U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts as a huge disappointment for constitutional law.

Pence joined CBN News Chief Political Analyst David Brody on Thursday when Brody asked, “Are you scratching your head a little bit on John Roberts? We’re not going to call him David Souter at this point, but conservatives have a track record of having some problems with Supreme Court justices that you thought were going to be a reliable vote…”

Pence replied that the Supreme Court is an extremely important institution, but Roberts is clearly not up to the challenge.

“We have great respect for the institution of the Supreme Court of the United States,” Pence said. “But Chief Justice John Roberts has been a disappointment to conservatives, whether it be the Obamacare decision or whether it be a spate of recent decisions all the way through Calvary Chapel. It’s a reminder, and I think several cases out of the Supreme Court are a reminder [of] just how important this election is for the future of the Supreme Court.”

The Veep continued saying:

We remember the issue back in 2016, which I believe loomed large in voters’ decision between Hillary Clinton and the man who would become President of the United States. And some people thought that it wouldn’t be as big an issue these days, but I think that’s all changed. The recent decision — and again a narrow Supreme Court decision — striking down a Louisiana pro-life law that only said that doctors working in abortion clinics would have to have admitting privileges at local hospitals. That’s a very modest restriction on abortion providers, but a narrow majority in the Supreme Court still said it was unacceptable.

And I think it’s been a wake-up call for pro-life voters around the country who understand, in a very real sense, that the destiny of the Supreme Court is on the ballot in 2020. And that’s why President Trump announced that he’s going to publish another list of men and women from which he will draw any future appointments to the Supreme Court of the United States. He did that in 2016; he kept his word. He’s going to do that in the fall of 2020, and [in the] next four years, he’ll keep his word and appoint more principled conservatives to our courts.

Pence specifically pointed to the disastrous ruling by Roberts in the Calvary Chapel case where Roberts ruled that a Nevada casino has more rights than the state’s churches.

“Well look, our nation has been through a very challenging time. And we’re still working our way through the coronavirus pandemic. But you don’t give up your constitutional liberties, even in a pandemic,” Pence said.

Here is the full interview:

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: facebook.com/Warner.Todd.Huston.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Become an insider


Best of the Month

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!
 
Send this to a friend