Search
Close this search box.

FLYNN FREE: Appeals Court Orders Judge To Dismiss Charges

FILE - In this Dec. 18, 2018, file photo, President Donald Trump's former national security adviser Michael Flynn arrives at federal court in Washington. In reversal, US prosecutors no longer oppose prison time for former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)

A federal appeals court on Wednesday ordered a lower court to allow the case against former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn to be dismissed, as requested by the Justice Department — likely ending the years-long legal saga stemming from the Russia investigation.

The abrupt ending came in an order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.

This was the result of an appeal from Flynn’s lawyers asking for a so-called writ of mandamus — essentially an order telling a government official to carry out a certain duty — directing Judge Emmet Sullivan to approve the DOJ’s motion to dismiss.

Sullivan did not immediately grant that motion and instead sought to hold hearings on the matter, angering Flynn allies.

The unusual move from Sullivan to keep the case alive despite prosecutors’ wishes was preceded by an unusual move from the DOJ itself to drop the charges against Flynn even after he had pleaded guilty — saying the FBI interview that led to his charge of lying to investigators had no “legitimate investigative basis.”

It’s unclear whether Sullivan might try to continue to appeal and keep the case alive. But Wednesday’s court order was direct, ordering “that Flynn’s petition for a writ of mandamus be granted in part; the District Court is directed to grant the government’s Rule 48(a) motion to dismiss; and the District Court’s order appointing an amicus is hereby vacated as moot, in accordance with the opinion of the court filed herein this date.”

(AP)



5 Responses

  1. Yaapchik, this means that a corrupt and possibly dirty Judge Emmet Sullivan just got his riot act read to him by his bosses from U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Whether he will disregard their order is another story.

  2. Even if dismissed, it would have to be dismissed “with prejudice” , otherwise he could be put on trial again.

    Why don’t these stories point out relevant facts. Such as In April 2009 (under Obama), then-Attorney General Eric Holder dropped the charges against Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska, a liberal Republican who sided with Democrats on key issues including climate change and abortion. That happened seven month AFTER Stevens was convicted by a federal jury. The judge who willingly agreed was the very same Sullivan in this case.

Leave a Reply


Popular Posts