Category: Articles

On Judge Sullivan’s Response – Nice Try


Today Judge Sullivan’s attorney replied to the DC Court of Appeals order that the Judge respond to defense counsel’s petition for writ of mandamus.

Attorney Beth Wilkinson is worth every penny. Her job was to defend the District Court’s indefensible behavior in trying to branch the Flynn case clown show into a full blown Cirque du Soleil. She gave it a heck of a shot.

It is still no sale. Like any legal brief arguing one side, it was Wilkinson’s job not to present a balanced discussion, but to convince the Court that her side is right.

So she harped on a couple of points (repeatedly, kind of that “pound the table” legal proverb). That Flynn repeatedly “admitted” he lied (“admitted”, considering what has been uncovered, requires a little chutzpah); that the government’s motion to dismiss was signed only by a political appointee and not by career “line attorneys” in the DOJ; claiming (quite on thin ice) that the government’s arguments for why reversing their course were thinly sourced (OMG); that the government withdrawing after a guilty plea was pretty unusual (but not rare and certainly not unheard of).

There was more but I took a fast read, and I don’t want to over-detail this.

All of her arguments, every single one, are countered by (1) the government motion’s offered proof, and I am saying proof, of no predicate, which means no investigation, which means no “material matter”, which means no crime of lying to the FBI in a material matter. (also, he didn’t lie) and (2) the unbreakable tenet that it is entirely, 100%, within the discretion of the government, and not the District Court, as to whether or not to prosecute an innocent man for perjury who claimed under oath to be guilty because he was being extorted by the prosecution into saying that.

And I am just totally leaving out the egregious government misconduct from begining to almost end.

Emmet, you are going to lose, but at least you were not so stupid as to try to write this brief yourself.

Staged Stacks of Bricks

Pantifa’s level of deniability?  0

Evidence that Pantifa has been planning, staging, and waiting for a convenient episode to light the fuse  (thanks stupid racist rat bastard cop) ? 100

Evidence that Pantifa is indeed a terrorist organization? 100

We will see how clever they are. Maybe they will surprise me but in my experience the jackals have a certain impressive kind of savvy, but are not deep thinkers.

Those piles of bricks came from somewhere. They went to multiple downtown areas and other hot zones, at least 20 I bet, in trucks with the ability to drop a pallet-level quantity of bricks.

Subtlety factor: 0

America is now Land of the Watched, and Home of the Surveillance Camera. The feds will absolutely be able to get license plates (if the Panty Patrol did not mask them) and be able to track movements of these trucks for large parts of the path they were on, maybe for the complete journeys. They are likely to have gotten face shots if they did not stay masked.  There were many trucks, many cities. And I don’t know, and please don’t tell me because right now I can sleep at night, mostly, what kind of crazy black magic goes on with tracking phones by GPS, but I have to suspect that with some camera hits and time stamps they can detect what phones were turned on in these trucks.

It is a numbers game, and all the feds need is to score a hit on one or two, and they can use those to roll up entire cells, draw a thread to the national organization, and #SeeYa. I know they are just now “officially” designating Pantifa a domestic terrorism gang. Don’t doubt for a second that the major figures are any mystery at all to the FBI, and that many, many phones have been surveiled for years.

I do not have little Trump dolls (would not mind Melania dolls — and let’s just let that drop right there) . But right now this is the guy we need. He is like the linebacker:  see quarterback, kill quarterback. Who was that, Brian Bosworth?  Trump is the guy to say hey you wanted this party, let’s do it. I got the FBI, I got wiretaps, I got cameras, I got judges, I got prisons. What do you got? Pretty pink lingerie and bricks? Guys who get their asses kicked by rednecks every time it is 1-on-1? (one of my favorite videos ever) Let’s go.

This cannot be allowed, cannot be uncontested. Without getting overly philosophical (ice cream headaches, right?) we can’t afford to even get close to a situation where society starts to unravel. Chaos, lawlessness, that leads to no possible good.  Even for Pantifa. This world that they want, they could not survive in. Kind of makes me happy to think about at one level, but I don’t want to lose America, lose Western Civilization, just so I can say #ToldYaBitch to a bunch of idiots.





The Curious Matter of Judge Sullivan, His Lawyer, and the Appeals Court

Maybe you thought the General Michael Flynn case couldn’t get any stranger.  Now this: Judge Emmet Sullivan, upon being ordered by the DC Court of Appeals to respond to the defense team’s petition for writ of mandabus, has hired a high-powered lawyer of his own.

When was that last time you heard of a judge getting a lawyer in a matter over which he was presiding?  I’ve never heard of such a thing.

Let us take a look at what is in the bushes here.

Recap of May 2020 Events

First, a recap of the most recent events in the prosecution of Michael Flynn by the Mueller Special Counsel’s Office. Only the very most recent, because this case has truly been a freak show for three years.

  • in the week prior to May 7: document dumps produced evidence of gross FBI misconduct in targeting Flynn in a perjury trap with no investigative purpose, and of Flynn’s original counsel, Covington & Burling, making a secret side deal that the government would not prosecute Flynn’s son in exchange for Flynn’s guilty plea.
  • May 7: the prosecution submitted a motion to dismiss the case with prejudice, meaning they could never bring charges again. The motion stated that the government had no original predicate to interview Flynn, and that any false statement  he might have made was not material to any investigation, and therefore no crime.
  • May 12: rather than dismissing the case, Judge Sullivan declared he would be accepting amicus briefs from third parties as late as June 10, and outlined a schedule that would  include hearings in July.
  • May 13: Sullivan appointed retired judge John Gleeson to be amicus curiae  “to present arguments in opposition to the government’s motion to dismiss”, as well as explore whether Flynn should be charged with perjury.  Gleeson had written an Op-Ed May 11 in the Washington Post critical of the government’s decision to drop the case.
  • May 19: Flynn’s team filed a petition for a Writ of Mandamus with the DC Court of Appeals, requesting the higher Court to direct Sullivan to dismiss the case.
  • May 22: the DC Court instructed Sullivan to respond to the petition for writ of mandamus within 10 days.
  • May 24. news came indirectly that Judge Sullivan had hired  his own high-powered lawyer, Beth Wilkinson.

And that was the very brief version.

What does Judge Sullivan need a high-powered lawyer for?  I believe it is simply for counsel on how to craft the response, which is highly interesting, since one would assume that an experienced federal judge would know.  I suspect he knows he has painted himself into quite a corner, and is looking for anything with a parachute. He has not merely mis-stepped, he has moved into the area of misconduct. Let us now deconstruct. I’d like to work from end to beginning on this one.

A Writ of Mandamus

(h/t The Federalist article relied on heavily here)

Start with the May 22 initial response from the Appeals Court. A writ of mandamus is an order from a higher court to a lower court to conduct itself according to the law.  It is considered a fairly extraordinary measure, and is rarely granted (most such petitions are just Hail Marys). Three conditions must be satisfied: (1) the petitioner has no other means of having this putative wrong made right, (2) petitioner shows a clear and indisputable right to the writ, and (3) (the wild card) the higher court in its discretion agrees the writ is appropriate.

Most petitions are rejected out of hand, with no detailed response. Otherwise, the appellate court may order or invite the trial judge to respond to matters addressed in the petition. Alternatively, the appellate court may assign an amicus curiae to do so.

In this case, the DC Court of Appeals ordered (not invited) Judge Sullivan (not a proxy in the form of an amicus curiae) to respond in 10 days.  They have ordered him to personally and publicly defend his decision.  Their order specifically cited a recent case in that court, United States v. Fokker Services, a decision which held that the Executive branch has primacy over charging decisions (in that case the government and defendant had made a deferred prosecution agreement, and the judge deemed the decision too lenient and denied the motion to defer prosecution).  The DC Court in citing this in their order for Sullivan’s response does not bode well for him.

This Petition for Writ of Mandamus

High-powered attorney Sidney Powell asked for three things from the Court of Appeals (honestly, it was enjoyable reading):

  • grant the Justice Department’s Motion to Dismiss;
  • vacate its order appointing amicus curiae; and
  • reassign the case to another district judge as to any further proceedings.

Her rationale (in very brief) was that: the Constitution and many precedents place the power to prosecute solely on the Executive Branch; appointing an amicus curiae to argue against the prosecution’s motion to dismiss was in effect acting as prosecution, again usurping Executive Branch authority; that that amicus briefs have no place in criminal trial courts; and that Sullivan had committed numerous acts (which were enumerated) casting doubt on his objectivity in the case, not the least being selecting that particular retired judge — Gleeson, who was clearly not objective on the maatter —  as amicus curiae.

The Government’s Motion to Dismiss

In the case of Flynn, the government’s motion to dismiss could have been a 3-page document. It was a 108-page monstrosity that went to exceptional detail about government misconduct. It actually had screen shots of Bill Priestap’s hand-written note questioning whether the aim of a Flynn interview was to get an admission or  get him to lie so they could prosecute him or get him fired; it showed texts between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page as they continuously re-edited Form FB-302 interview notes in order to incriminate Flynn; it discussed Crossfire Hurricane, the January 4 FBI “closing document” indicating there was no derogatory information on Flynn and recommending any investigation be closed;

Sullivan read all of this, or should have. Yet instead of granting the prosection’s motion to dismiss, he has instead chosen to further drag this out, further denying decent treatment of the accused.

Sullivan’s Situation

Sullivan’s acts beginning on May 7 were far outside of any precedent.  Not immediately granting the prosecution’s motion to dismiss is a violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine, with recent precedents including not only Fokker, but a 9-0 Supreme Court decision handed down May 7, the exact date of this case’s motion to dismiss. Authored by Justice Ginsberg, it slapped down the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals for violation of a basic legal tenet called the “party presentation principle”.  In short, the court has to adjudicate the case in front of it, not the case it wishes it had.

There is another principle not so far mentioned in this column (but discussed at length by Powell in the petition). Due process. The entire judicial system in America has as a bedrock principle that the defendant has rights against being overpowered by the government (prosecution), and the judiciary is the primary protector of those rights. Because of due process, there are any number of rules (Miranda rights, chain of evidence, trial jury of peers, effective defense, discovery, Brady rules, speedy trial, freedom from double jeopardy,and many others). Were the judiciary to wrongly impose on the prosecution, that is bad. Were they to needlessly persecute the accused, that is a travesty which must not be borne.

Sullivan has been ordered to defend his actions in writing.  There’s not much of a  way to pretty this up.  He stepped way out of line, not only in sitting on the motion to dismiss, but in taking the role of a prosecutor. In addition, said some very intemperate things on the record: straight up accused Flynn of treason — yes, a trial judge said that to the defendant on a “lying to FBI on whether he discussed sanctions with Russian US Ambassador Kislyak” charge; and said “can’t hide my disgust, my disdain”;

No wonder he brought in Beth Wilkinson.  He’s OJ, except the gloves do indeed fit. He had better come up with something amazing.

He Could Punt

I have seen this mentioned only by Andrew McCarthy (although that’s pretty good chops right there ) . Judge Sullivan could, between now and June 1, grant the government’s motion to dismiss.  It’s not particularly a glamourouse move, does not save face, but it would probably help him escape from possible misconduct proceedings.

VeepStakes for Joe Biden

It seems the prevailing discussion on the Democrat side is that Joe should strongly consider picking an American Black, preferably female. But things that resonate within the party and the media may not necessarily resonate in America.

I view the VP pick this way. Joe Biden is underwater, I don’t care what RCP says. He is likely to lose, and may lose really, really big. As such, you want your VP pick to give you a boost, not merely shore up previously safe demographics. Ideally you would want the pick to help you steal crossover votes or a demographic or a state or two.

Things other than source state or race can be much bigger in a general election. Personality, resume, some particular specialty or calling card that can appeal across party lines. For the Democrats, that might be a big name sports figure (AJ Foyt, Dale Jr, Danica Patrick, Terry Bradshaw, Michael Jordan) or impressive military hero (John Glenn, pre-scandal David Petraeus, Michael Flynn if they had not tried to ruin him), or a notably centrist or crossover politician (Joe Lieberman, Joe Manchin, pre-2000 Al Gore before we knew he was nuts).

I would say go for some kind of very, very positive and vibrant persona, male of female, of any race, that does not sound like a socialist, free of scandal, and who does not have a specific record of making headlines pissing off undecideds in battleground states, and who might geographically help tip a significant state or several. If that person happens to be black, or a woman, so much the better.

To get back to the main topic, yes they are hemmoraging black votes, but in the search for meaningful battleground votes, there are more meaningful votes to be harvested by picking for personality and lack of socialist bona fides.

The payoff here? Stacey Abrams is actively and shamelessly lobbying for the job. Others prominently mentioned are Kamala Harris and Susan Rice. Outside the black female crowd, Amy Klobuchar seems to be a hot name, Andrew Cuomo and Michelle Obama also getting some mentions. Each of those is a terribly flawed candidate.

I can’t think of anybody, a single person, who makes a good pick. Fortunately, it’s not my job to help them.

State of the Bone

We’re back……….

It’s been just about 8 years. So much has transpired in both American political scene, and in the lives of the Patriot Bone family. I’m not going to recap all that here. I’d rather get right back to covering the scene, and maybe a time or two reflect on the events in the 8 year gap.

I will mention a couple of relevant things though, related to the site and me.

First, in case you wonder what you are up against, here it is. I am an Edmund Burke – James Madison – Russell Kirk conservative. I accept as fellow travelers the 3-legged stool crowd

Second, the only personal news from the 8 year gap that you are likely to see here: contributor and dear friend Pete departed us for heaven on August 18, 2018. He was 83, and while his hearing had been fading for years, he was looking pretty good right up until April of that year. I seriously thought he was going to make 90 easy and maybe challenge for 100. But for whatever reason, he faded fast. Not a bad way to go: 83 strong, then check out quickly. I remember telling my friend Martin that at some point it was looking like months, not years. The day came when I told Martin it was now looking like days, not months. And the day came, and I spent the day with him on his last day.

I look forward to seeing him again, same as I do Moses Sands, Richard Lucy, and Bob Chiore. Let’s not dwell on it.

Third, as far as PatriotBone goes, I have one other contributor now, Stella, and she is one phenomenal person, and I hope you will enjoy her. Total mind of her own, and I’m not going to demand that she toe the Burke/Kirk line. She’s not a formulaic conservative, but she is conservative, and like I said, she will contribute to the flavor of Patriot Bone in a way I think you’ll like. I hope to entice a couple of other friends, who are not blogging veterans, to chip in. I’ll not name names here, because like all of us, what we do as outspoken conservatives comes with a cost and a load of caution. As EPU it is not impossible to suss out who I am in the RW, but I’ll not help make it easy. I will recommend that my two friends in question use nom de plumes, just because leftists get personal.

Anyway……. I’m back. It’s on like Donkey Kong.

Overnite Pete: Sandy fallout

So the big hurricane/norther/perfect storm hit Monday, and unlike last year’s storm of the century (Irene), this one packed a large wallop. But soon enough the wind and the tidal surge passed, and now we do have a mess on our hands. The NJ coast, Lower Manhattan, and Staten Island seem to have suffered terribly. Electricity out, plumbing and drinkable water out, gasoline out, tunnels and bridges in and out closed (or monitored by Bloomy for those trying to sneak out without at least 3 to a car).

There was at least a week’s notice that this was coming. I don’t begrudge that the infrastructure took a huge hit. I only partly begrudge ordinary people not planning a little better for food/water/gas shortages. And then that idiot barack strolled around the Jersey shore in his photo-op with FatBoy™ and actually said “if they need something, we figure out a way to say yes”, in association with something he called the “15 minute rule.”

Yeah, right.
Read more

Anybody here too tired to fight 5 more days?

In some degree, we’ve been counting the days to this November the 6th for 4 years. Or perhaps for 24 years. Or perhaps since ObamaCare was passed, or since Porkulus was passed, or since the November 2010 thrashing we gave to the Visigoths. Maybe since Chief Justice Benedict Roberts stole a big one for the Bolshevik team.

Any way you count it, this Tuesday has been circled on the calendar for quite some time. It is the day that the forces of the Constitution are arrayed from one side of the valley to the other, against the forces of Statism. The valley is filled from wall to wall, and there is nobody on the battlefield who has not trained and worked tireless days, weeks, and months, all pointed to this day.

Every helmet and breastplate has been cleaned and polished to a shine, every dent hammered out. Every strap is on tight. Every weapon has been checked and rechecked, every blade honed down to a fine edge.

This is the day we have lived for.
Read more

Overnite Pete: EJ Dionne is an idiot (again)

Yeah I know. I am violating the old adage: no need to point out the astoundingly obvious when the merely obvious will do. Yet, this I could not pass up. Just add this one to the Mount McKinley size pile of bull-hockey from the main-sleaze commie media in their prodigious effort to get the chief commie re-elected so he can continue his work of dismantling the country. You can’t blame commies for agitating and lying for the cause.

But I do find it disappointing that they are so stupid. Just once could we get an evil but brilliant adversary? Perhaps we could meet the Kleptocrats halfway: give us an adversary that can button his fly without a government-issued manual.
Read more