Emmet Sullivan—aka the eccentric federal judge who’s been fanatically performing nonconsensual mouth-to-mouth on the Flynn prosecution—can retire from the bench when the case ends, then walk right into an absurdly-high-paying do-little partnership at a DOJ/Deep State-aligned law firm or DNC-support organization.
Two such possibilities immediately spring to mind: FusionGPS and Covington & Burling LLP, which originally represented Flynn. Eric Holder also landed a revolving-door partnership thereafter he declined to prosecute the firm’s banking clients in the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis.
Many lawyers and judges likely anticipate these contingencies too. Few, however, are likely to talk about them, let alone publish an article like this one. Their profession is highly image-conscious and the truth is unflattering. Thankfully though, despite the media’s undying loyalty to the shyster brigade, more people are coming to see them for what they are.
Fired former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe now works for CNN, for example.
I first thought Sullivan’s absurd behavior was the result of blackmail or extortion. The DOJ regularly uses such leverage to achieve its political goals, going all the way back to J. Edgar Hoover and the infamous files he kept on prominent Americans.
Before Flynn’s case, Sullivan was renowned as the Brady judge. That’s a reference to the Supreme Court decision that requires prosecutors to reveal evidence that’s damaging to their cases. So Sullivan’s recent retention of a retired judge basically to keep prosecuting Flynn in the face of the Mueller team’s scandalous Brady violations felt like an episode of The Twilight Zone.
I was worried about Sullivan. A decade ago, he ruffled a lot of feathers when he effectively forced the DOJ’s “public integrity section” to drop its fraudulent prosecution of Republican U.S. Senator Ted Stevens. The DOJ doesn’t easily forgive that kind of embarrassment. Department personnel dig up dirt and blackmail lawyers for much less.
Now, however, I have a different hypothesis: Sullivan simply sold out. Occam’s razor says the simplest answer is usually the correct one. And no other theory so simply explains Sullivan’s recent pandering. He knows higher judges will reverse his decisions against Flynn, but that’s irrelevant: This is all theatre for the benefit of his patrons.
Election day is rapidly approaching, and the mainstream press is furiously churning out anti-Flynn and anti-Trump headlines at every station stop of Sullivan’s crazy train. Remember, Bill Clinton appointed Sullivan to the bench.
In the latest act of thespianism, June 12, a panel of 3 federal appeals judges heard arguments to remove Sullivan from the Flynn case. I predict it will rule along partisan lines, though it ought to be a 3-0 decision against Sullivan regardless of which judges hear it. If so, this will provide the latest evidence that the federal judiciary has become a thoroughly partisan and theatrical institution.
If the appeals court leaves Sullivan in charge of the case, Flynn’s lawyer, Sidney Powell, will likely file a petition to the Supreme Court, which will then be heard and also decided along partisan lines. Thus, Flynn can rest easy, reassured by the high court’s 5-4 conservative majority. Again though, it ought to be a unanimous decision regardless of which judges or justices hear it: Objectively speaking, the law is clear.
Some in the legal world will complain about the damage Sullivan is doing to the public’s confidence in the criminal justice system. That confidence, however, is the result of widespread misperceptions. Indeed, if an engineer designed a system that ruined so many innocent lives, he would quickly find himself unhireable. If a doctor had such bad patient outcomes, he would lose his license.
So, Sullivan’s antics are a kind of public-service announcement, to the extent they damage the misperceptions that enable the worst aspects of the criminal justice system.
It’s just too bad Sullivan’s PSA will be drowned out by all the shyster media pundits who blindly or disingenuously insist the system works. That’s how misperceptions nearly become a reality. Remember, though, nearly every one of these pundits is a lawyer or a judge—a member of a gild reliant on the public’s goodwill, even if that goodwill is maintained through dishonest means.
The truth is, they’ve built and maintained a system that sucks, at a staggering cost to Americans outside their gild, like General Flynn, Roger Stone, President Trump, and you and me.