A court appeal has granted a motion for mandamus. It is an extraordinary remedy that tells the judge, we must do something or not do something. And they directed the judge flynn or dismiss case. But happen yesterday in the full court, all ten judges to decide this case re heard it. The reason this case is being heard, it is an unusual posture and that after pleading guilty, Michael Flynn, the Justice Department is dismissing the case. And so for that reason, the judge is required to give permission. There is a court rule that said in the case to be dismissed with leave of court. So he scheduled a hearing to hear more about it before rendering a decision. And then leapfrogged that decision and led to the court of appeals to say he must dismiss. He has the discretion. So thats what that was about yesterday. I think even if the court also may decide the case it really is proper to go the routine iaroute of having the trial judge make the decision. And then appealed the decision if you don
Legislators back in the special session to consider the mma. Elaine weiss, sunday night at 8 00 p. M. Eastern on cspans q a. This morning bret mcardle for leaving time but this case to the last half hour. I wonder after watching yesterday you think Michael Flynns Attorney Sidney Powell did what she needed to do to make her case before that panel of judges yesterday . Look, it is a difficult case if your focus is simply on the politics of the matter. If you are looking at the law and the facts of the c case, i think ms. Powell has the stronger side of the facts and the law. With the executive branch is the one that should be determining whether case goes forward or not. Steve at the headlines the Washington Post this morning judges skeptical of shutting down a review of the flynn case. I wonder your reading of the judges reaction, their interaction with the lawyers yesterdays . Guest any time you are in front of one judges difficult as an attorney. But to be in front of multiple judges
Flynn is a defendant without a prosecutor and litigation now without any controversy between the actual parties to the case. Instead of promptly granting dismissal as required as a matter of law, judge sullivan denied two defense motioning opposing any amicus at all, appointed mr. Gleeson to usurp the job of prosecutor, and went forth to right theening wrotes he perceived. To right the wrongs he perceived. The job of the United States attorney is otherwise occupied. In adding these unconstitutional burdens of process to punish Michael Flynn, judge sullivan discarded any semblance of the unbiased, impartial adjudicator this court extolled in the 2019 chapter of that case saga. As a cornerstone of any system of justice worth the label. Four rulings are required to conclude this novel article three excess. Judge sullivans petition for rehearing must be flatly denied with clear language that a judge has no injury and no standing to seek relief of this courts rulings. Because judge sullivan
Office get more moneys votes more money to make sure peoples votes get to location on time. What do you think . Do you support more money for the post office for mailin voting . We will open up special lines this morning. If you support calls to get the post office more money for mailin voting, we want to hear from you at 202 7488000. More money for the u. S. Post office for mailin voting, your number is going to be guest . And is going to be 202 7488001. And we are opening up special line, u. S. Postal workers, if you work at a post office or for the Postal Service, we want to hear from you and what is going on in your location. Your number is going to be 202 7488002. Keep in mind, you can always text us at 202 7488003. You can always reach us on social media at twitter at cspanwj and on facebook at facebook. Com cspan. Of the post office has been on the mind of americans for the past week or so. I will bring to you a story from the wall street journal, talking about these concerns. H
Good morning, everybody. The hearing will come to order. Today were going to have a video hearing with ms. Sally yates, who was the acting attorney general for a period of time in january of 2017 and was the number two at the department of justice in early january 2017. Ms. Yates appeared before the committee on may 18th, 2017. That was before the Mueller Investigation really got started. It was before the horowitz report about the Mueller Investigation was issued, and i believe much has been learned since may of 2018 2017. And we would like to discuss certain topics with ms. Yates. My view of ms. Yates is that she exercised good caution and legal judgment in january of 2017, and if people had followed her advice, things might be different today, so i just want to let you know, ms. Yates, from my point of view, you analyzed the situation fairly correctly, and we will get into that later on. Whats the purpose of this hearing . Its to ask questions of ms. Yates knowing then what she know