Appeals Court to Flynn Judge: Explain Yourself

Jay Sekulow breaking news the DC court of appeals in general points case is an order telling the judge to explain himself live from Washington DC Jay Sekulow I think it means 11 a face-saving graceful way to get out of this on his own without the appellate court having to slap him down your questions right now: 1-800-684-3110 is this simply no legal justification what he's doing. I think hopefully that what the court is telling them is you know what, count to 10. We have to get our political disputes out of the courthouse and the chief counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice Jay Sekulow everybody brought will bring new year yesterday. Every Little League couple hours later, a DC Court of Appeals asked the district of Columbia federal Court of Appeals issued an order in general points case.

If you remember the issue. There is a writ of mandamus that was filed by Gen. plan through his lawyer, Sidney Brown's done a fantastic job in this case, I can't say that enough and she asked for a writ of mandamus to not allow the judge to basically appoint as amicus curiae, which is basically now a special prosecutor continue to go after Flynn after the Department of Justice said were done with the case. We agreed that the motion.that was filed to withdraw the plea to guilty plea should be done in the case should be over so the DC Court of Appeals yesterday issued this order to read it to you. It says upon consideration of the emergency petition for writ of mandamus is ordered on the court's own motion that within 10 days of the date of this order, the district judge, file a response addressing the petitioner's request that this court order, the district judge to grant the government's motion to dismiss filed on May 7, 2020. The government was also invited to respond within their discretion. But the key party areas that they want within 10 days, the district court judge to file a response addressing the writ of mandamus. That was in fact put forward by Sidney Powell. Now I'm a writer and you, senior counsel for the Americas and flow justice as well as a former US attorney, I was formally with the Department of the Treasury. We litigated cases Andy. This move of the Court of Appeals is motion on their own their own ruling here what he read what you read on this. My read on it is.

I've never seen it before, and 45 years of practicing law in mind you, and slap in the face of the district judge telling them what are you doing when the defendant asked the case to be dismissed and the government concurs in that and the prosecution should terminate. Who are you to appoint a referee to come in and assist you in making a decision on something that federal rule 28 of the rules of criminal procedure says you have to do ministerial 80 and what are you doing balking at this and refusing to rule.

I think it's an embarrassment to the judge. I think it's humiliating blow. It was done very tactfully. I agree with the comment that was made at the opening.

It was done in an attempt to save face. They did not name the district judge they could said Judge Emmet Sullivan, but they just said that District Judge I noticed that and it was unanimous. Jay was a three-judge panel of the DC circuit that unanimously agreed and this order to Judge Sullivan. I think it is really a phenomenal piece of the work on the part of Jenny Powell on the part of Bill Barnett think it's a humiliation to the District Judge drilling the fascinating aspect of this and he said as I reviewed right now, again ordering the District Judge to file a response addressing the writ of mandamus practice local couriers to I cannot remember a time where a Court of Appeals ordered a judge issue actually issue order and then require the judge to respond to basically filing a brief with the with the Court of Appeals usually did make a decision is reviewed by the Court of Appeals.

This is post unprecedented. I will take your phone calls, 1-800-684-3110 800-684-3110. Let me also tell you this.

Your support of the American Center for Law and Justice allows us to be engaged in all these cases, but also allows us to bring you this broadcast every single day ACLJ.challenges facing Americans are substantial time and are now free to insert constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stand with the American Center for Law and Justice ACLJ on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do our work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms than remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you.

If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us.

ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing work, become a member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice is protected. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn. It's called mission life will show you how you are personally pro-life support in the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist the ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the what Obama care means to the pro-life of the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right to life question free copy of mission life today online ACLJ/is extraordinary.

I mean just exploring what it happened. So it just joining us, a DC Court of Appeals, a writ of mandamus was filed with the DC Court of Appeals applied for everyone. What exactly Cindy Powell is asking for. She was very specific. She said what the judge was doing to general Flynn by appointing that amicus curiae retired judge. Find out what is happening and say basically your appointed to determine if there was a constitutional a criminal violation.

You're basically lying when he entered his plea which was unpleasant that she filed a writ of mandamus.

What does that mean a writ of mandamus is an extraordinary remedy rarely used in court and it says that I'm famous for the use of my Latin on the aerosol can hear it again folks it comes from the Latin verb monde all right which means to order mandamus is the first person plural of that which means we order you to do this that or the other whatever it is, a writ of mandamus are generally issued to public officials to do their duty. For example, issue a drivers license that this person is entitled why are you holding it up with the Secretary of State of the state put someone on the ballot he qualifies. But to see an appellate court issue a writ of mandamus to eight District Judge telling him explain yourself and why you have become the player in a ball game where you should be the and not take sides is something I have never ever ever seen, and they trying to do it in a very sort of Allied fashion. Like I said they didn't name the Jack by name.

They could help you know what else they could have done J is simply that we order you to enter an order dismissing the case, they could've said that the DC circuit could've said I don't hear anymore dismissed this case, but they said to him you got 10 days to explain yourself and that in the name itself to me is a humiliation to a judge to serve for what 25 years on the court right thing says its order on the courts almost means they may discard the motion that within 10 days of the date of this order. That's the order that came out yesterday, the District Judge at Sullivan will file a response addressing the petitioner's writ of mandamus, and they of course that writ of mandamus request that this court order the District Judge to grant the government's motion to dismiss. So we have an interesting question that came in on Facebook from Susan on the rate it says that Susan says this whole ordeal reminds me of how important judicial appointments. Nominations are then vented our director of government affairs. We were just talking about that five minute we went on the air.

You are not. It's a great example of how important ARJ and why we spent so much time at the ACLJ focusing on not only did mean the right people nominated by the President but also then getting the United States Senate to give them fair treatment and confirming the correct one day I'll tell you just this week there were four District Court nominees that were confirmed by the United States Senate not getting a lot of attention because of all the news that is happening with the United States Senate continues to confirm President trumps judges and then yesterday J the Senate Judiciary Committee ended. In addition to considering the 53 subpoenas that we've been talking about.

They considered the nomination of Justice Walker to be a judge on guess what what.court the DC circuit Court of Appeals. So look all of these things impact one another of the present has to nominate the right judges that the United States Senate has to confirm them the good news is behind the scenes in the face of all this, those confirmations are still happening now this is where it really brightens up your listening watching on Facebook. A periscope encourages share with her friends were listening on radio tell them, tell them, tell your friends will listeners broadcast were really breaking this down for Cindy Powell, the lawyer for general Flynn has issued a very direct statement on this, giving her opinion.

Let me play 40, number 27.

They issued a very order saying you got to follow response by June 1.

Usually they invite a response from the judge, but here they are ordering a response from Judge Sullivan a site for services and rule 48 a which require him to accept the government's dismissal limit status with leave of court, but that's a purely ministerial section that the defendant cannot be punished repeatedly by multiple prosecutions which would apply here because the government wants to dismiss with prejudice as they should. So I mean she could not be any clearer what she's asking so you after then ask yourself this question, what is motivating. Judge Sullivan to continue this case when you had the District Court judge entering his initial reporting this amicus curiae then you have a situation where you had the Department of Justice say you know what we agreed that the motion to withdraw the plea to be withdraw because we think there was misconduct submit sufficient enough, but there was not cause to make a prosecution here so all this is happening at the same time take your call that all of us at 1-800-684-3110 is 800-684-3110 days of the nonsense going on, but this is a day pull of information treatment information act request response came in that dead really addresses the whole situation with the beginning of crossfire hurricane and I will tell you this I would read again on rating point but were doing this for about 70 been one of things on the screen for me in and brought hundreds about Maria. Here it says this was in an article this morning and this is right out of the authorization document for this investigation. This investigation is being open to determine whether individuals associated with the trunk campaign are waiting WITT ING and coordinating activities with the government of Russia and this was in 2016. Waiting and all organs coordinating activities with the government, Russia, any break that one down.

That's the authorization memo on crossfire hurricane that the document written by our good friend the disgrace and corrupt Peter Strauch. I think you're referring to get a first divide is and how to use English language would mean waiting to have knowledge of waiting were not writing Victorian novels here. You simply ride you the you simply ask whether or not some administration officials had knowledge of, or Laura were participants in something that came from Russia to interfere with the campaign in the trumpet minister in the trunk. The election campaign is not as good as it was progressing so that it was it was obviously an attempt to see if the President was the Presidential nominee, was colluding and we were going to find out we limit to start an investigation on our own, and I think it was based on some barroom talk in London was a J it was with George Papadopoulos. Novels denied that the statements that he made that they said he made that even made. This became the basis upon which the entire crossfire hurricane started. Now we got we got John during the US attorney for Connecticut. Looking at this in great detail. But then there's also really going on this and not the United States Senate as well give us an update. Yet there is J a couple things and then jump out to people on the hill about this document again is the electronic communication near the document that basically opens crossfire hurricane, the number one thing that their CJ is Peter Strauch's name is Allison four times on the opening page of this a while. James Comey may have been calling the shots.

Peter Strauch was definitely the workhorse here, so I would not subpoena lands on Peter Strauch's desk.

I think this will be one of the documents that they will be asking about the jamboree from you. At page 3 of this document. After they talk about George Papadopoulos is in conversations and in barrooms and and the rest of this is how they refer to Donald Trump's campaign and whether or not they were involved. It says it was also unclear. It was also unclear how Mr. Trump's team reacted to the offer. We note that trumps two team's reaction could in the end, have little bearing of what Russia decides to do with or without Mr. Trump's cooperation so J in the authorizing document, they acknowledge that they do not have information suggesting other Donald Trump's campaign is cooperating with a foreign government to collude or anything otherwise. And yet, J. They continue to survey all members of the trunk campaign. They continued open investigations on members of the incoming President, even though in the authorizing document, it says it is unclear how Mr. Trump steams reacted. That's all they had to go on J menu will understand exactly was going on here right I mean we live this for three years and a lot of you there watching.

I have to admit this with us, which we appreciate that's white so great that we can come to each and every day, but you understand what's going on here. This was a sham from the beginning and it was a sham based on information that was not only not reliable that they could coordinate themselves and this was put forward after remember, don't ever forget that the interview was Flynn was done after the field office that investigated general Flynn said there was no evidence of wrongdoing. Now Cindy Powell will talk about this in the next segment is saying you know what the FBI should release the transcript of the conversation between Lieutenant General Flynn and ambassador kiss we had from Russia because you know what's not mentioned in it.

The word sanctions there's a lot more unpack particular calls at 1-800-684-3110 800-684-3110 is what I want you to do support the work of the ACLJ you can do that really easily broadcast every single day party support helps us do that.

It's on rating was on TV five days a week, 52 weeks a year ACLJ.org and donate, you know, we were just this week on the admit asking if you know that and we said yesterday filed a brand-new case and that of course we had the situation that was resolved successfully involving Cass and Eric all this weekaclj@aclj.org. Only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice as is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn, called mission life will show you how you are personally support the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists.

The ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the Obama care means to the prone life in many ways your membership in the is empowering the right question for you, mission life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans is time and are now free to start constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do more work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms that remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times.

The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about her life changing become a member today ACLJ will we could play that for everybody do a job well basically remote location so that work taken called got people calling it Diana New Hampshire she don't like you either like a situation that I can't carry on its part because he had played guilty and request to create input for anybody with pride guilty. I think we can now be charged with perjury when they want to plea great question and did my knee, turning off her longtime under circumstances change, new evidence, but hearing a multilayered you had both be sleeping with dry because of really unbelievably poor loitering by the previous counsel 70,000 great companies. These were for not doing a great job. My end but also you have Brady material that had not been given, and then it was given 80 well this is exactly the case in an instance in which you take a guilty plea and procedurally I want to explain the real quickly that government or the defendant. One of the other has got to give a factual basis for the guilty play. In other words that have appeared before that I have often said to the defendant.

Tell me what you did that because the government to bring these charges against you, or alternatively government what will your evidence show. If this case went to trial. You got that established facts and what Sullivan the judge is trying to say is that at the time that he entered his guilty plea and by the way, what before him was before. Jack concurs that the guilty plea was entered. Let's remember that that you lied about what he was saying he did, but the fact is that the government had failed to provide him with Brady material which will exculpate and exonerate him from any guilt or wrongdoing, therefore making back plea on the so there could be no perjury, so I don't know what Judge Sullivan is looking around for but one thing that is for sure in his business.

He is not the US attorney. I'm sure he would like to be a need make a great one at that position is already filled because one of the things happen here is the Supreme Court of United States just a week before I argued for the President which is now, I argued last Tuesday. Here's what's so interesting about this defendant to about a week before that Justice Ginsburg for a unanimous Supreme Court 920920, said that the parties are the one who litigated cases and issues intervene and appoint people to do things that are not within the scope of the article 3 responsibilities of judges are appointed to do under the Constitution. Let me tell you what this is, in the last three really concluding in the last year I had the privilege of representing his motioning of the President on a whole host of issues. One was an article by article 2 because the special counsel Robert Muller worked for the Justice Department. The Justice Department is part of our executive branch and numbered part of the Presidential branch so we handle that case successfully. Then we had an article 1 inquiry.

What was that impeachment, Congress, all the authority for impeachment. We did that we concluded the investigation of the Russia probe I Muller the article to investigation about July of last year was really gunning it may fighting July 6 months later seven months later, we concluded the article 1 investigation, which was the investigation for the impeachment resulted in an acquittal in the United States Senate and the nine breaking the board try that case for three weeks on the floor of the United States that later I didn't article previously representing the present state of the Supreme Court of the United States representing article to bring to government's capacity involving article 3 because the Supreme Court hears. We have a unique perspective on all of us obviously be limited so you have to understand that we have been highly involved. Now I want you to know that while the judicial aspect of this is going on family need to reiterate what is going on and explain what's going on in the United States Senate. Anything happening but we the Congress have the President with a DJ in New York on behalf of the President we have the President in these other proceedings, and now the district committee essay were looking at it to explain what exactly is going on. If we close this segment of people understand what has happened and what is happening.

Well, it starts with your conversation Jay about why the different articles by the different branches have the power that they did. The article 1 branch, Congress is much as you might not like the impeachment proceeding they have that power for a specific reason. They are directly accountable to the voting, the prosecutorial powers belong to the article 2 branch because it's headed by the chief executive who is directly accountable to the voters. The reason that judge Gleason in the article 3 branch does not have that power. It's not just arbitrary dates because they are not directly accountable to the voters. They are nominated by the head of the agent by the article to branch the President of the United States.

JD power that the United States Senate Judiciary Committee has here under article 1 is the power to provide oversight and to investigate and they have subpoena power. The chairman of that committee. Lindsay Graham has begun a process to exercise that authority. It began yesterday when in their executive business meeting.

He brought forward 53 subpoenas for consideration and debate all of the names we've talked about on this broadcast all the way up to Jim James Comey James Klapper Peter Strock Lisa page Sally H. There are 53 of them J he laid them before the committee. They debated it and then what happened was that it's called. They were held over.

This is a rule in the committee which says you cannot vote on them the same day they are considered so J they were held over they will be on the agenda for the next executive business meeting that will be on June 4 and every indication from yesterday is that that the committee is authorized. Those 53 subpoenas on June June force all these questions were talking about the direct players involved are going to get a subpoena from the United States Senate asking for them to respond and also J to turn over the documents we been talking about before the 32nd summary about working with this order from the DC circuit yesterday while I mean it's an extraordinary is an extraordinary order based on an extraordinary writ and it's telling they would plan was saying telling in article 3 judge under our, should you stay within your limits you in and get elected by the people you are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and your job is to rule on motions before you not to be a prosecutor making prosecutorial recommendations stay within your around and keep out of the business of politics which you have no business getting involved in the correct way to come back from the break and take your call.

Remember a lot.

Check them in the mother station well back with more 80 okay ACLJ is been on the frontline protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena.

The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side. If you're already a member.

Thank you.

If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us, ACLJ.org, where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ live from Washington DC. Jay Sekulow, counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice Jay Sekulow everybody will hundred 64, 31 to big news out of the DC circuit Court of Appeals that the federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Remember that Gen. Flynn's lawyer Cindy Powell filed a very important writ of mandamus to the DC Court of Appeals. The issue there was this the judge judge Emmett Sullivan appointed an individual former judge to basically bring charges against Gen. Flynn. Even though the government. Gen. Flynn realize and recognize agreed that the plea that he filed a guilty plea should be removed. The government was not prosecuted and Andy is very important to point out that was done because the government did an independent investigation and determined that the prosecution was not merited. It was not right and Brady material was not released and that is exactly right. That's exactly right.

The government looked at the case against Gen. plan under Atty. Gen. bar. He appointed a US attorney from Berry look into it independently and it was determined by the government.

We did not treat this man. According to the law.

We did not give him material that would exonerate him and that would exculpate him from liability criminal acts leave.

For instance, had standing in Comey did agents to try to entrap him to get him fired beginning to make admissions to get them to make lies so that we can get him out of office or prosecuted those kinds of things with Robert mother knew about. By the way. In his investigation, and it was Robert mother Teemu brought the prosecution of plan never turned over to Flynn.

All that, taken together, Atty. Gen. bar set painted the prosecution and the government moved to dismiss it now judge Sullivan the Siebel.

I'm not sure I agree with that, I think, look into this myself a little bit and make my own as well as the judge because I made up my mind that this man Gen. Flynn is writer call them that in court appointed judge to help me figure this out you doing this in the DC circuit building and slapped them down very clearly that you explain yourself in 10 days. Judge Sullivan. They did it in a nice way.

But let me tell you it was pretty firm read you what happens of the writ of mandamus was filed and then what happened was order was issued.

Let's put that order up on the screen.

This is really important understand so this is the order watching on television, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. In re Michael T. Flynn, petitioner McMoore Judges Henderson elect not to get the judges are self-evident to a Balkans when the order upon consideration of the emergency petition for writ of mandamus is order on the court's own motion and work no one told the judge to do that, the court to do this on the court's own motion that within 10 days of the date of this sort of the day they issue the order yesterday the District Judge judge Emmett Sullivan will file a response addressing the petitioner's request that this court order, the district judge to grant the government's motion to dismiss the case against Gen. Flynn. I have never heard of a District Court being told by the Court of Appeals, you better defend yourself not given but the issue write a brief defending yourself. Not much. I'm wondering if you have his amicus curiae friend do it, working in the do it himself, but the judge now has to respond.

It tells you a lot and that kind of situation very quickly and would let me or break playing Washington right now just happened yesterday.

Well I think it's a sign that the court sees this as an extraordinary circumstance that warrants this project if he has his amicus friend doing to his amicus friend wrote in 2013 that the government has near absolute power to extinguish a case that it has brought so luck on anything Judge Gleason can make a reasonable argument that what Judge Sullivan has Diane correct what year was that 2013. I guess if the Pennsylvania well now it's 2020. That would be a very good defense.

I would take your calls. 800-684-3110, 1-800-684-3110 a lot more to talk about a lot more analysis that we want to give you again because of your pleasant 800 684 32 calls of questions in my face the challenges facing Americans are substantial time and are now free to start constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontline protecting your freedom. Defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms that remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you for not well this is the perfect time to stand with us. ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing, member today ACLJ only one. A society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally support the publication includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activist ramifications 40 years later plan parenthood's role in the Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership in the is empowering the right question free copy of mission life today online/withdrawal radio you notice him letting the music play a little bit longer than I normally would a better day withdrawal great question came in on Facebook on Facebook click the District Judge appealed to the Supreme Court, wears an interesting thing. You would have standing to. In my view. But you got. I'm assuming the Court of Appeals if they were to rule in favor of judge Flynn with a District Court judge has the divinity issued the order. If the judge that the court says hey you don't have the authority to do this, we probably know they want the motion granted.

Grant the motion. He has no choice to appeal anything that is not a real party in interest in that sense. Now he has no right to appeal. It's like saying that I Court of Appeals reversed me in an opinion on all of them in contempt because they don't agree with the lies I've done work that way you do.

Note the superior tribunals that that you do and whether you like it or not, that's the way the justice system works to raise his calling and he's got a great question. Go-ahead rail line 3 John the doctor, the President is quick quick can be impeached or removed their feathers for that know he can be reversed. That's what that's what would be the remedy. Here he would be reversed, writ of mandamus is granted, he would be reverse it as an impeachable offense and that that probably not.

That's the only way he could be removed. It's a life appointment. That's not can happen that moment saying that what they're saying is the judge is wrong constitutionally wrong wrong under his authority and should be removed and you how you remove that if you remove the opinion the order not to judge but this again does point to fan the importance of judicial nominations in this whole issue that were talking about. You gotta keep your eyes on the judicial nominations which by the way your American Center for Law and Justice is doing just that. Yemen, the legislative branch has an important role here doesn't have to rise to the level of impeachment for them to have a role in starts before Judge Sullivan ever got his seat on the bench.

They were the ones responsible for confirming him.

And that's why J there their view of this is fairly important and very frankly goes back to the conversation we had about the separation of articles. It is in the article 1 branches interest J to make sure that the article 3 branch does not get out of balance be of the authority that they have been given because if they do, J the it's the voters that that lose on this hustle coming back to your question about judicial nominations. We said this earlier, but three district judges were confirmed again this week by the United States Senate. 1/4 had cloture invoked, which as you know, Jay is pretty much as good as confirmation these days because the threshold is the same price and yesterday, the Senate Judiciary Committee considered the denomination of Justin Walker to be a judge on this very court.

The DC circuit Court of Appeal so even while everything else is happening. The United States Senate is confirming President trumps judges at one another confirmed date. It will be 194 judges confirmed his present trunk took office is pretty amazing. It is pretty amazing I were taking your calls 800-684-3110 the 2000 684-3110 also taken your comments and questions by Facebook and periscope Leslie calling from Oklahoma.

She's on my one Leslie go-ahead place all the court be made public. Yes, it's basically Andy Judge Sullivan's been ordered to defend himself in a brief. Basically that's what the order says it will be made public. It will be filed and only made public, and he'll have to defend himself and explain his ruling in and his reluctance or his failure to act and will all know what we don't do things in secret in federal court in left field with some national security reason, or to save someone's life events in danger. But even have to put down in writing so that everyone in the world can see why he did what he did. Thinking about this because I never seen this.

You've never seen and collectively you either proxy law about 90 years and never seen anything like this. But having said that this judge is basically is been ordered to file a brief with the Court of Appeals defending himself. This unprecedented I've never seen this. No, I've never I've never seen the Court of Appeals any Court of Appeal take this action against you.

Good luck unite he acted ruggedly. He acted wrongly, he acted in a fashion that is completely contrary to the way I judge should do a judge rules on motion judge doesn't bring in another judge to give him advise and to be a special prosecutor and do the things that he wanted him to do in his order that is Judge Sullivan and sometimes the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court has to come down with a pretty happy and when someone has done what he has done and gone way, way off into an area that is just improper for a judge to go into and that's what they did with Judge Sullivan. So here's what's interesting parties, US attorney as well as Andy was and is commentator national review has great website himself.

He had to say about take a listen. I think it means that the Court of Appeals is giving Judge Sullivan a face-saving graceful way to get out of this on his own without the appellate court having to slap him down because there's simply no legal justification for what he's doing. I think hopefully that what the court is telling them is no luck, count to 10. We have to get our political disputes out of the courthouse so I think that's I think that's exactly what this is.

It was a bit of a face-saving, but it was sure a direct order. Let's go to Bobby's calling in New York.

I like to I Bobby what the broadcaster on their warning. If you think are at all possible that the Court of Appeals would side with Judge Sullivan and that the case will continue on what he think ultimately the case will be dismissed with what your take a look at anything's possible meeting. You never always dangerous to predict. I think the judicial philosophy of the judges, but in their understanding the cost is in this. It was interesting.

This order was issued by all three judges to Republican appointees when democratic pointing I don't have 20 but it was unanimous order so I think that makes him pretty series volume. I would think that I was guessing and an educated guess I've been before that court many times or Supreme Court as well that Judge Sullivan is clearly I mean I think if you look at the logic ship. Sullivan is clearly wrong.

He has no authority to do this, he's appointing a special prosecutor. He's article 3 not article 2, so he doesn't get to do that so I think ultimately, the Court of Appeals would reverse Judge Sullivan and like any McCarthy said is, face-saving that I can explain himself or decide you know it is not worth the aggravation on the skin to do the right thing here like to Gen. Flynn did not give him exculpatory evidence that he was entitled to Andy that itself is reason to let that may be revoked in the case is over and the parties are in agreement and you got a recent Supreme Court case authored by Justice Ginsburg nine 209-2080 well I don't want any judge granted. Because you never know. I've been around too long to make those victims, but I have a pretty good feeling. Sullivan is going to be reversed and he will be order to rule on this thing. Of this, my pending motion to dismiss the. The case against general plan, it is wrong to become a prosecutor when you're a judge I think the Court of Appeals was right. I think make it even goes to the Supreme Court triumph in some fashion. It is not possible. That way, the Supreme Court will do the right thing and say Jack Sullivan you're off base. So I really have all confidence that the rule of law than to prevail in Judge Sullivan will be sanctioned for his conduct.

Okay, so here's what I wanted you we got another segment coming up at St. we take your calls on any topic. So you give us a call at 800-684-3110 but then I want to give an update on the unemployment numbers are high and there are people that are hurting and we know that another stock of another stimulus package to our team's been going through what that looks like where is all this process. I know Mitch McConnell talked about some of this will get into more this next week.

What's your sense. Yes, extermination and leader McConnell and and efforts to include Speaker Pelosi and this had been talking this week Jay, I think there is a growing consensus that there will be another bill. In fact it while both the chambers are to be out on Memorial Day recess next week at the indication of those conversations will continue next week.

I think you will start to see the framework of the next bill, the place I think the centerpiece will probably be in another direct payment to the American people. I Jay I will tell you the timeline was set back bind up Speaker Pelosi doing her own way and passing the $3 trillion bill that was just mainly away wish list for the left. However, the main parties that need to be in the room.

Now DR talking to each other.

There does seem to be consensus that another package is needed.

I Jay again, both chambers are on recess next week so you won't see debate on the floor either for of either one. Next week, but I think the following week Jay. I think that's when you see that the debate on one of the floors started again. Following that an office of government affairs that they invented heads-up ACLJ.org if you was worth the work of the ACLJ if you're able.

We encourage that you talk to us on their 1-800-684-3110 lasting thought on any topic that you'd like one address at 800-684-3110 also follow us on Facebook twitter@Jay Sekulow at Jordan secular at ACLJ that allows stay engaged all of these critical take your calls and your comments on Facebook that already coming in soon as we get back from the break, but again my thought was on air that's easy one 800 68 only when a society can agree that the most vulnerable invoice. Is there any hope for that culture to survive. And that's exactly what you are saying when you stand with the American Center for Law and Justice, defendant the right to life, we've created a free powerful publication offering a panoramic view of the ACLJ's battle for the unborn is called mission will show you how you are personally Tatian includes a look at all major ACLJ pro-life cases were fighting for the rights of pro-life activists. The ramifications of Roe V Wade, 40 years later Planned Parenthood's role in the abortion industry and what Obama care means to discover the many ways your membership in the ACLJ is empowering the right question free copy of mission in life today online ACLJ/challenges facing Americans for substantial time and are now free to insert constitutional rights are under attack more important than ever to stay with the American Center for Law and Justice on the frontlines protecting your freedoms defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena and we have an exceptional track record of success. But here's the bottom line we could not do her work without your support, we remain committed to protecting your religious and constitutional freedoms that remains our top priority, especially now during these challenging times. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side, you're already a member. Thank you, are not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ the only one I have to say I got up on Facebook.

Debbie said I missed the live performances to Debbie live performances anytime soon but let me say one thing that our band director, music director is working on Mark Townsend. He's working on a situation where you will be in locations to picnic to make a monthly student actually from the monkey when the monkey sounds and what each player part and then our editing team a marked audio technique put it all together as a video that will be able to release and I probably can release alive, but it will be already put together some of those on on on some of the various you have Facebook pages. I've really enjoyed watching this concert I found 800 684 30 with its that's coming. I will work on something but I think Rob missing the band a little bit. Mike was constable I was alone when I Michael perfect LOL by the way during impeachment earnings. Mike dolphin and many others could appreciate what I question about good Sullivan is obviously injecting politics in which he stated it very obvious with where this is going to the appeals court and possibly Supreme Court if Judge Sullivan were to continue to try to have his way with that kind of the jury in a prosecutor.

Obviously there's no precedent and obviously he's clearly wrong on what what potentially could he possibly face from a legal standpoint I guess I'm going with me say parts of the rule against guide general plan and the great motion that Cindy Powell filed, which I find hard.

They would let say they did she take it up to this or you think that would mandamus up to the US Supreme Court is perfectly allowable. Anybody with this confusion here.

What happens to the judge and he is sending wins. He's reversed is not removed from office now. Maybe he's conflicted out of the case. At that point, I don't know. I thought about the parameters of that recuse himself, but he would be reverse that's what happens to the judge that Friday's assembly is reversed life by your thing and withdrawn. Your decision is wrong. We reverse and this is happened in the past who engaged in repeated patterns of disobeying the orders of appellate courts and just go off on their own or commit crimes and this is not him.

I'm not saying you committed. I'm not saying that it all by simply is wrong. In my view on the law, but it is the law that judges who completely disregard the orders of appellate courts repeatedly and commit offenses that are criminal offenses could stand to be impeached.

I don't see that happening in Judge Sullivan's case, I think he's going to abide by the ruling of the appellate court in their 25 years. He knows the law.

He knows what is supposed to do and he's going to have to put himself pretty clearly in this brief that he's going to have to filing 10 days, God is calling for Montana. She's on line 5 hi Don, thank you for taking my call. My question today.

The number of justices appointed by prompt and confirms sounds really good. But how does it compare with the last three or four administrations, judges, the Presidents may have been on that as we track that information, but they never confirm appointments here is is is very very significant and that's more than all of them. Even if you reach back farther than that J. At this point of President transfer me as 193 about to be 194 federal judges confirmed present Obama had 137. At this stage George W. Bush had 171 Bill Clinton hundred and 88 George H. W. Bush hundred and 33 and Ronald Reagan, 129 NJ. I would just tell you quickly without getting too deep in the weeds, it's even more remarkable because the United States Senate has demanded more cloture vote. Votes by that by the term of like times 100. I mean, they never used to have yet culture votes they had take multiple votes and role more Senate floor time and yet Pres. Trump still has more confirm judges in all of those past Presidents. That's very true Lisa on Facebook has raised a great quest. Let me read it. Everybody is there any concern about the ballot changes.

Some states are caught talking about putting in place in response to cobra 19 and you have actually talked about that and let me be very clear here. We were very pleased that the Supreme Court of the United States and what happened Wisconsin was unconstitutional. Wisconsin they lived mail-in ballots. They didn't have a can be postdated and overstated after the election and still count that is absurd in the Supreme Court said it cannot do that. That's wrong now our states, but I have more of the mail-in ballot situation in light of the cobra 19. The answer is yes. Under our Constitution, the states have those kind of authority, but the important underlining here is, it has to be consistent with the Constitution of the state.

Can't you say you can mailing your ballot. If the election is November 3 as long as we get it by November 15.

Even if it's Mark November 8. It's fine though that would be unconstitutional. There are enough people have absentee ballots but maybe that's a really verifiable process and ballots laying around an apartment complex and say go fill it out yourself and let us know what you think.

No, I think it becomes J with that of absentee ballots that the procedure that should be followed that the only tried-and-true procedure, but the mail-in ballot at your leisure whenever you want to whoever you are, without any verification. I don't think passes constitutional scrutiny. I think the absentee ballot procedure that we have you that we use in Maine in almost all jurisdictions is something that we can live with this, in the house that the mail-in balloting states that the stakes are to be making the decisions on this. I suspect yeah minted. To that extent has it has been several bills that have passed the house, the position of leader McConnell and probably a majority of the United States Senate is wanting to retain a state control of that you think there is some openness to expansion of mail-in balloting.

But those decisions have to be made at a state level. I think you're gonna see universal resistance from both well I can say from the left is universal resistance from the right to the federal government saying you must do it exclusively.

That way either. Not can offer that you the other question I had on this and that is there are some of the money for appropriations.

Had I think something to do with him or member quickly, maybe off on this with regard to this issue of balance in the electoral processes in the stimulus bill that was enacted J there is my for the states to be using this rate, but again it's controlled by the Senate of the state and the states get the site on the Internet. Now it's different and what was passed in Speaker Pelosi's bill that that money would come with strings and would force states to do it right the way that she prefers.

That's where were there will be. There will be constitutional battles on this. I have no doubt because there already happened.

That does it for our broadcast this week remote again but were able to get it to you every single day. Two weeks a year with our entirety, think our team is working very hard making sure we keep this on the CBS news the other day could not get the broadcast on the air. I got sympathy for that we understand.

I mean, you know were coming from you all from the light remote locations, but your support of the American Center for Law and Justice support our team, including the people that you don't see that working on this broadcast right now our social media team. We are watching the Facebook periscope comments there working right now our video team work of the ACLJ supporting all of them ACLJ.org have a great weekend. ACLJ's been on the frontline protecting your freedom is defending your rights in court in Congress and in the public arena. The American Center for Law and Justice is on your side.

If you're already a member. If you're not well this is the perfect time to stand with us ACLJ.org where you can learn more about our life-changing work, member today ACLJ