Author: Admin

No comments

DOJ: Courts Can’t Hold DOJ Accountable If It Drops A Case For Corrupt Reasons

  By ,

The Justice Department defended its decision to drop charges against Michael Flynn at the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday, arguing broadly that any scrutiny of its decision would wreak havoc on the department. U.S. Deputy Solicitor General Jeff Wall cast the argument in stark constitutional terms, suggesting that the judge in the Flynn case had already damaged both the Justice Department and the judiciary by subjecting the DOJ’s decision to move to drop charges against Flynn to public examination. “This has already become, and I think is only becoming more of, a public spectacle,” Wall said of actions by U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan for the District of Columbia. Wall repeatedly expressed worry at the idea that Sullivan would attempt to conduct some kind of discovery at the DOJ through affidavits or declarations. Sullivan has yet to suggest that he would do so, and has yet to rule on the DOJ’s motion to dismiss. “You’ll have a proceeding forcing us to explain ourselves,” Wall said. “The district court has left itself room not just for documents of that kind or witnesses; that is going to intrude on our deliberative process.” He added that the “spectacle” would end up “impugning the motives of the Attorney General of the United States.” Wall described the amicus brief of John Gleeson — the outside attorney Sullivan appointed to oppose the DOJ request to dismiss the case — as a “polemic” alleging “gross misconduct.” Broadly, though, Wall focused on the idea that court proceedings were not the forum for handling allegations of corruption against the Justice Department in making prosecutorial decisions. That, he maintained, is a political question to be handled away from the courts. The Flynn case is just one example of… Read More

QUICK EASY SHARE OPTIONS PRESS + FOR MORE
No comments

‘The way a master owns a slave’: Court-enforced ‘guardianship’ of seniors emerges as national issue

  By , ,

At least 1.5 million adults in the United States are under the care of guardians and, critics say, are trapped in a flawed system which controls everything from a person’s finances to visits with family members. In North Carolina, Ginny Johnson described how, just three months after her 95-year-old father was placed in guardianship, she was locked out of the Raleigh home she had lived in for 53 years and her father was taken away. “My father was a 95-year-old healthy man when this happened,” Johnson said. “The day before dad was abducted he was on the golf course hitting golf balls with me. He had just lifted weights for 30 minutes and biked for 30 minutes.” Johnson said her father’s dying wish was that she help prevent other abuses like the ones done to him. “My father’s service in WWII was also heroic and yet he was kidnapped, robbed and murdered by our courts and legal system,” she charges. As “wards of the state,” many of America’s most vulnerable are “stripped of their individual rights, find themselves separated from friends, family members and lifelong support networks as a result of enforced isolation imposed allegedly for their ‘protection,” according to Sam Sugar, author of the best-seller “Guardianships & The Elderly: The Perfect Crime.” The American Bar Association, in a study published earlier this year, said that “guardianship is generally permanent, leaving no way out – ‘until death do us part.’ ” In many states, all that is required to become a guardian, for those who have not been convicted of a felony or recently declared bankruptcy, is taking a course. “My father was in great shape until he was warehoused by the court appointed guardian in a care center that… Read More

QUICK EASY SHARE OPTIONS PRESS + FOR MORE