The Imperial Judgeship

[PoliticalChic]

Always in question is how much power a President has. When one claims more than some would allow, the term 'Imperial Presidency' is often applied.

"Imperial presidency definition, a U.S. presidency that is characterized by greater power than the Constitution allows."
Google
One might think of a President who claims 'a pen and a phone' rather than a separate legislature.


Today we have a new petty tyrant: an imperial judge, who claims to be judge, jury, and prosecutor.
The NYSun puts it in perspective.


1. "...Showdown Over General Flynn

2. ...a United States district judge, who has balked over a motion by the government to dismiss the criminal charges to which the general once pled guilty.... the district judge, Emmet Sullivan, has signaled he’s considering opening a new legal attack against the general and, through him, the Justice Department itself. He’s suggested he’s prepared to empower various “friend of the court” lawyers, known as amici, to undertake a whole new probe of the Justice Department’s handling of the Flynn case. He’s suggested that the “presumption of regularity” is up for review.


3. The Justice Department, in no uncertain terms, says no. The Constitution, it argues, “vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when — and when not — to prosecute potential crimes.” It is insisting that it was exercising that power when it filed to dismiss the charges against general Flynn, who, it had concluded, was railroaded. It’s clearly shocked that Judge Sullivan would “assume the role of prosecutor” and ask an amicus to eye new criminal charges.

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

5. The appeals panel includes three hard-headed judges, Karen Henderson, Robert Wilkins, and Neomi Rao. We wouldn’t hazard a guess as to what they’ll do, even if a key precedent was decided by their own circuit. They could deny the general’s petition and give Judge Sullivan time. Or they could order Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. Or they could assign the case to a different judge. Or they could — on their own motion — dismiss the case themselves and set the general free once and for all.


6. There would, [Sullivan's] brief suggests, be plenty of time for the appeals court to review the matter after the district is done with its review. Our own estimate — it’s only that — is that Judge Sullivan is trying to run out the clock on what he hopes will be a one-term administration of President Trump."

Stage Is Set for Showdown Over General Flynn

It looks like the stage is set for quite a showdown over separated powers and the fate of General Michael Flynn. It will pit, on the one hand, America and President Trump's first national security adviser against, on the other hand, a United State

www.nysun.com

 

[Mac-7]

Always in question is how much power a President has. When one claims more than some would allow, the term 'Imperial Presidency' is often applied.

"Imperial presidency definition, a U.S. presidency that is characterized by greater power than the Constitution allows."
Google
One might think of a President who claims 'a pen and a phone' rather than a separate legislature.


Today we have a new petty tyrant: an imperial judge, who claims to be judge, jury, and prosecutor.
The NYSun puts it in perspective.


1. "...Showdown Over General Flynn

2. ...a United States district judge, who has balked over a motion by the government to dismiss the criminal charges to which the general once pled guilty.... the district judge, Emmet Sullivan, has signaled he’s considering opening a new legal attack against the general and, through him, the Justice Department itself. He’s suggested he’s prepared to empower various “friend of the court” lawyers, known as amici, to undertake a whole new probe of the Justice Department’s handling of the Flynn case. He’s suggested that the “presumption of regularity” is up for review.


3. The Justice Department, in no uncertain terms, says no. The Constitution, it argues, “vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when — and when not — to prosecute potential crimes.” It is insisting that it was exercising that power when it filed to dismiss the charges against general Flynn, who, it had concluded, was railroaded. It’s clearly shocked that Judge Sullivan would “assume the role of prosecutor” and ask an amicus to eye new criminal charges.

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

5. The appeals panel includes three hard-headed judges, Karen Henderson, Robert Wilkins, and Neomi Rao. We wouldn’t hazard a guess as to what they’ll do, even if a key precedent was decided by their own circuit. They could deny the general’s petition and give Judge Sullivan time. Or they could order Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. Or they could assign the case to a different judge. Or they could — on their own motion — dismiss the case themselves and set the general free once and for all.


6. There would, [Sullivan's] brief suggests, be plenty of time for the appeals court to review the matter after the district is done with its review. Our own estimate — it’s only that — is that Judge Sullivan is trying to run out the clock on what he hopes will be a one-term administration of President Trump."

Stage Is Set for Showdown Over General Flynn

It looks like the stage is set for quite a showdown over separated powers and the fate of General Michael Flynn. It will pit, on the one hand, America and President Trump's first national security adviser against, on the other hand, a United State

www.nysun.com

I think the DOJ can just remove Sullivan and assign the case to another judge

 

[task0778]

Always in question is how much power a President has. When one claims more than some would allow, the term 'Imperial Presidency' is often applied.

"Imperial presidency definition, a U.S. presidency that is characterized by greater power than the Constitution allows."
Google
One might think of a President who claims 'a pen and a phone' rather than a separate legislature.


Today we have a new petty tyrant: an imperial judge, who claims to be judge, jury, and prosecutor.
The NYSun puts it in perspective.


1. "...Showdown Over General Flynn

2. ...a United States district judge, who has balked over a motion by the government to dismiss the criminal charges to which the general once pled guilty.... the district judge, Emmet Sullivan, has signaled he’s considering opening a new legal attack against the general and, through him, the Justice Department itself. He’s suggested he’s prepared to empower various “friend of the court” lawyers, known as amici, to undertake a whole new probe of the Justice Department’s handling of the Flynn case. He’s suggested that the “presumption of regularity” is up for review.


3. The Justice Department, in no uncertain terms, says no. The Constitution, it argues, “vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when — and when not — to prosecute potential crimes.” It is insisting that it was exercising that power when it filed to dismiss the charges against general Flynn, who, it had concluded, was railroaded. It’s clearly shocked that Judge Sullivan would “assume the role of prosecutor” and ask an amicus to eye new criminal charges.

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

5. The appeals panel includes three hard-headed judges, Karen Henderson, Robert Wilkins, and Neomi Rao. We wouldn’t hazard a guess as to what they’ll do, even if a key precedent was decided by their own circuit. They could deny the general’s petition and give Judge Sullivan time. Or they could order Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. Or they could assign the case to a different judge. Or they could — on their own motion — dismiss the case themselves and set the general free once and for all.


6. There would, [Sullivan's] brief suggests, be plenty of time for the appeals court to review the matter after the district is done with its review. Our own estimate — it’s only that — is that Judge Sullivan is trying to run out the clock on what he hopes will be a one-term administration of President Trump."

Stage Is Set for Showdown Over General Flynn

It looks like the stage is set for quite a showdown over separated powers and the fate of General Michael Flynn. It will pit, on the one hand, America and President Trump's first national security adviser against, on the other hand, a United State

www.nysun.com

I think the DOJ can just remove Sullivan and assign the case to another judge

"I think the DOJ can just remove Sullivan and assign the case to another judge"

Unfortunately, no they can't. The higher Court of Appeals can remove Sullivan from the case and assign it to another judge, or they can order Sullivan to dismiss the case or they can do it themselves. Congress can impeach the guy, but that's about it. And the Executive Branch can't really do shit.

From the OP's link:

The big question is whether a judge, part of the judicial branch, can launch a whole new investigation of the administration on its own, becoming both prosecutor and judge.

The Justice Department, in no uncertain terms, says no. The Constitution, it argues, “vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when — and when not — to prosecute potential crimes.” It is insisting that it was exercising that power when it filed to dismiss the charges against general Flynn, who, it had concluded, was railroaded. It’s clearly shocked that Judge Sullivan would “assume the role of prosecutor” and ask an amicus to eye new criminal charges.

I believe there was a recent SCOTUS ruling that says that Judge Sullivan has no legal basis to do what he's doing. in light of that ruling, I find it hard to believe that the DC COA will not do one of three options I listed. And fairly quickly. Flynn deserves that IMHO.

 

[Ridgerunner]

And the Executive Branch can't really do shit.

Actually the Executive Branch can do shit...


As of April 1, 2020. [update] , the United States Senate has confirmed 193 Article III judges nominated by President Trump, including 2 Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, 51 judges for the United States Courts of Appeals, 138 judges for the United States District Courts, and 2 judges for the United States Court of International Trade.
List of federal judges appointed by Donald Trump - Wikipedia

 

[task0778]

And the Executive Branch can't really do shit.

Actually the Executive Branch can do shit...


As of April 1, 2020. [update] , the United States Senate has confirmed 193 Article III judges nominated by President Trump, including 2 Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, 51 judges for the United States Courts of Appeals, 138 judges for the United States District Courts, and 2 judges for the United States Court of International Trade.
List of federal judges appointed by Donald Trump - Wikipedia

Oh yeah, they can appoint judges subject to the consent of the Senate, but once the judge is confirmed by the Senate that's it. They are virtually untouchable.

 

[task0778]

I'd like to revisit the 4th point in the OP:

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

Yesterday, a group of Senators filed a brief with the court of Appeals that basically says once the prosecution and the defense both drop a case then there is no case or dispute. It's over. There is no longer a controversy between the gov't and the defendant, and Article III of the Constitution limits the judicial power of the Judicial Branch to cases and controversies.

Since the case is dead whether Sullivan likes it or not, anything he does is beyond the scope of his authority. He has already exceeded his authority by appointing a retired federal judge to look for anything to prosecute Flynn for, and invited amicus briefs from any and all corners. Something he himself has said is inappropriate.

I think the DC CoA should dismiss this case and issue some kind of admonishment to Sullivan for trying to usurp authority that he does not have.


Added: We do seem to have a lot of imperial judges in this country, making rulings that should be beyond their jurisdiction and scope.

 

[Mac-7]

The higher Court of Appeals can remove Sullivan from the case and assign it to another judge, or they can order Sullivan to dismiss the case or they can do it themselves.

Then that is what the DOJ should do

ask the higher court to remove the judge from the case

 

[Dick Foster]

Always in question is how much power a President has. When one claims more than some would allow, the term 'Imperial Presidency' is often applied.

"Imperial presidency definition, a U.S. presidency that is characterized by greater power than the Constitution allows."
Google
One might think of a President who claims 'a pen and a phone' rather than a separate legislature.


Today we have a new petty tyrant: an imperial judge, who claims to be judge, jury, and prosecutor.
The NYSun puts it in perspective.


1. "...Showdown Over General Flynn

2. ...a United States district judge, who has balked over a motion by the government to dismiss the criminal charges to which the general once pled guilty.... the district judge, Emmet Sullivan, has signaled he’s considering opening a new legal attack against the general and, through him, the Justice Department itself. He’s suggested he’s prepared to empower various “friend of the court” lawyers, known as amici, to undertake a whole new probe of the Justice Department’s handling of the Flynn case. He’s suggested that the “presumption of regularity” is up for review.


3. The Justice Department, in no uncertain terms, says no. The Constitution, it argues, “vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when — and when not — to prosecute potential crimes.” It is insisting that it was exercising that power when it filed to dismiss the charges against general Flynn, who, it had concluded, was railroaded. It’s clearly shocked that Judge Sullivan would “assume the role of prosecutor” and ask an amicus to eye new criminal charges.

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

5. The appeals panel includes three hard-headed judges, Karen Henderson, Robert Wilkins, and Neomi Rao. We wouldn’t hazard a guess as to what they’ll do, even if a key precedent was decided by their own circuit. They could deny the general’s petition and give Judge Sullivan time. Or they could order Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. Or they could assign the case to a different judge. Or they could — on their own motion — dismiss the case themselves and set the general free once and for all.


6. There would, [Sullivan's] brief suggests, be plenty of time for the appeals court to review the matter after the district is done with its review. Our own estimate — it’s only that — is that Judge Sullivan is trying to run out the clock on what he hopes will be a one-term administration of President Trump."

Stage Is Set for Showdown Over General Flynn

It looks like the stage is set for quite a showdown over separated powers and the fate of General Michael Flynn. It will pit, on the one hand, America and President Trump's first national security adviser against, on the other hand, a United State

www.nysun.com

I think the DOJ can just remove Sullivan and assign the case to another judge

What case? The case against Flynn has been dropped fer pity sake. What's needed now is to bring the judge up on charges of obstruction. I wish Barr would send federal marshals over to arrest the prick.

 

[Mac-7]

Always in question is how much power a President has. When one claims more than some would allow, the term 'Imperial Presidency' is often applied.

"Imperial presidency definition, a U.S. presidency that is characterized by greater power than the Constitution allows."
Google
One might think of a President who claims 'a pen and a phone' rather than a separate legislature.


Today we have a new petty tyrant: an imperial judge, who claims to be judge, jury, and prosecutor.
The NYSun puts it in perspective.


1. "...Showdown Over General Flynn

2. ...a United States district judge, who has balked over a motion by the government to dismiss the criminal charges to which the general once pled guilty.... the district judge, Emmet Sullivan, has signaled he’s considering opening a new legal attack against the general and, through him, the Justice Department itself. He’s suggested he’s prepared to empower various “friend of the court” lawyers, known as amici, to undertake a whole new probe of the Justice Department’s handling of the Flynn case. He’s suggested that the “presumption of regularity” is up for review.


3. The Justice Department, in no uncertain terms, says no. The Constitution, it argues, “vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when — and when not — to prosecute potential crimes.” It is insisting that it was exercising that power when it filed to dismiss the charges against general Flynn, who, it had concluded, was railroaded. It’s clearly shocked that Judge Sullivan would “assume the role of prosecutor” and ask an amicus to eye new criminal charges.

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

5. The appeals panel includes three hard-headed judges, Karen Henderson, Robert Wilkins, and Neomi Rao. We wouldn’t hazard a guess as to what they’ll do, even if a key precedent was decided by their own circuit. They could deny the general’s petition and give Judge Sullivan time. Or they could order Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. Or they could assign the case to a different judge. Or they could — on their own motion — dismiss the case themselves and set the general free once and for all.


6. There would, [Sullivan's] brief suggests, be plenty of time for the appeals court to review the matter after the district is done with its review. Our own estimate — it’s only that — is that Judge Sullivan is trying to run out the clock on what he hopes will be a one-term administration of President Trump."

Stage Is Set for Showdown Over General Flynn

It looks like the stage is set for quite a showdown over separated powers and the fate of General Michael Flynn. It will pit, on the one hand, America and President Trump's first national security adviser against, on the other hand, a United State

www.nysun.com

I think the DOJ can just remove Sullivan and assign the case to another judge

What case? The case against Flynn has been dropped fer pity sake. What's needed now is to bring the judge up on charges of obstruction. I wish Barr would send federal marshals over to arrest the prick.

The judge is making a fool of himself

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'd like to revisit the 4th point in the OP:

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

Yesterday, a group of Senators filed a brief with the court of Appeals that basically says once the prosecution and the defense both drop a case then there is no case or dispute. It's over. There is no longer a controversy between the gov't and the defendant, and Article III of the Constitution limits the judicial power of the Judicial Branch to cases and controversies.

Since the case is dead whether Sullivan likes it or not, anything he does is beyond the scope of his authority. He has already exceeded his authority by appointing a retired federal judge to look for anything to prosecute Flynn for, and invited amicus briefs from any and all corners. Something he himself has said is inappropriate.

I think the DC CoA should dismiss this case and issue some kind of admonishment to Sullivan for trying to usurp authority that he does not have.


Added: We do seem to have a lot of imperial judges in this country, making rulings that should be beyond their jurisdiction and scope.

"... a group of Senators ...."

Since we agree that prosecution of crimes is the purview of the executive branch, isn't adding the legislative just muddying the waters?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Always in question is how much power a President has. When one claims more than some would allow, the term 'Imperial Presidency' is often applied.

"Imperial presidency definition, a U.S. presidency that is characterized by greater power than the Constitution allows."
Google
One might think of a President who claims 'a pen and a phone' rather than a separate legislature.


Today we have a new petty tyrant: an imperial judge, who claims to be judge, jury, and prosecutor.
The NYSun puts it in perspective.


1. "...Showdown Over General Flynn

2. ...a United States district judge, who has balked over a motion by the government to dismiss the criminal charges to which the general once pled guilty.... the district judge, Emmet Sullivan, has signaled he’s considering opening a new legal attack against the general and, through him, the Justice Department itself. He’s suggested he’s prepared to empower various “friend of the court” lawyers, known as amici, to undertake a whole new probe of the Justice Department’s handling of the Flynn case. He’s suggested that the “presumption of regularity” is up for review.


3. The Justice Department, in no uncertain terms, says no. The Constitution, it argues, “vests in the Executive Branch the power to decide when — and when not — to prosecute potential crimes.” It is insisting that it was exercising that power when it filed to dismiss the charges against general Flynn, who, it had concluded, was railroaded. It’s clearly shocked that Judge Sullivan would “assume the role of prosecutor” and ask an amicus to eye new criminal charges.

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

5. The appeals panel includes three hard-headed judges, Karen Henderson, Robert Wilkins, and Neomi Rao. We wouldn’t hazard a guess as to what they’ll do, even if a key precedent was decided by their own circuit. They could deny the general’s petition and give Judge Sullivan time. Or they could order Judge Sullivan to dismiss the case. Or they could assign the case to a different judge. Or they could — on their own motion — dismiss the case themselves and set the general free once and for all.


6. There would, [Sullivan's] brief suggests, be plenty of time for the appeals court to review the matter after the district is done with its review. Our own estimate — it’s only that — is that Judge Sullivan is trying to run out the clock on what he hopes will be a one-term administration of President Trump."

Stage Is Set for Showdown Over General Flynn

It looks like the stage is set for quite a showdown over separated powers and the fate of General Michael Flynn. It will pit, on the one hand, America and President Trump's first national security adviser against, on the other hand, a United State

www.nysun.com

I think the DOJ can just remove Sullivan and assign the case to another judge

What case? The case against Flynn has been dropped fer pity sake. What's needed now is to bring the judge up on charges of obstruction. I wish Barr would send federal marshals over to arrest the prick.

The judge is making a fool of himself

....a Democrat of himself.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I think the DC CoA should dismiss this case and issue some kind of admonishment to Sullivan for trying to usurp authority that he does not have.


Added: We do seem to have a lot of imperial judges in this country, making rulings that should be beyond their jurisdiction and scope.

I wish Barr would send federal marshals over to arrest the prick.

The judge is making a fool of himself

Spot On Gentlemen...

 

[DOTR]

I'd like to revisit the 4th point in the OP:

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

Yesterday, a group of Senators filed a brief with the court of Appeals that basically says once the prosecution and the defense both drop a case then there is no case or dispute. It's over. There is no longer a controversy between the gov't and the defendant, and Article III of the Constitution limits the judicial power of the Judicial Branch to cases and controversies.

Since the case is dead whether Sullivan likes it or not, anything he does is beyond the scope of his authority. He has already exceeded his authority by appointing a retired federal judge to look for anything to prosecute Flynn for, and invited amicus briefs from any and all corners. Something he himself has said is inappropriate.

I think the DC CoA should dismiss this case and issue some kind of admonishment to Sullivan for trying to usurp authority that he does not have.


Added: We do seem to have a lot of imperial judges in this country, making rulings that should be beyond their jurisdiction and scope.

"... a group of Senators ...."

Since we agree that prosecution of crimes is the purview of the executive branch, isn't adding the legislative just muddying the waters?

The legislative branch can and should impeach.

 

[task0778]

I'd like to revisit the 4th point in the OP:

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

Yesterday, a group of Senators filed a brief with the court of Appeals that basically says once the prosecution and the defense both drop a case then there is no case or dispute. It's over. There is no longer a controversy between the gov't and the defendant, and Article III of the Constitution limits the judicial power of the Judicial Branch to cases and controversies.

Since the case is dead whether Sullivan likes it or not, anything he does is beyond the scope of his authority. He has already exceeded his authority by appointing a retired federal judge to look for anything to prosecute Flynn for, and invited amicus briefs from any and all corners. Something he himself has said is inappropriate.

I think the DC CoA should dismiss this case and issue some kind of admonishment to Sullivan for trying to usurp authority that he does not have.


Added: We do seem to have a lot of imperial judges in this country, making rulings that should be beyond their jurisdiction and scope.

"... a group of Senators ...."

Since we agree that prosecution of crimes is the purview of the executive branch, isn't adding the legislative just muddying the waters?

LOL, maybe. It's not like the waters aren't already pretty muddy. But the prosecution is over really, so I don't think the Senators are crossing any Constitutional lines here, they aren't arguing about innocence or guilt. This is about Judge Sullivan's authority to decline the motion to dismiss and to investigate and charge Flynn for something else. I guess he can decline the motion to dismiss but I don't see that he has any authority to do anything else. So, if he doesn't dismiss the case then I suspect the DC CoA will and it'll finally be over. I don't see anyway in hell he can drag this thing out until a democrat takes office in January.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'd like to revisit the 4th point in the OP:

4. General Flynn .... emergency petition for a writ of mandamus from the appeals court. It would cut through all the politics and get to the fact that there is currently no case and controversy extant in respect of the general. The general and the government agree that he wrongly pled guilty and that the case should be dropped. If the courts could act where there is no case or controversy, they’d be the new King George.

Yesterday, a group of Senators filed a brief with the court of Appeals that basically says once the prosecution and the defense both drop a case then there is no case or dispute. It's over. There is no longer a controversy between the gov't and the defendant, and Article III of the Constitution limits the judicial power of the Judicial Branch to cases and controversies.

Since the case is dead whether Sullivan likes it or not, anything he does is beyond the scope of his authority. He has already exceeded his authority by appointing a retired federal judge to look for anything to prosecute Flynn for, and invited amicus briefs from any and all corners. Something he himself has said is inappropriate.

I think the DC CoA should dismiss this case and issue some kind of admonishment to Sullivan for trying to usurp authority that he does not have.


Added: We do seem to have a lot of imperial judges in this country, making rulings that should be beyond their jurisdiction and scope.

"... a group of Senators ...."

Since we agree that prosecution of crimes is the purview of the executive branch, isn't adding the legislative just muddying the waters?

LOL, maybe. It's not like the waters aren't already pretty muddy. But the prosecution is over really, so I don't think the Senators are crossing any Constitutional lines here, they aren't arguing about innocence or guilt. This is about Judge Sullivan's authority to decline the motion to dismiss and to investigate and charge Flynn for something else. I guess he can decline the motion to dismiss but I don't see that he has any authority to do anything else. So, if he doesn't dismiss the case then I suspect the DC CoA will and it'll finally be over. I don't see anyway in hell he can drag this thing out until a democrat takes office in January.

I'd kinda like to see him stew in his own juices.