FOX News<\/p>\n
Former U.S. Attorney Brett Tolman<\/a> thought he had “seen everything” over the course of his career until a federal judge\u00a0opened the door Tuesday<\/a> for legal experts<\/a> and other outside parties to oppose the Justice Department\u2019s motion<\/a> to drop the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn.<\/p>\n Appearing on “Fox & Friends,”<\/a>\u00a0Tolman said he believed Judge Emmet Sullivan’s decision was “outrageous” and that the Washington D.C.<\/a> judge had turned himself into an “activist,” willing to set aside rules, ethics, and precedent in favor of partisanship.<\/p>\n Although Sullivan did not directly address the Justice Department’s<\/a> motion to drop the charge against Flynn, in his order Sullivan announced he would\u00a0set a schedule for outside parties to present arguments about the government\u2019s request to dismiss the case.<\/p>\n GREGG JARRETT: FLYNN JUDGE WRONG TO ALLOW ANTI-TRUMP FORMER WATERGATE PROSECUTORS TO INTERFERE IN CASE<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n Although Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI in 2017<\/a>, the Justice Department argued last week that the\u00a0FBI<\/a> had an insufficient basis to question Flynn<\/a> in the first place and that statements he made during the interview were not material to the broader counterintelligence investigation into ties between Russia<\/a> and the Trump campaign.<\/p>\n Tolman told host Brian Kilmeade that while the court is going against its own rulings – which he labeled “sacrosanct” –\u00a0Flynn’s attorney Sidney Powell is now “going to have\u00a0to do some quick-acting” on her client’s behalf.<\/p>\n “She may file for example a writ of mandamus. That would allow her to\u00a0immediately appeal this decision\u00a0and this approach by this judge\u00a0to the circuit,” he remarked.<\/p>\n “And let’s face it, if it looks like this is what’s going\u00a0on, there is\u00a0strategy then that\u2019s at the\u00a0heart of what this judge is\u00a0trying to accomplish.\u00a0And, that strategy is offensive to anyone\u00a0who practices,”\u00a0he stated.\u00a0“It’s the United States against\u00a0Michael Flynn.\u00a0And, when the United States says\u00a0we’re no longer going to pursue\u00a0it because we don’t have the\u00a0evidence, then the audacity of\u00a0somebody outside of that coming\u00a0in who has no authority is\u00a0outrageous.”<\/p>\n