The “Watergate Prosecutors” who intend to file an amicus brief in the Flynn case include some heavy-hitting lawyers. Larry Robbins represented Marie Yovanovitch during impeachment and Bill Taylor helped secure Greg Craig’s acquittal last year.
Flynn is just as afraid of the truth coming out as Trump* is. They are afraid of lawyers making an argument. Someone’s opposition to friend of the court briefs says more about them than anything else. This case seems a perfect example. And all Americans have a dog in this hunt.
Michael Flynn’s Opposition to and
Motion to Deny Notice of Intent to File
Motion for Leave to File Amicus Brief
On May 11, 2020, a group referring to itself as “Watergate Prosecutors” submitted to the Court by email a Notice of Intent to File Motion for Leave to File Brief as Amicus Curiae.1 However, this Court has consistently—on twenty-four (24) previous occasions—summarily refused to permit any third party to inject themselves or their views into this case. Exhibit A. The proposed amicus brief has no place in this Court. No rule allows the filing, and the self-proclaimed collection of “Watergate Prosecutors” has no cognizable special interest. Separation of powers forecloses their appearance here. Only the Department of Justice and the defense can be heard. Accordingly, the Watergate Prosecutors’ attempted filing itself should not be registered on the docket, and any attempt by the group or any individual to make a filing in this case must be denied—as all others have been.
1 The Watergate Prosecutors’ Notice also referred to this Court’s Local Criminal Rules, LCrR 57.6, but, as will be seen, applied for no relief other than permission to file an amicus brief. They do not have “a dog in this hunt” any more than do the former “Whitewater” prosecutors or the “Clinton impeachment” prosecutors.