Trump/Russia/SDNY investigation

Those comments by the judge are disturbing to say the least. Surely Mueller and his team of braniacs would have expected there to be dirty members of the judicial system trying to impede their process. Maybe the judge is just a loon who doesnt know his professional boundaries but it's easy to think that with stakes this high that some powerful figures are trying to influence folks like him. The release of those statements and timing of Trump s speech who then references it is a bit curious though.
 
Raoul said:
Judge is apparently a Reagan appointee. He has no business saying any of that since doesn't actually know Mueller's strategy nor all of the evidence Mueller is sitting on.
Click to expand...

Huh? If a judge feels the case before him is being used to trap someone else (and this definitely happens a lot on mob trials in TV legal shows!), he has the right to call that out.
 
berbatrick said:
Huh? If a judge feels the case before him is being used to trap someone else (and this definitely happens a lot on mob trials in TV legal shows!), he has the right to call that out.
Click to expand...

I completely agree with you. It’s got to be done by the book, there’s no point thumbing the scales against Manafort to get to Trump because: A. It’ll give Trump a good reason to pardon Manafort. And B. What sort of moral high ground do you have if you’re using corrupt methods to bring down politicians you think are corrupt? Either you know they are corrupt because you have the evidence or you don’t. You shouldn’t need to resort to nefarious techniques.


Now with that said, that’s why I have a bit of doubt about it because Mueller has the reputation of a sharp shooter who is meticulous in all his methods. I really do struggle to imagine that he’d be this sloppy and this reaching at this stage.
 
berbatrick said:
Huh? If a judge feels the case before him is being used to trap someone else (and this definitely happens a lot on mob trials in TV legal shows!), he has the right to call that out.
Click to expand...

Its not being used to trap someone. Mueller has a mandate to pursue all things related to Russian interference and any issues that may arise thereof. Therefore he is well within his mandate to pursue a case against Trump's campaign manager if he has evidence laws have been broken. Its not the judges role to wax poetic about what he thinks Mueller is doing. His job is to interpret the law and make a ruling.
 
Raoul said:
Its not being used to trap someone. Mueller has a mandate to pursue all things related to Russian interference and any issues that may arise thereof. Therefore he is well within his mandate to pursue a case against Trump's campaign manager if he has evidence laws have been broken. Its not the judges role to wax poetic about what he thinks Mueller is doing. His job is to interpret the law and make a ruling.
Click to expand...

“I don’t see what relationship this indictment has with what the special counsel is investigating,” U.S. Senior Judge T.S. Ellis III, a Reagan appointee, told government lawyers at Friday’s hearing.

The Virginia indictment alleges Manafort hid tens of millions of dollars he earned advising pro-Russia politicians in Ukraine from the Internal Revenue Service, money earned from 2006 through 2015. The indictment accuses Manafort of fraudulently obtaining millions in loans from financial institutions later, after his Ukrainian work dwindled. Prosecutors say that part of the conspiracy stretched from 2015 through January 2017, including the months while he was working on the Trump campaign.

Under questioning from Ellis, government lawyers admitted that Manafort had been under investigation for years in the Eastern District of Virginia before Mueller was ever appointed special counsel. And Ellis said it was implausible to think that the charges against Manafort, which primarily concern his business dealings and tax returns from about 2005 through 2015, could have a real connection to Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Ellis suggested the real reason Mueller is pursuing Manafort is to pressure him to “sing” against Trump, though he also noted that such a strategy is a “time-honored practice” for prosecutors and not necessarily illegal. Ellis went on to say that defense lawyers are naturally concerned that defendants in that situation will not only sing but “compose” — meaning that they’ll make up facts.
...
Manafort’s lawyer, Kevin Downing, has argued that a special counsel should be tightly constrained in how it operates. He noted that the law authorizing the special counsel was passed to replace the old independent counsel law, which was derided for allowing overbroad, yearslong investigations during the Reagan and Clinton administrations.

Downing has argued that the charges should be dismissed if Mueller lacked authority to bring them. Ellis, though, suggested another remedy would be to simply hand the case back to regular federal prosecutors.

Ellis withheld ruling on the motion and will issue a written ruling at a later date.
Click to expand...
 

Its not his job to make an assessment about anything other than charges before him. Mueller's mandate includes Russian interference and "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4."

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download

That is a very broad mandate that includes Manafort's activities since they are part of the Russia investigation and matters that have arisen directly from the investigation. The AG (or if he's recused the Deputy AG) has the legal authority to lay out the ground rules for the investigation. The judge's piece here is to interpret the law, not change it.
 
Raoul said:
Its not his job to make an assessment about anything other than charges before him. Mueller's mandate includes Russian interference and "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4."

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download

That is a very broad mandate that includes Manafort's activities since they are part of the Russia investigation and matters that have arisen directly from the investigation. The AG (or if he's recused the Deputy AG) has the legal authority to lay out the ground rules for the investigation. The judge's piece here is to interpret the law, not change it.
Click to expand...

Yeah it’s basically “Investigate the 2016 election and any crimes you uncover along the way”.

They can have no arguments over whether anything falls under scope. The only argument I can see them having any chance with is that the scope itself was too broad but I think Manafort has already failed with that claim.
 
berbatrick said:
Huh? If a judge feels the case before him is being used to trap someone else (and this definitely happens a lot on mob trials in TV legal shows!), he has the right to call that out.
Click to expand...
Are you telling me that there is something illegal or immoral about trying to flip a criminal to use him to catch a bigger fish? I was of the opinion that it was a major resource used against organised crime bosses in the USA. If it is not illegal or immoral what's the problem?
 
The immoral thing is that you let criminals off the hook thus fail to advance justice but it's legitimized by the frying of bigger fish, classic trade off.
 
Nikhil said:
Chris Cuomo says it is good when the US meddles in elections in other countries. I remember Biden saying the same thing as well.


Click to expand...


That's not what he said. He said its not ok to solicit information from a foreign government otherwise the soliciting party may run a-fowl with the FEC.
 
Schneiderman has resigned as NYAG, wonder what effect that might have because he was working with Mueller.
 
Adisa said:
Nunes will get what's coming to him.
Click to expand...

This is the new strategy by Nunes, Trump and the freedom caucus. Blow up the investigation by subpoenaing and publicizing information that reveals Mueller's case and allows wrongdoers to adjust their defense strategies and destroy evidence. Its pure obstruction of justice.
 
ChaddyP said:
Click to expand...


Wow.

Edit - I’m beginning to think this is part of a full court press by Mueller. The Cohen raid and subsequent investigation was based on Mueller intelligence. The reason Avenatti is always two steps ahead is because he basically has the almanac.
 
Last edited:
Javi said:
Just shows that Avenatti is on a PR tour.
Click to expand...
hes not the only one reporting the payment, hes just the only one thats saying it may have been used to repay for daniels payment. Its been widely reported by all the major outlets that this payment was made to cohen and his lawyer has basically confirmed it as much (but said itwasnt a payment) Robert Mueller has questioned the olegarc that made the payment already and there are some obvious questionable things that have come up in wake of all of this.

Follow the money
 
ChaddyP said:
hes not the only one reporting the payment, hes just the only one thats saying it may have been used to repay for daniels payment. Its been widely reported by all the major outlets that this payment was made to cohen and his lawyer has basically confirmed it as much (but said itwasnt a payment) Robert Mueller has questioned the olegarc that made the payment already and there are some obvious questionable things that have come up in wake of all of this.

Follow the money
Click to expand...

Then it's rather odd that he's claiming to have put 'significant investigation' into the discovery meaning a gross misallocation of funds.

It's also not the reason I said that Avenatti was on a PR tour. The payment could have been for any legal service under the sun, too. It's not advancing his case, which is to protect Stormy Daniels whatever her real name in the matter.
 
Fergies Gum said:
That does sound like a load of nonsense.

Are we really supposed to believe Trump asked a Russian businessman to do him a favour and to get his company to refund Cohen for the hush money.
Click to expand...

Sounds crazy, but I wouldn’t put anything past the stupid Watergate crew.
 
Javi said:
Then it's rather odd that he's claiming to have put 'significant investigation' into the discovery meaning a gross misallocation of funds.

It's also not the reason I said that Avenatti was on a PR tour. The payment could have been for any legal service under the sun, too. It's not advancing his case, which is to protect Stormy Daniels whatever her real name in the matter.
Click to expand...

yes the payment could have been. But the amount, timing , account used and person it was coming from will certain ring alot of fecking bells. Which is why Mueller found it necessary to question vekselberg on the runway about it. Avenatti has always been on a PR tour. Its part of his legal strategy to keep his case always in the public . All im saying is hes not just posting random BS for shits and giggles and i hope he has his backing (like he normally does) so he doesnt look like an ass if its fake news.
 
Fergies Gum said:
That does sound like a load of nonsense.

Are we really supposed to believe Trump asked a Russian businessman to do him a favour and to get his company to refund Cohen for the hush money.
Click to expand...


You give Trump and co too much credit
 
Fergies Gum said:
That does sound like a load of nonsense.

Are we really supposed to believe Trump asked a Russian businessman to do him a favour and to get his company to refund Cohen for the hush money.
Click to expand...

Its all over the news right now. I'm not sure Cohen and Trump were slick enough to not do this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.