It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Paul Manafort sues Mueller and the DoJ

page: 4
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:32 PM
link   

33. But paragraph (b)(ii) of the Appointment Order purports to grant Mr. Mueller further authority to investigate and prosecute “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” That grant of authority is not authorized by DOJ’s special counsel regulations. It is not a “specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated.” Nor is it an ancillary power to address efforts to impede or obstruct investigation under 28 C.F.R. §600.4(a).
...
35. The effort to convey that “additional” authority to pursue any matters that might come to light, as part of the grant of original jurisdiction, without the required consultation and decision by the Attorney General, exceeds the scope of appointment authority under 28 C.F.R. §600.4. It also defies the principles of limited power and accountability that animate those limits on the Attorney General’s appointment authority. Under the Appointment Order, the Special Counsel’s authority is not confined to the specific matters identified by politically accountable officials: The Appointment Order purports to grant authority to the Special Counsel to expand the scope of his investigation to new matters without the consent of—indeed, without even consulting—any politically accountable officer of the United States.


Source link in OP.

This is Manafort's attorney basically stating that the widening net Mueller has cast is not within his original remit as he did not seek additional approval from the Attorney General to pursue these allegations that have nothing to do with anything that transpired during the election cycle.




posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: luthier




The doj gives a special council broad powers, they are limited, but manafort has no idea how his case fits into Mueller's larger investigation which males it even more of a hail Mary.



What does this even mean?
Unless you mean that Mueller only got an indictment to try to flip Manafort, which if so was a giant FAIL with this suit filed.


Mueller is losing whatever leverage he thought he had. Papadopoulos is probably his last hope.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:33 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yet he got a warrant and Rod already testified? Hmm

Will you own this if it's thrown out?



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:36 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier




He has the authority...

I never said he didnt

now you answer what happens to a federal prosecutor that seizes privileged information



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:37 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier


Yet he got a warrant and Rod already testified? Hmm


Are you sure about that?


40. On July 30, 2014, Mr. Manafort voluntarily met with DOJ prosecutors and FBI agents to discuss his offshore political consulting activities. During the interview, Mr. Manafort provided a detailed explanation of his activities in Ukraine, including his frequent contact with a number of previous U.S. Ambassadors in Kiev and his efforts to further U.S. objectives in Ukraine on their behalf. He further discussed his offshore banking activity in Cyprus. Throughout the process, DOJ maintained that they were assisting the Ukrainian government in locating stolen assets. The investigation focused on the activities of a former Ukraine President and was closed soon after Mr. Manafort’s interview.

41. The Office of the Special Counsel charged Mr. Manafort with the very conduct he voluntarily disclosed to DOJ almost three years prior to the appointment of Mr. Mueller as Special Counsel. The charged conduct does not relate to the specific matter designated in the Appointment Order, nor did it arise from the Special Counsel’s investigation. The Special
Counsel’s investigation and indictment resulted from a violation of numerous DOJ policies and procedures and otherwise far exceeds any lawful authority to investigate links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government.



Will you own this if it's thrown out?


What's to own? I didn't file the lawsuit.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

That you believe it has legs and these are actual valid legal points...



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Nothing. They can't use it in prosecution. He never sized anything..he asked and they handed it over.

, and there were no specific claims..

It was a publicity stunt, just like this.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:46 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Hey musicmaker, haven't you heard of the old "foot in the door" tactic. There's been some background growling that when DOJ and FBI illegally used illegal wiretaps to impugn the FISA Court Judge, they all become ineligible, for further employment, in this prosecution. If Manafort's lawyers chase this cat up a tree, then the whole Mueller machinery goes down the tube. Let's hold our horses, for a bit, and see what kind of motions Manafort's law team put into the court proceedings.

IMO, Going too far outside of the bounds, probably won't stop Mueller's team. But catching them all with their pant's down, over illegally proferrred writs to the FISA court, is another breed of cat.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Why would I need to "own" something that is readily apparent?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I have no problems admitting that when it is truth.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: carpooler

Great post! Thank you for providing that new angle.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: angeldoll

perjury
it was a process crime to that investigation
much like what flynn plead to

what Manafort was indicted for was NOT a process crime
and Manforts suit claims it was OUTSIDE the SC scope, which will be an interesting debate


Nope. He perjured himself about Lewinski, not Whitewater, which was the reason for the investigation.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: carpooler

Yes I have but haven't you heard of a hail mary?

Did you read this over.

Ukraine is beyond the scope because it's not russia? Even though he worked for a pro Russian Ukraine party...

A civil lawsuit? So trying to circumvent the criminal charge in a different court?

He went passed his legal authority even though he just has to meet with Rod, Rod already testified Mueller was in bounds after this alleged occurance

The doj has over stepped it's own regulation?

And how about the help me please throw this out because I am most likely going to jail factor?



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Dfairlite




posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Because you may wiggle out its rigged it's a deep state.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   

Consistent with DOJ’s special counsel regulations, the Appointment Order gives
Mr. Mueller authority to investigate a specific matter: “links and/or coordination between the
Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump.”
But the Appointment Order then purports to grant Mr. Mueller the additional authority to pursue
“any matters that arose or may arise directly from” that investigation.


So, Mueller was granted the authority to pursue and investigate criminal acts he found that were outside the scope of the Russia/campaign investigation, which includes crimes by Manafort being uncovered, which in turn gets Manafort's panties in a wad (because he was caught), so he's suing to protect himself from his alleged very real crimes under the guise of abuse or excess of authority.

Manafort is peeved that he, being a criminal, was caught, and now he's trying to do anything he can to save his ass. That's it. The guy is a sleaze ball. And so are the people trying to undermine a very serious criminal investigation and stick up for the criminals. Sad!

Sorry you got caught. Take it like the criminal you are.






edit on 3-1-2018 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

Your really losing me here.

I provided you with the statute regarding appointing a special prosecutor and defining their jurisdiction. It's very specific.

You obviously know the scope of the investigation since you provided a copy of it. It's fairly specific too.

What Manafort has been charged with stems from before his work with the Trump campaign and the 2016 election. The investigation is in regards to the 2016 election, so the charges against Manafort have a good chance to be dismissed, as they are not part of the jurisdiction of the investigation.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Vector99

And I already gave one easy scenario.

He looked into his records to find any historical contacts he has with Russians who can influemce the election. In the process uncovered financial crimes (which is in the statue that isn't specific by any means by statute standards)..he goes back to see if he has debts to any nefarious people.

Maybe he owed a debt to these people from 2014 who wanted a favor in 2016...there are literally dozens of ways it can be connected...


(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and


edit on 3-1-2018 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:48 PM
link   
Simple question...

Does Duty of Disclosure apply to a Special Counsel?



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

And as I've been trying to get through to you, Manaforts charge has NOTHING to do with the 2016 election. Mueller would have to expand his jurisdiction to investigate the crime he's charging.

Tell me, where is the specific and factual statement of the matter to be investigated to expand the jurisdiction of the investigation?

Plain and simple, Mueller snooped where he wasn't allowed, and Manafort bought smart enough lawyers to find the laws proving it.



posted on Jan, 3 2018 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: luthier

And as I've been trying to get through to you, Manaforts charge has NOTHING to do with the 2016 election. Mueller would have to expand his jurisdiction to investigate the crime he's charging.

Tell me, where is the specific and factual statement of the matter to be investigated to expand the jurisdiction of the investigation?

Plain and simple, Mueller snooped where he wasn't allowed, and Manafort bought smart enough lawyers to find the laws proving it.



(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation


And again he was allowed to do this, Rodstein testified, and it could have been to find a history of associates and any favor that may have been.

He has several charges as well...



new topics

top topics



 
23
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join