Paul Manafort sues Mueller and the DoJ

a reply to: Dfairlite

Discovery will be glorious!

a reply to: bknapple32

Playing ball, Manafort has nothing on Trump even if he wants to play ball. The dude only knew Trump for like 3 months and was brought in for his delegate counting expertise.

a reply to: EvidenceNibbler

Dismissed...

Next..

a reply to: SirHardHarry

Mainly uncovering a vast criminal conspiracy around trump and co and also involving russian interests and money laundering.

If that's what he's doing, he's doing a really bad job at it... but the next part is what I find interesting:

. Trump put himself on the radar the moment his ego got too big and he pounced on the presidency.

So basically you're admitting that the entire investigation is "the deep state" or "the establishment" attacking a threat? And you're ok with this?

a reply to: luthier

If it's not dismissed what are you going to say?

a reply to: Dfairlite

I will say I was wrong. I didn't have my information correct. My interpretation of the law is not correct.

It won't be, it's rigged, it's a deep state, what about Hilary, Obama put the judges in place.

Trying to circumvent criminal trials is usually a bad approach. It's easily read.

The irony is another investigator wold puck up the case if they are crimes. So it's probably a pardon favor.

a reply to: Dfairlite

If that's what he's doing, he's doing a really bad job at it... but the next part is what I find interesting:

How so? He has at least two informants and who knows how many others.

The average case is about 3 years from a SC.

There is a narrative being passed around Mueller isn't doing a good job but I don't find it compelling at all..

originally posted by: angeldoll
Maybe a little explanation for the Opening Post.

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort has sued special counsel Robert Mueller, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and the U.S. Department of Justice.

The suit alleges that Mueller has strayed beyond the scope of the investigation he was authorized to pursue, and argues that the charges filed against Manafort have nothing to do with the 2016 presidential election that spurred Mueller's appointment.

"The actions of DOJ and Mr. Rosenstein in issuing the Appointment Order, and Mr. Mueller's actions pursuant to the authority the Order granted him, were arbitrary, capricious, and not in accordance with the law," the suit reads.


Manafort's suit alleges the order appointing Mueller "exceeds the Deputy Attorney General's authority." All actions taken by the special counsel "must be set aside," it reads.

www.cnbc.com...

The suit alleges that Mueller has strayed beyond the scope of the investigation he was authorized to pursue,

Guess that means Bill Clinton can sue whatshisface. Ken Starr.

Nah... statute of limitations is LONG gone...

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Vector99

I did champ. Also my father in law was a chief of staff for a state AG, my sister in law has three law degrees and teaches law,...

It ain't going nowhere. I would be willing to bet on it. It looks fancy and it fooled you I guess. He tries to create a legal precedence but it won't work. Mark my words. It's nearly impossible to fight vague investigative powers.

But you can hope and be impressed I can't atop you. Then complain it's rigged when it's thrown out.

My neighbor is the mayor and his daughter is a lawyer for "the big guy", and she said it had legs. So I believe my third party source cancels yours out.

Before tonight, I thought that LAWS were LAWS. Now I see that the discipline of law is more of an art, than a science.

a reply to: dasman888

Sure he could but he would get about as far as manafort will...the filing stage.

a reply to: carewemust

Laws are laws. But they take the same volume of knowledge as physics to understand them.

Ever see the cliche volumes of books in a lawyers office, and their desks spilled over with case files and law books?

You cant Google a statute and expect to understand what it means. It's not that simple. Particularly in a common law system.

originally posted by: carpooler
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.

There it is, exactly... discovery may be a real bitc* for Mueller and his crew... who are furiously trying to figure out how long they can delay the inevitable scrutiny over TWO FISA requests... the first failed one... and the second one that was granted... that was "fruit of the poisoned tree" before it was even submitted to FISA.

It wasn't technically poisoned fruit (illegally acquired), but it was probable there was deliberate attempt to deceive the FISA court... and when THAT fruit blooms... it's gonna be serious popcorn time.

originally posted by: Liquesence

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.

See, that's the crazy thing about the American system... breaking the law to prosecute folks who have broken the law is not legal or legitimate in our courts. Everyone has rights... even those who have broken the law. If convicted, they lose SOME rights... but we never lose the right to a fair trial, due process, etc... etc... just because we broke some laws.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Dfairlite

Yep I read the lawsuit. It's going to get thrown out.


And is while he made it a civil claim. As a professional stunt.

No "why" to it Luthier... a lawsuit IS a civil claim, by definition... just sayin

a reply to: dasman888

You believe Mueller and his crew are furiously trying to figure out throwing off scrutiny over fisa requests he wasn't a part of?

The guy has been around the block and the second longest fbi director in history.

Prior to that a deputy AG?

a reply to: dasman888

No I listed it, linked the law that specifically gives Mueller the right to look into unrelated things to push a suspect to testify(whether or not that should be OK is another matter)

Listed the fact this is a civil suit trying to navigate around the criminal case where he would have filed a motion if it was valid...

And that rodstein testified already he is aware of everything Mueller has done and it's legit.

a reply to: yomss

In any criminal investigation, they do look at the money and follow it. Manaforts financial information is highly suspicious, to the point it was going to open up questions and those would lead to them digging a bit deeper. And as Manafort was also had ties to Ukraine and a Russian backed person there, it would be suspect, along with the banks that are used, where it is known that they launder money. So yes this would be within the scope of the investigation. The question is who knew, what and when.

Now, the other thing, is that you mention about the javelin missiles, an anti tank weapon. If I was Russia that is the exact kind of weapon I would want sent, cause then it means that the danger to say planes would be kept at a bear threat and thus not of concern. And funny how one tends to leave out one small thing, about any and all arms deal, they look at the President, instead of the other part of that equation, the congress, and several committees that all have to sign off on said sales. So lets look at this, foreign country asks and wants to buy weapons from the USA. The DOD has to study and give its ok, then the foreign relations committee, has to look and approve of it, then it has to be approved by the House and finally the Senate. The State Departments has a hand in it, and finally the President signs off and it is a done deal.

And yes Russia does interfere with other countries. They have for a long time and ultimately will not do anything to stop as long as it holds a strategic interest to them. All major powers do such. China does it, and so does the USA.

But back to the topic at hand. This kind of operation is never done over night, but takes a few years to accomplish, carefully cultivating the right people and laying down the ground work, a nudge here, and suggestion there. The Russians have been laying the ground work to do this for years, and finally pulled it off.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Dfairlite

I did. The procedure if he was confident is to file a motion in the criminal court. Not to file a civil lawsuit. That is going to really piss of the criminal judge.

That's not the angle he's coming at this from... the Special Counsel is a dubious and tortured entity... one which MANY Constitutional scholars say is incompatible with the Rule of Law. Remember... so long as both sides of the political aisle support it... it will be hard to get rid of... but this case LOOKS like it is going after the very legal veracity of the Special Counsel... pretty long game... but in discovery Mannaforts lawyers may force open the secret egg about the FISA warrants and applications, wrongdoing on the part of SC and his subordinates... ANYTHING that further illustrates what a disaster the SC structure is to the Rule of Law (Constitutional rights... etc)

a reply to: dasman888

Funny he never used the constitutionality in their argument. ..

And you file a motion to stop or change the criminal case.

This is a cherade..nothing else.

There will be no discoveries.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: dasman888

You believe Mueller and his crew are furiously trying to figure out throwing off scrutiny over fisa requests he wasn't a part of?

The guy has been around the block and the second longest fbi director in history.

Prior to that a deputy AG?

No... I am saying this is largely a "tactical play" to force discovery of things that will rupture the SC Investigation in ways that make it very difficult for partisans on both sides of the debate to keep nerf batting each other, instead of sticking to the law.

Personally... I don't think Mueller is necessarily "dirty" although to say there was a "potential" conflict of interest is a massive understatement. Mueller got seriously f***ed by the partisan people who he had to fire from the investigation... there is a significant trail of real oddball stuff associated with all this that has yet to hit the mainstream.

(Ohr's wife, a "Russia Expert" and on the payroll of Fusion GPS WORKING on the Trump smear file, at the beginning of 2016 applied for and received a HAM Amateur radio license? Wonder why? My friends with SIGINT experience didn't wonder why.
LOL)

The only reason this entire thing is still going on is because of the furious hateful politics in the DC Beltway and rabid partisans on both sides of the political spectrum. It stinks... and Manafort's lawyers are probably going to force a nice BIG bright light on the pieces of this that the DOJ has thus far refused to provide evidence about to Congress.

Politics with .gov entities is one thing... we're all accustomed to that. When, under threat of incarceration, a publicly visible case like this demands some document discovery... it may get very interesting.

As you said Luthier... if the case is ruled as having "no standing" and is thrown out, and not refiled... it's a nothingburger. If it is allowed to proceed, the discovery phase will be a flaming disaster for Mueller, because the FBI and DOJ partisan hacks... some or one of them, probably broke the law with the FISA application shenanigans.