Judge tosses Manafort civil suit challenging special counsel

Source

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Washington has thrown out a civil lawsuit brought by President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman that sought to challenge the authority of the special counsel in the Russia investigation.

The decision was a blow to Paul Manafort’s defense against special counsel Robert Mueller. U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued the ruling.

Manafort’s attorneys had initially asked Jackson to throw out all charges against Manafort, arguing that Mueller had exceeded his authority by bringing charges unrelated to Russian election interference.

There goes Manafort's only hope down the drain. So much for the idea that he had a shot against Mueller to have his case thrown out and that it was only a matter of time before he was to be a free man. Back to the drawing board Manafort!

a reply to: Swills

Wonder if all the people saying he has a solid case will eat crow or deflect.

The case was thrown out. Couldn't have been very solid. It was thrown out after they limited there claims even.

Judge has a history of liberal rulings from her high and mighty judge seat.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Swills

Wonder if all the people saying he has a solid case will eat crow or deflect.

The case was thrown out. Couldn't have been very solid. It was thrown out after they limited there claims even.

I was going to suggest “Libruhl Judges” but someone beat me to it.

a reply to: jjkenobi

Uh huh. So she could just toss a solid case.

A case that has been wiiddled down by manafort himself.

a reply to: Swills

Judge was appointed by O. Look at two other cases she ruled on....

Link

Earlier this year, for instance, she dismissed a lawsuit filed by the parents of two of the four Americans who died at the U.S. compound in Benghazi, Libya in 2012, seeking to hold Trump’s election opponent Hillary Clinton responsible. And four years ago, she sided with the Obama administration request and put on hold a lawsuit by House Republicans demanding papers related to former Attorney General Eric Holder’s botched Fast-and-Furious gun-tracking operation.

I think they should be looking for collusion here at home in the justice system...

a reply to: Swills

What did Q have to say about manafort I wonder?

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Swills

What did Q have to say about manafort I wonder?

Not much, as best as I remember.

Q has stated that Flynn will be exonerated, and that to me seems fairly likely, because the judge's actions there seem to indicate he suspects Mueller acted inappropriately. (Ordering the prosecutor to turn over evidence to the defense is a huge red flag.)

EDIT: There are two Q posts that mention Manafort: one from last October, and one from earlier this month. Both times, Q claims Manafort was inserted into Trump's campaign by people who were hostile to him.

a reply to: matafuchs

Yea she sounds very upstanding and impartial...

Time to end the appointing of judges...they need to be voted in...this scratch the back of whoever appointed them nonsense is about as counter to a fair and impartial system as it gets.

And here comes the tears...but it was an Obama judge. Lol...

a reply to: jjkenobi

Justice is blind

a reply to: RickyD

I wish trump agreed with you.

The Justice Department had moved for dismissal of the lawsuit, largely on grounds that allowing a judge in a civil case to dictate the scope of a criminal investigation would be a violation of separation of powers. Daniel Schwei of the Justice Department’s civil division argued that previous precedent should guide the judge to throw out the suit.

a reply to: matafuchs

So what. Jesus H Christ. The judge didn't pledge an oath to obama.

a reply to: Swills

How can it be a blow to manaforts legal team it says in the article they requested the case be dropped.

But in an April 4 hearing, Downing told Jackson that he was dropping the bulk of the civil challenge, asking her just to nullify a paragraph in Mueller’s appointment order that he believed was overly broad.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: jjkenobi

Justice is blind

Well that just makes Justice even better at smelling money,and tasting power. Justice coudnt get disability because of her blindness since she can still work doing something. like sniffing perfume.

a reply to: scraedtosleep

I don't care what trump agrees with...supposedly the people are supposed to have the power here...maybe we should stop bickering over our teams which neither of really serve us and maybe take that power back...as it should be. They should rightfully fear us!

a reply to: luthier

tears? Why is is when a fact is pointed out most of you call it crying or being triggered. It is a f'n fact. Look at her rulings. Do you really think she would be impartial? Take you own partisan view out of it and be honest....

a reply to: Sillyolme

Bull# and you know it. Keep living in that fantasy world though for what little time is left in it.

a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Manafort was brought in for delegates and the RNC. That was it. For some reason people act like he was one of Trumps best advisors but he was not. He had the connections and the ability to get a part of the campaign done and he did. He is a RNC deal maker/broker/bagman, call him what you want, but he had one job.

He was also there, not on the side of Trump, when the RNC told Trump to step down from the race after the grab the pussy comment. Trump and his team, not including Manafort, told the RNC to suck eggs and they went on to win. The RNC wanted him out, they could have put in a patsy and HRC would be president.