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.

 

U.S. judge questions special counsel's powers in Manafort case

page: 1
37
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+19 more 
posted on May, 4 2018 @ 11:21 AM
link   


A federal judge on Friday sharply criticized Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s criminal case in Virginia against President Trump’s former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, and openly questioned whether Mueller exceeded his prosecutorial powers by bringing it.

“I don’t see what relationship this indictment has with anything the special counsel is authorized to investigate,” U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis in the Eastern District of Virginia said.

At tense hearing at the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, the judge said Mueller should not have “unfettered power” in his Russia probe and that the charges against Manafort did not arise from the investigation into Moscow’s alleged meddling in the 2016 U.S. election.

U.S. judge questions special counsel's powers in Manafort case

Well color me shocked...

Someone in the courts questioned Robert Mueller being able to wield dictatorial power?

I know trump opponents want him brought down by any means necessary but eventually a sane judge [who has read the constitution] was going to speak up...

Seriously, who here wants unelected officials choosing who and what should be allowed?

Everyone on the left can put your hands down now...

Mueller, rosenstein, Comey, McCabe, strjok, page and their lackies built an infrastructure to usurp the will of the people and overturn the results of a freely elected resident...

Which is terrifying...
It’s astonsishing to me how quickly the left devolves into lawlessness and trampling of our constitution so long as it is Trump who is the target..

Stay classy mueller....I cannot wait until that smug narcissist is fired...

-Chris




posted on May, 4 2018 @ 12:15 PM
link   
The curtains are closing.

The Questions are being Questioned.

🎁



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 12:54 PM
link   
Wow, a Virginia judge. I didn't think that Virginia would have many impartial judges. I am a little shocked. Maybe he is saving his wrath for a more prestigious case.



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 01:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Christosterone

I'm sure this is "Breaking News!" On the MSM outlets, right?

Right?



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Now that Federal Judge has figured out that Mueller is employing LIES and DECEPTION, all in an attempt to entrap a duly elected President.

Source: www.foxnews.com...

The entire country is now coming to grips with Mueller's REAL agenda. It's time for President Trump to go on OFFENSE and use to "Presidential Powers" he promised in his Tweet Wednesday.



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 01:42 PM
link   
Robert Mueller soon to be Robert "Bueller"

😎



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 02:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Christosterone

Was just coming here to post this. Not only did the judge lash out at Mueller and his team, he reprimanded them as well.

This has nothing to do with the Trump-Russia collusion and a judge finally sees this for the bs sham that it is. Destroy the President and anyone around him by either throwing them in prison with charges the government cared nothing about over a decade ago or financially destroy them if they cant charge them.

I still believe the decision to go after Cohen in the SDNY was an effort to pierce the attorney client privilege and to do it in a manner that seems unrelated to Mueller.

Manaforts motion to dismiss is coming up in short order. The judge who dismissed the civil lawsuit warned for people not to read into the decision to dismiss the civil suit as an indicator of how they might rule for the same motion on the criminal side.

Prosecutorial misconduct
Malicious prosecution

This disaster of a special counsel must end.

Even CNN is reporting on this -
Judge in Manafort case says Mueller's aim is to hurt Trump

(CNN)A federal judge expressed deep skepticism Friday in the bank fraud case brought by special counsel Robert Mueller's office against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, at one point saying he believes that Mueller's motivation is to oust President Donald Trump from office.
Although Mueller's authority has been tested in court before, Friday's hearing was notable for District Judge T.S. Ellis' decision to wade into the divisive political debate around the investigation.
"You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud," Ellis said to prosecutor Michael Dreeben, at times losing his temper. Ellis said prosecutors were interested in Manafort because of his potential to provide material that would lead to Trump's "prosecution or impeachment," Ellis said.
"That's what you're really interested in," said Ellis, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

Ellis repeated his suspicion several times in the hour-long court hearing. He said he'll make a decision at a later date about whether Manafort's case can go forward.
"We don't want anyone in this country with unfettered power. It's unlikely you're going to persuade me the special prosecutor has power to do anything he or she wants," Ellis told Dreeben. "The American people feel pretty strongly that no one has unfettered power."
When Dreeben answered Ellis' question about how the investigation and its charges date back to before the Trump campaign formed, the judge shot back, "None of that information has to do with information related to Russian government coordination and the campaign of Donald Trump."
At one point, Ellis posed a hypothetical question, speaking as if he were the prosecutor, about why Mueller's office referred a criminal investigation about Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen to New York authorities and kept the Manafort case in Virginia.
They weren't interested in it because it didn't "further our core effort to get Trump," Ellis said, mimicking a prosecutor in the case.


click link for entire article as well as video footage.
edit on 4-5-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 4-5-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 02:47 PM
link   
This is a shot across the brow of the Special Counsel,
the judge has accused the prosecutor of lying.

"We don't want anyone with unfettered power".

And this - the argument of the Special Counserl's Office
is "We said this was what the investigation was about, but
we are not bound by it and we were lying".

Judge accuses them of lying at least twice!

The Mueller train is coming off the rails.....



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 02:57 PM
link   
Lol.. awesome (from the fox news link above)


Further, Ellis demanded to see the unredacted “scope memo,” a document outlining the scope of the special counsel’s Russia probe that congressional Republicans have also sought.


Congress already demanded this via subpoena and the DOJ refused to comply. Lets see them pull that with a judge.


and a major no no -

The special counsel argues that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein granted them broad authority in his May 2, 2017 letter appointing Mueller to this investigation. But after the revelation that the team is using information from the earlier DOJ probe, Ellis said that information did not “arise” out of the special counsel probe – and therefore may not be within the scope of that investigation.


This is exactly what occurred to Flynn. The initial FBI investigation occurred prior to the appointment of the special counsel. Mueller took that info and folded it under his authority to go after Flynn.

The same is going to be argued for Cohen.



Jack Posobiec
🇺🇸
‏Verified account @JackPosobiec
3h3 hours ago

Breaking: Federal Judge Ellis gives Mueller two weeks to turn over the full unredacted secret memo that Rosenstein refused to give to Congress



In a somewhat unrelated matter -
The OIG testimony to Congress has been postponed due to new information in the Hillary Clinton investigation.
edit on 4-5-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   
and another hit to Mueller. Manafort's lawyer has stated Mueller's team has not complied with discovery requirements. Media kept reporting of links between Manafort and Russia and yet cant provide any of that evidence to Manafort's lawyer, as is required under Brady rules.

Turns out there is no evidence linking Manafort to Russia.

Paul Manafort’s defense attorney delivers possible blow to Robert Mueller’s probe

A defense attorney in a court filing says special counsel Robert Mueller has disclosed he has no evidence that former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort communicated with Russian government officials.

If the attorney is accurate, it delivers another credibility blow to the Democratic Party-financed dossier, which accuses Mr. Manafort of orchestrating Trump-Russia collusion.
Kevin Downing, a defense attorney for Mr. Manafort, filed the brief April 30 in the special counsel’s money-laundering case against his client. Those charges are confined to millions of dollars he earned as a political consultant for Ukrainian politicians.

The Ukraine criminal case, to date in public court filings, has nothing to do with alleged Trump-Russia coordination. But Mr. Downing’s brief to a federal judge is relevant to the Mueller Russia investigation because it punches a big hole in dossier conspiracies being investigated by the FBI and Congress.

Mr. Downing said he has asked Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors multiple times under mandatory discovery rules for any information showing any communication between Mr. Manafort and Russian officials during the campaign season.

“The special counsel has not produced any materials to the defense — no tapes, notes, transcripts or any other material evidencing surveillance or intercepts of communications between Mr. Manafort and Russian intelligence officials, Russian government officials [or any other foreign officials],” Mr. Downing said. “The Office of Special Counsel has advised that there are no materials responsive to Mr. Manafort’s request.”

Mr. Downing said that government-sourced news stories saying Mr. Manafort communicated with Russians during the campaign were an “elaborate hoax.”

Mr. Downing’s declaration deals another blow to the veracity of the dossier, funded by the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign and written by former British intelligence officer Christopher Steele.

Mr. Steele laid out a supposed “extensive conspiracy” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, and Mr. Manafort, as the dossier narrative goes, was right in the middle of it.

Mr. Steele wrote, “speaking in confidence to a compatriot in late July 2016, Source B, an ethnic Russian close associate of Republican US presidential candidate Donald TRUMP, admitted that there was a well-developed conspiracy of co-operation between them and the Russian leadership. This was managed on the TRUMP side by the Republican candidates campaign manager, Paul MANAFORT, who was using foreign policy advisor, Carter PAGE, and others as intermediaries.”

Mr. Page and Mr. Manafort have denied all the dossier’s Trump-Russia collusion charges, none of which have been confirmed publicly.

The fact that the special counsel, according to Mr. Downing, says he has no evidence of communications creates questions for other Trump-Russia reporting.

In a major story promoting collusion, The New York Times in February 2017 ran a story that said the U.S. government had complied a large amount of communication intercepts and phone records between Trump campaign officials and Russian intelligence. On its face, the story meant there was collusion.

That June, former FBI director James B. Comey, told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence that the Times story was almost completely wrong. There were no such records.

Then there is the issue of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who appointed Mr. Mueller and later gave him the parameters for investigating Mr. Manafort. One justification was the Ukrainian money. There other was allegations of Manafort-Russia coordination to interfere in the 2016 election.

The Rosenstein memo did not provide the source for that allegation. The only public allegation of such coordination is found in the Steele dossier posted online by BuzzFeed on Jan. 10, 2017.

The dossier has emerged as one of the more important documents in modern U.S. political history.

The FBI has relied on it greatly. It used the dossier to obtain a court-approved wiretap on Mr. Page, who has not been charged. Agents also relied on the dossier for leads and to question witnesses.

On his book tour, Mr. Comey has said the bureau tried to “replicate” Mr. Steele’s work.

The FBI formed an alliance with Mr. Steele and committed to paying him $50,000 to continue investigating Mr. Trump. But the FBI fired Mr. Steele after he violated FBI rules and went to the news media with his conspiracy tales.

The Republican majority on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence concluded in a final report last week that there was no collusion, thus rejecting all the dossier charges.

The committee’s Democrats, led by Rep. Adam Schiff of California, relied on the dossier at hearings and in questioning witnesses. Mr. Schiff applauded Mr. Steele’s work.

Mr. Downing made his no-evidence disclosure in a memorandum asking a judge to hold a hearing into government leaks against his client.

He said many of those leaks alleged a Russian-Manafort conspiracy that, while non-existent, damages his clients standing before a trial jury.

He specifically cited The New York Times February 2017 story. The story helped the Times win the George Polk Award in Journalism for its Russia coverage.

“If the representations of the special counsel are accurate and there is not, in fact, any evidence of communications between Mr. Manafort and foreign officials, then the perpetrators of this elaborate hoax must be identified and punished and the substantial unfair prejudice to Mr. Manafort must be remedied,” Mr. Downing wrote.



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Christosterone

I just read some of the comments this judge made and it seems he is using his position to vent his own political frustrations.

He even goes as far as to opine on the intent of the prosecution and Mueller's team.

Very odd for a judge to say such things. Even if the case is dismissed, he is making it quite easy for the prosecution to argue that the judge's judgment was clearly tainted or politicized.



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Christosterone

I just read some of the comments this judge made and it seems he is using his position to vent his own political frustrations.

He even goes as far as to opine on the intent of the prosecution and Mueller's team.

Very odd for a judge to say such things. Even if the case is dismissed, he is making it quite easy for the prosecution to argue that the judge's judgment was clearly tainted or politicized.

perhaps if muellers team followed the law this wouldnt happen
maybe they will give up their redacted super secret scope like the judge PREVIOUSLY asked for
if manafort committed crimes muellers team will have let them off because they simply couldnt follow the rules



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody



perhaps if muellers team followed the law this wouldnt happen


Nothing appears to of have "happened", except the judge seems to be spitting his political frustrations on the bench. Something a judge should not do.

Also, what convictions have been laid at the feet of Mueller's team? What laws have they been proven to have broken?



maybe they will give up their redacted super secret scope like the judge PREVIOUSLY asked for


Perhaps. I'm not entirely privy on the law in regards to that aspect. I'd want to know more before giving an opinion on that aspect.



if manafort committed crimes muellers team will have let them off because they simply couldnt follow the rules


That doesn't make much sense. Mueller's team is going to let Manafort off because they couldn't follow the rules? Then why are they in court?
edit on 4-5-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

no worries
msnbc can spoon feed you
fumny how you comprehend complex issues when its not in trumps favor but this is so puzzling

federal judges accuse prosecutors of lying while adjudicating pre trial motions all the time



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody



fumny how you comprehend complex issues when its not in trumps favor but this is so puzzling


This has nothing to do with being pro or anti Trump. This is about a judge's words and actions on the bench. And I was puzzled at what you said, as it makes no #ing sense.

Read what you posted again and try to explain that one to me. How is Mueller going to let Manafort off, especially considering they are taking this to court?




federal judges accuse prosecutors of lying while adjudicating pre trial motions all the time


Sure, but the judge said much more than than. He specifically lashed-out about the prosecutors intent, making it clearly obvious he was triggered by the entire ordeal.

Did you read some of his statements? Clearly, he is biased in this case and he may have just given the prosecution justified reason to ask for new hearings, as the judge has compromised himself.
edit on 4-5-2018 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

same judge that earlier stated manafort may be a flight risk because he faces life in jail.....but now he is biased
hahahaha

if manafort committed crimes and muellers teams incompetence allows manafort to walk it would be a shame



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody



same judge that earlier stated manafort may be a flight risk because he faces life in jail.....but now he is biased hahahaha


That does not invalidate what I said, nor does it justify what the judge recently said.

Your approach is highly illogical.



if manafort committed crimes and muellers teams incompetence allows manafort to walk it would be a shame


True. It would also be a shame to see this process drug out any longer because the judge outed himself as being potentially biased and partial.



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Christosterone

I just read some of the comments this judge made and it seems he is using his position to vent his own political frustrations.

He even goes as far as to opine on the intent of the prosecution and Mueller's team.

Very odd for a judge to say such things. Even if the case is dismissed, he is making it quite easy for the prosecution to argue that the judge's judgment was clearly tainted or politicized.


I disagree. He is responding to motions Manafort's lawyer have raised. His questions are appropriate and given the governments response they are justified. He has given the DOJ 2 weeks to provide him the unreadacted scope memo that they are refusing to turn over to Congress (in violation of a subpoena).

Secondly the judge is right in reference to Mueller going after Manafort from an already existing DOJ investigation that failed to prosecute. It means Manafort and what he is charged with was not discovered by the SC investigation.

As for the comment about political frustration please... Look at everyone on Mueller's team. All are Democrats / Clinton supporters. Even the newest one just added is a Democrat /Clinton supporter.

The judges actions and comments were appropriate.
edit on 4-5-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

" True. It would also be a shame to see this process drug out any longer because the judge outed himself as being potentially biased and partial. "


Excuse Me , but are you talking about the Mueller Investigation or this Judge there ? .Hmm......



posted on May, 4 2018 @ 04:58 PM
link   
If the judge sides with Manafort and dismisses all charges that is the legal remedy for a prosecution that comes off the rails and delves into illegal actions by the prosecution.

The charges gets dismissed, with prejudice.

Given the tools available to law enforcement and prosecutors there should be no reason to be violating the laws or someones civil rights.

If you can't lawfully make your case then you have no case.
edit on 4-5-2018 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
37
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join