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.

 

Judge Orders Mueller To Prove Russian Company Meddled In Election

page: 1
43
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+11 more 
posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Looks like the Judge in a "Russian interference" case brought forward by the bobber muler special counsel is asking for some proof !!

Muler's prosecutors were caught off guard when some Russian company actually came to court "unexpectedly" after charges were filed.

Lawyer(s) for the Russian company claim there is no law against election interfering !! 😃

It's never easy when things start falling apart 😎


Judge Orders Mueller To Prove Russian Company Meddled In Election

Concord was accused in the indictment of supporting the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian 'troll farm' accused of trying to influence the 2016 US election.

On Thursday, Judge Freidrich asked Mueller's prosecutors if she should assume they aren't accusing Concord of violating US laws applicable to election expenditures and failure to register as a foreign agent.

Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges - claiming that Mueller's office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.




"all fallink down goingk boomka"




posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Oh I'm sure Bobby Boy Mueller will have no problems providing all the evidence any judge wants to see.

www.bloomberg.com...

According to the judge’s request for clarification, the Justice Department has argued that it doesn’t have to show that Concord had a legal duty to report its expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Rather, the allegation is that the company knowingly engaged in deceptive acts that precluded the FEC, or the Justice Department, from ascertaining whether they had broken the law.


www.reuters.com...

The indictment said Concord was controlled by Russian businessman Evgeny Prigozhin, who U.S. officials have said has extensive ties to Russia’s military and political establishment. Prigozhin, also personally charged by Mueller, has been dubbed “Putin’s cook” by Russian media because his catering business has organized banquets for Russian President Vladimir Putin and other senior political figures. He has been hit with sanctions by the U.S. government.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 05:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Looks like the Judge in a "Russian interference" case brought forward by the bobber muler special counsel is asking for some proof !!

Muler's prosecutors were caught off guard when some Russian company actually came to court "unexpectedly" after charges were filed.

Lawyer(s) for the Russian company claim there is no law against election interfering !! 😃



Buh ... buh ... buh ... but hasn't the US been interfering in the elections and administrations of other foreign countries for decades? Proven fact, yes!

The US has set the precedent.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 05:24 PM
link   
so, which is it, does the judge want the special counsel to prove that they meddled... I thought that was what a court hearing would be for, to lay out the evidence.
or is it that the judge wants some clearification as to just what laws were broken?
or maybe it's both, who knows.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: incoserv

but, but, but.... if they have, which I wouldn't doubt...
I imagine that those countries didn't just shrug their shoulders saying well, we do it too, what the heck!!
I imagine they investigated it deeply, tried to find any holes in their security that could be closed, and well, sought to find out if any citizens or gov't officials of that country assisted in the act!!!



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

According to the fictional character that wrote that story its the first,

but if you actually read the quotes and information its the second.

Thats zerohedge for you.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 05:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: incoserv

but, but, but.... if they have, which I wouldn't doubt...
I imagine that those countries didn't just shrug their shoulders saying well, we do it too, what the heck!!
I imagine they investigated it deeply, tried to find any holes in their security that could be closed, and well, sought to find out if any citizens or gov't officials of that country assisted in the act!!!



If they have?

What rock have you been living under for the last few decades, friend?

Central America? Middle- and Far-east? The US has affected regime change and control in more countries than you can imagine. Iraq is one of the most recent. Saddam got to big for his britches, overthrow him in make our own country.

Yeah, I know. Saddam was a big, bad man and the US did it for the children!

The Banana Wars. Look it up.

edit on 2018 10 20 by incoserv because: clarification



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen




Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges - claiming that Mueller's office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.


Mueller is after the conspiracy aspect....which would be pertinent.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 06:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Swills

Wait, what? The crime is that the company did not go to the DoJ to tell them they might be committing a crime??
LOL.
I rather think it's good manners old chap to actually have a case before bringing an indictment, don't you? I am not sure, 'they might have not told us that they were committing a crime' quite meets the threshold for due process.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: xuenchen




Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges - claiming that Mueller's office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.


Mueller is after the conspiracy aspect....which would be pertinent.










Focusing on the 'conspiracy aspect' is a stage of the investigation, not an indictment. Mueller brought an indictment, so he must have some evidence. The judge has asked for it. Mueller doesn't seem to have it.
edit on 20/10/2018 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 06:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
Lawyer(s) for the Russian company claim there is no law against election interfering !! 😃


I don't get this. Why is there a smiley face there?

Are you actually rooting for the Russians to be able to keep interfering in our elections? That excites you? I know this is an international forum so you could be from anywhere, but why is this a good thing?

And for someone who seems to be very, very active here with a lot of posts and threads -- I think you're smarter than you make yourself appear. After a couple of years in the press you can't spell "Mueller" correctly, even though it's also in the title and in the quote?

Smells fishy in here.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 06:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Mahogany

You are not expected to "get it" 😎



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 06:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: xuenchen




Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges - claiming that Mueller's office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.


Mueller is after the conspiracy aspect....which would be pertinent.




Focusing on the 'conspiracy aspect' is a stage of the investigation, not an indictment. Mueller brought an indictment, so he must have some evidence. The judge has asked for it. Mueller doesn't seem to have it.


There's nothing to say the investigation is complete, Mueller's is focus on the end game, one indictment is not singular in the investigation so Mueller will not want to jeopardise what he already has. The American 'Defraud clause' includes a deal more than the word itself implies....conspiracy and collusion...perhaps even criminal collusion...which includes fraud and money laundering, should that be the case, are federal crimes.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: incoserv

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: incoserv

but, but, but.... if they have, which I wouldn't doubt...
I imagine that those countries didn't just shrug their shoulders saying well, we do it too, what the heck!!
I imagine they investigated it deeply, tried to find any holes in their security that could be closed, and well, sought to find out if any citizens or gov't officials of that country assisted in the act!!!



If they have?

What rock have you been living under for the last few decades, friend?

Central America? Middle- and Far-east? The US has affected regime change and control in more countries than you can imagine. Iraq is one of the most recent. Saddam got to big for his britches, overthrow him in make our own country.

Yeah, I know. Saddam was a big, bad man and the US did it for the children!

The Banana Wars. Look it up.


What rock have you been living under for the last century? China, England , France and a whole list of others have toppled countries, set up regimes and supported puppets .

But it’s much easier to blame it on the evil Americans when you put blinders on .



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 07:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Mahogany

You are not expected to "get it" 😎


No?

What am I supposed to do? Obey?







posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: xuenchen
Lawyer(s) for the Russian company claim there is no law against election interfering !! 😃


I don't get this. Why is there a smiley face there?

Are you actually rooting for the Russians to be able to keep interfering in our elections? That excites you? I know this is an international forum so you could be from anywhere, but why is this a good thing?

And for someone who seems to be very, very active here with a lot of posts and threads -- I think you're smarter than you make yourself appear. After a couple of years in the press you can't spell "Mueller" correctly, even though it's also in the title and in the quote?

Smells fishy in here.


We have some very active members here on ATS from the UK who interfere in our American politics on a regular basis by actively attempting to sway people's opinions. Sometimes they even post false information. They seem very determined and hide behind anonymity as well.

Plus, we need to consider that the "Internet" is a global forum.

So with that said, I think that yes, it seems fair that Russians can say or do whatever they want on the Internet, including lie and involve themselves in politics of any nation. Just as you and I can do the same if that's how we feel.

Really what do you propose doing about it? Sending Interpol after them? Blocking all international internet traffic? I don't understand the point of all of this nonsense.

Does this all boil down to the fact that Trump won the election and the Democrats want to make people pay for it by putting them in prison under accusations that they cheated or something?



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Mahogany

You may obey whoever you wish to obey.

😎🙇‍♀️



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Mahogany

You may obey whoever you wish to obey.

😎🙇‍♀️


Wonderful. Now that I have Chinese/Russian permission.


Spasiba.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: smurfy

originally posted by: xuenchen




Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges - claiming that Mueller's office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.


Mueller is after the conspiracy aspect....which would be pertinent.




Focusing on the 'conspiracy aspect' is a stage of the investigation, not an indictment. Mueller brought an indictment, so he must have some evidence. The judge has asked for it. Mueller doesn't seem to have it.


There's nothing to say the investigation is complete, Mueller's is focus on the end game, one indictment is not singular in the investigation so Mueller will not want to jeopardise what he already has. The American 'Defraud clause' includes a deal more than the word itself implies....conspiracy and collusion...perhaps even criminal collusion...which includes fraud and money laundering, should that be the case, are federal crimes.


He's already brought the indictment in this particular instance. He either has the evidence to support that indictment or he doesn't. It would appear that he doesn't.



posted on Oct, 20 2018 @ 11:54 PM
link   
The US was trying to influence elections of other governments for many decades. It is not illegal....yet. I doubt if our government wants to make it illegal, since they are always doing it.

Don't let the left try to convince you to only look at one point, intent to influence the election, look at the way the law governs this, internationally it is not illegal. If they are trying to throw something like non-reporting of money to fund it and improper paperwork, then they are trying to trick us, it happens all the time. Campaign contributions influence elections all the time, they increase the odds of a candidate to win, lots of that money comes from outside of this country, the person who wins then has to pay back the favor.
edit on 20-10-2018 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
43
<<   2 >>

log in

join