Trump-appointed judge upholds special counsel Mueller's authority

a reply to: Southern Guardian

Mueller in Reality Has No Authority other than What that Slimey Snake Rosenstein temporaryly Loaned Him .

a reply to: Vasa Croe

The reason he ended it is in the above article. They quickly turned up NOTHING. He was being advised against it, and states weren't cooperating because they were offended and thought it was a waste of time. Which it was.

My God you're stubborn.

Look I'm really done with this nonsense. You have a nice life.

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Vasa Croe

The reason he ended it is in the above article. He was being advised against it, and states weren't cooperating because they were offended and thought it was a waste of time.

My God you're stubborn.

Look I'm really done with this nonsense. You have a nice life.

Ha...not stubborn. You said there was an investigation of millions of people. There wasn't....

He took the advice of good counsel and dropped it regardless of what he believed. That's the sign of wisdom and maturity....listening to those that know more than you do and following their advice.

The exact opposite is what is occurring with Mueller. He is spending millions and has nothing to show for it in relation to exactly what he was hired for.

I dont give a crap about Manafort or whomever else....never even heard of them prior to this investigation coming up. But everything they are being hit for is years old and before Trump....what good has it done for "the cause"?

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Vasa Croe

The reason he ended it is in the above article. He was being advised against it, and states weren't cooperating because they were offended and thought it was a waste of time.

My God you're stubborn.

Look I'm really done with this nonsense. You have a nice life.

Ha...not stubborn. You said there was an investigation of millions of people. There wasn't....

He took the advice of good counsel and dropped it regardless of what he believed. That's the sign of wisdom and maturity....listening to those that know more than you do and following their advice.

The exact opposite is what is occurring with Mueller. He is spending millions and has nothing to show for it in relation to exactly what he was hired for.

I dont give a crap about Manafort or whomever else....never even heard of them prior to this investigation coming up. But everything they are being hit for is years old and before Trump....what good has it done for "the cause"?

You continue to say I said things that I didn't say. Where did I say there was an investigation of millions of people? I didn't. nevermind, don't answer, because one more time I didn't say something you said I said, and you'll come up with another strawman, move the goalpost, or some such other moronic and transparent tactic that should be beneath you.

The real question I have to myself, is why do I keep responding to some one who builds (pathetic) strawmans, and doesn't take the time to try to comprehend a post, before he lashes out with inaccurate bs and ad homs? And seems to be taking his daily dose of frustrations out on me, who has done nothing but state my opinion and a few well known facts.

Downright Creepy.

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Vasa Croe

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Vasa Croe

The reason he ended it is in the above article. He was being advised against it, and states weren't cooperating because they were offended and thought it was a waste of time.

My God you're stubborn.

Look I'm really done with this nonsense. You have a nice life.

Ha...not stubborn. You said there was an investigation of millions of people. There wasn't....

He took the advice of good counsel and dropped it regardless of what he believed. That's the sign of wisdom and maturity....listening to those that know more than you do and following their advice.

The exact opposite is what is occurring with Mueller. He is spending millions and has nothing to show for it in relation to exactly what he was hired for.

I dont give a crap about Manafort or whomever else....never even heard of them prior to this investigation coming up. But everything they are being hit for is years old and before Trump....what good has it done for "the cause"?

You continue to say I said things that I didn't say. Where did I say there was an investigation of millions of people? I didn't. nevermind, don't answer, because one more time I didn't say something you said I said, and you'll come up with another strawman, move the goalpost, or some such other moronic and transparent tactic that should be beneath you.

The real question I have to myself, is why do I keep responding to some one who builds (pathetic) strawmans, and doesn't take the time to try to comprehend a post, before he lashes out with inaccurate bs and ad homs? And seems to be taking his daily dose of frustrations out on me, who has done nothing but state my opinion and a few well known facts.

Downright Creepy.

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: Metallicus

Instead of our Government fixing actual problems they are making them where none existed.

You mean like calling an investigation into millions and millions of people voting illegally, causing Trump to lose the popular vote? Which otherwise he obviously would have won? heh.

..And this is just funny. Trump saying today that he only hired Omarosa because "she said great things about me".
and "she made me feel good".

How do you feel about those tax dollars going to person only to stroke a grown man's ego?

Back on page 2...bolded it for you to jog the memory.

And if we are speaking of strawmen....if that isn't what you actually meant or were implying it was similar to Mueller, then what did you mean exactly? That would actually be a strawman....again...definitions are everything.

I'm surprised you haven't deleted this post
I

And there was no investigation.

By vasa cro

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: Vasa Croe


I

And there was no investigation.

Correct....so who had the strawman again? Comparing no investigation to an investigation? You implied the connection, so please explain.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

You mean like calling an investigation into millions and millions of people voting illegally, causing Trump to lose the popular vote?

What part of Trump saying that "millions of people voted illegally" do you not understand?

originally posted by: [post=23673127]Vasa Croe[/p

Correct....so who had the strawman again? Comparing no investigation to an investigation? You implied the connection, so please explain.

I don't know what to say to you anymore. I know you think you're making some good points, but you're really not.

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: [post=23673127]Vasa Croe[/p

Correct....so who had the strawman again? Comparing no investigation to an investigation? You implied the connection, so please explain.

I don't know what to say to you anymore. I'm worried that you've lost your sanity.

Well...you are the only one here comparing an admitted non investigation, to the Mueller investigation, and implying they are somehow similar.

Not sure how me pointing that out to you makes me insane but if you feel the need to label then label away!

Huh, weird how the thread topic went from a judges ruling regarding Muellers indictment authority, to arguing whether or not voter fraud was investigated.

No, no thread derailment going on here.....

originally posted by: UKTruth
The judge is wrong in my view.
Mueller currently has the scope to investigate every person in the world.
That power cannot be granted to a person not nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate - even then the scope may be beyond even what is correct after a nomination and confirmation. It's an appointments clause issue.
This will likely be put before more judges as time passes.

100% correct. there have been quite a few people out there saying this since day one. with the broad authority Mueller has, he is in fact a Principle officer, and not an Inferior one.......he is acting in violation of the appointments clause.

I absolutely agree with any judge , Republican or otherwise , that wants the Mueller investigation to continue
1) The people of the US (probably not foreign nationals) are growing weary of the subject. When we go weary of a subject , it begins to grate on our nerves. We turn completely against the subject and go the other way.
Most folks here in the US are already beginning to ridicule the investigation .The only ones still promoting are the MSM and certain degraded members of Congress.

2) The investigation has turned from Trump "collusion" into a farcical "but the Russians" . Every single minute the investigation continues , it shows the exponentially growing desperation of the Liberals . They are Done. D U N - done.

3) The investigation has only turned up as a few Russians (in Russia) were hopelessly indicted by Mueller for interfering with a US election. Yet , not a single peep of how. Why ? He has nothing.
What next ? Folks in Liechtenstein ? Or the Maldives ? Extraterrestrials ? Blame the ETs.

a reply to: Gothmog

The problem here though is how the investigation started in the first place. Any judge worth his salt would look at that aspect and go from there. To date all judges, with the exception of this Trump appointed judge, missed the problem.

The investigation is based on an improper foundation. The methods the DOJ/FBI used to initiate the investigation is invalid, illegal and unconstitutional. All the rulings thus far only concentrate on the legality of the special counsel being appointed.

The omissions made to the courts to get the FISA warrants is enough to shut this entire mess down.

Imo the reason people are growing tired of this is it has been going on for about 2 years now and everything under the sun has leaked with the exception of any Trump Russia collusion. People also ignore or dont understand a sit down with Mueller can only be initiated if there is evidence linking the person to whats being investigated. If there is nothing an interview is not required and cant be compelled.

Democrats have leaked everything under the sun on this case and have consistently gone on tv to claim they have a smoking gun yet its never produced. Its nothing more than a political game for them to either remove trump illegally or do do enough damage and obstruct enough to limit what he gets done as President.

Its going to be a long 7 years for Democrats.

a reply to: annoyedpharmacist
How do you think this judges decision will affect that authority?

Does this ruling make a difference in his scope of authority or does it just amount to a legal opinion?

a reply to: Gothmog
From what I understand Mueller is trying to hold his evidence (of what I'm not sure) close. The Russian firm is struggling even trying to get evidence from the prosecution.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Its going to be a long 7 years for Democrats.

My money is on 25 years.

originally posted by: Chickensalad
a reply to: Gothmog
From what I understand Mueller is trying to hold his evidence (of what I'm not sure) close. The Russian firm is struggling even trying to get evidence from the prosecution.

If the evidence he is holding close was used to indict the Russians / Russian companies then he doesnt have a choice. He is required under Brady to disclose evidence to the defense against their client. Failure to do so can result in dismissal of the case and all charges with prejudice and the prosecutors can be sanctioned by the judge for their behavior.

Trying to use national security as an excuse to withhold evidence violates due process. A person has a right to see all evidence against him/her and has a right to face their accusers and cross examine them in court.

How can justice that is served in secret be justice?

The Russians so far have submitted over 70 requests for evidence that have gone ignored. They finally started to turn over evidence but the info was taken from russian social media, were in russian, and have not been translated yet by the prosecution, which makes one wonder how they can use it as evidence if they dont know what it says. Imo it was nothing more than a stall tactic by the SC.

I do expect there to be issues with the Manafort case though. Judge Ellis did establish criteria prosecution needs to meet in order to make their case. If the prosecution rests and this goes to the jury and the jury finds Manafort guilty and the judge finds the prosecution didnt meet the requirements Ellis can set aside the jury verdict and declare Manafort not guilty.

Thus far I am seeing a real possibility of that.

originally posted by: Chickensalad
a reply to: annoyedpharmacist
How do you think this judges decision will affect that authority?

Does this ruling make a difference in his scope of authority or does it just amount to a legal opinion?

That depends
If one is a foreign national or unknowing US citizen it would mean that the opinion is the Mueller investigation would be legit

To an informed US citizen , it is a totally meaningless statement . And statement is all that it is. No legal impact whatsoever.

originally posted by: Chickensalad
a reply to: Gothmog
From what I understand Mueller is trying to hold his evidence (of what I'm not sure) close. The Russian firm is struggling even trying to get evidence from the prosecution.

There is none.
And this judge had no access to Mueller's investigation .Nor even the FISA warrant.
So , how the HADES was he making a judgement?
He wasnt. The motive was pure self-indulgent and self-promotion .
And a mere statement based on nothing.