U.S. Judge Questions Mueller's Powers

[Route 45]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ounsels-powers-in-manafort-case-idUSKBN1I51WE

It's about damn time.

 

[T.Lex]

In different contexts, such questions would have been considered attempts to legislate from the bench.

 

[Kutnupe14]

In different contexts, such questions would have been considered attempts to legislate from the bench.

In the words of Mutombo... Not Today.

 

[BugI02]

In different contexts, attempts to overturn a legitimate election by any means possible would be seen as treason

 

[Colt1860]

The justice department should have put and end to this along time ago

 

[Trigger Time]

The justice department is the most corrupt organization and bunch of thugs there are and exactly the government actions our founders warned against and were afraid government would turn Into. Thugs with badges.
Heres a great read about exactly what's going on
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-04-29/cia-whistleblower-trump-doing-what-kennedy-tried

 

[SheepDog4Life]

In different contexts, such questions would have been considered attempts to legislate from the bench.

How so? This is about Mueller's standing to bring and prosecute the charges before the court. Isn't this Law 101?

Except for the charter issued by Rosenstein, Mueller is just a private citizen. This is a basic question of standing that should be asked and answered.

Could I prosecute Hillary for her crimes before a federal court? No. I don't have standing as a prosecutor.

Could the county prosecutor bring federal charges in a federal court? No, they don't have standing in that court to prosecute those laws.

This is basic order of law stuff.

Mueller just wants to "hide" the original Rosenstein memo because it's cr@p and doesn't follow the Justice Department guidelines... which is then fodder for the "witch-hunt" charge. The DoJ isn't following it's own rules on this, which makes it political instead of plain old applying the law.

 

[Tombs]

In different contexts, such questions would have been considered attempts to legislate from the bench.

If it was done within the first few weeks, sure.

This has been ongoing in one form or another for more than a year and a half now. Nothing significant has surfaced, no real leads, no real evidence. At best some bad money dealings with some people in political circles, not even Trump directly.

Someone needs to put an end to the circus, as they're going to eventually get desperate and start putting people in jail for legal technicalities to justify their jobs.

 

[Kutnupe14]

If it was done within the first few weeks, sure.

This has been ongoing in one form or another for more than a year and a half now. Nothing significant has surfaced, no real leads, no real evidence. At best some bad money dealings with some people in political circles, not even Trump directly.

Someone needs to put an end to the circus, as they're going to eventually get desperate and start putting people in jail for legal technicalities to justify their jobs.

The isn't correct, and the two latter are above you knowledge. I'll remind you that the investigation in into Russia's attempt to influence the campaign, not Russian collusion with Trump.
13 Russians identified and indicted. Some of the Russian businesses involved, discovered. The means by which they infiltrated American social media, discovered. Not to mention he has the mandate to investigate crimes discovered during the course of the probe. Gates, Manafort, Flynn, and Papa Smurf... have gotten the smackdown. Cohen is probably next.
Further (and I learned this today), unlike the Starr investigation, Mueller's Probe does not have to give Congress updates. Essentially, not you I, or anybody outside of the Mueller investigation knows much outside what has been released, and to believe that we would know 1/100 of an ongoing investigation simply doesn't make sense.

The Starr investigation lasted 5 years... I'm sure Mueller is aware of this, so I doubt it will go that far.

At the end of the day, this investigation was started by Republicans, headed by Republicans, and continues because of Republicans. I know a lot of people want to say its Democrats to blame, but that too, simply isn't correct.

 

[Dead Duck]

The isn't correct, and the two latter are above you knowledge. I'll remind you that the investigation in into Russia's attempt to influence the campaign, not Russian collusion with Trump.
13 Russians identified and indicted. Some of the Russian businesses involved, discovered. The means by which they infiltrated American social media, discovered. Not to mention he has the mandate to investigate crimes discovered during the course of the probe. Gates, Manafort, Flynn, and Papa Smurf... have gotten the smackdown. Cohen is probably next.
Further (and I learned this today), unlike the Starr investigation, Mueller's Probe does not have to give Congress updates. Essentially, not you I, or anybody outside of the Mueller investigation knows much outside what has been released, and to believe that we would know 1/100 of an ongoing investigation simply doesn't make sense.

The Starr investigation lasted 5 years... I'm sure Mueller is aware of this, so I doubt it will go that far.

At the end of the day, this investigation was started by Republicans, headed by Republicans, and continues because of Republicans. I know a lot of people want to say its Democrats to blame, but that too, simply isn't correct.

And all they've found so far is Russians colluding with Clinton and her team that were totally interfering with the elections.... or trying to. Not to mention all the election fraud from the left all over the place.

Spin that NeverTrumpers!

 

[Kutnupe14]

And all they've found so far is Russians colluding with Clinton and her team that were totally interfering with the elections.... or trying to. Not to mention all the election fraud from the left all over the place.

Spin that NeverTrumpers!

My security clearance isn't that high, so I don't know who is guilty of what. Obviously, there are plenty of INGO members, despite their distrust of govt, that have active security clearances that allow them to access to information retained by only the highest members of govt. I shall defer to their insider knowledge.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Mueller returned to private practice after his retirement as FBI director. He became a private citizen again.

His "powers" as a prosecutor emanate solely from the Rosenstein memos. Period. Full stop. Do not pass "Go".

Yet, he refuses to present the memo/memos unredacted to the court in which he aims to exercise said prosecutorial powers???????

"Something is rotten in the state of Denmark."

 

[SheepDog4Life]

My security clearance isn't that high, so I don't know who is guilty of what. Obviously, there are plenty of INGO members, despite their distrust of govt, that have active security clearances that allow them to access to information retained by only the highest members of govt. I shall defer to their insider knowledge.

No, Kut... just reading the reported stories with a critical eye. Rarely these days is anything reported (or sourced) without some degree of "spin". Some only "spin" those stories further to the "right", or as above, even further to the "left".

From my perspective, as the layers of the now 2 years of investigation against Trump are peeled back, it is increasingly being revealed as a corrupt abuse of power of historic, Nixon and Hoover proportions, by Obama/Lynch/Comey et al against political opponents in order to retain power and subvert the will of voters.

The latest is this WSJ story that intimates the reason for all of the "top secrecy" and redactions is not to protect national secrets, but to cover-up blatantly corrupt behavior. Did the Obama administration's FBi (Comey) plant a "mole" in the Trump administration during the 2016 campaign? This should be a sobering question for all Americans and the unvarnished truth of the answer to that question should rise above any partisan differences.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/about-that-fbi-source-1525992611
https://outline.com/D8uSz4

 

[Kutnupe14]

No, Kut... just reading the reported stories with a critical eye. Rarely these days is anything reported (or sourced) without some degree of "spin". Some only "spin" those stories further to the "right", or as above, even further to the "left".

From my perspective, as the layers of the now 2 years of investigation against Trump are peeled back, it is increasingly being revealed as a corrupt abuse of power of historic, Nixon and Hoover proportions, by Obama/Lynch/Comey et al against political opponents in order to retain power and subvert the will of voters.

The latest is this WSJ story that intimates the reason for all of the "top secrecy" and redactions is not to protect national secrets, but to cover-up blatantly corrupt behavior. Did the Obama administration's FBi (Comey) plant a "mole" in the Trump administration during the 2016 campaign? This should be a sobering question for all Americans and the unvarnished truth of the answer to that question should rise above any partisan differences.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/about-that-fbi-source-1525992611
https://outline.com/D8uSz4

But, despite formulating belief concerning the situation, you acknowledge that, at the end of the day, you belief does not allow you claim fact. Yes?

 

[BugI02]

My security clearance isn't that high, so I don't know who is guilty of what. Obviously, there are plenty of INGO members, despite their distrust of govt, that have active security clearances that allow them to access to information retained by only the highest members of govt. I shall defer to their insider knowledge.

Perhaps some of us have the ability to read minds and determine intent from our armchairs, just as some prolific anti-Trump posters seem to have

 

[Trigger Time]

The left always has a "but" and an excuse for everything. Always some bull **** long winded explanation of why they are allowed to trash the law and why the law doesn't apply to them the same way it does everyone else. I just pray some of them start being locked up

 

[BugI02]

But, despite formulating belief concerning the situation, you acknowledge that, at the end of the day, you belief does not allow you claim fact. Yes?

When Manafort gets his guilty plea, which seems to have been obtained by concealing exculpatory evidence and threatening his family with prosecution and financial ruin, vacated; can we expect an admission on your part that even "facts" are malleable in the environment we find ourselves in?

"Ham sandwich", and all

 

[Fargo]

In different contexts, such questions would have been considered attempts to legislate from the bench.

How so?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

But, despite formulating belief concerning the situation, you acknowledge that, at the end of the day, you belief does not allow you claim fact. Yes?

I will claim as fact, that by any standard, except the #Resist maxim, probable cause to investigate criminal, corrupt practices within the Obama administration was demonstrated long ago.

We are now at "preponderance of the evidence" and no criminal investigations of corruption, lying and obstruction, within the Obama DOJ and FBI.

Those actions within besmirched the reputations of those institutions... and now the cover-ups just bring further shame.

 

[Fargo]

When Manafort gets his guilty plea, which seems to have been obtained by concealing exculpatory evidence and threatening his family with prosecution and financial ruin, vacated; can we expect an admission on your part that even "facts" are malleable in the environment we find ourselves in?

"Ham sandwich", and all

That's Flynn isn't it?