Posted on 12/09/2018 9:40:48 PM PST by conservative98
Prosecutors enjoy absolute immunity for their prosecutorial functions. But not their administrative functions.
Leaking to the press, i.e., public relations, seems to be an administrative function. No?
Too late to review the caselaw.
I am going on the idea here that Corsi’s attorneys have at least a basic legal theory where Mueller could be vulnerable, and maybe they are trying to “make law” as the government guy said the other day.
So they must see some light through the veil...
The mind boggling part this to me is there is more on Trumps accusers for trying to frame him, than on Trump himself.
This should have been obvious to Mueller before he became special counsel.
Nifong was a STATE prosecutor. Big difference. The history of prosecutorial misconduct in the DOJ has shown that even when federal judges have concluded that the misconduct happened - and the government has had to pay $$$ to the victims - the prosecutors have gotten away with it with nary a slap on the wrist.
Look into what happened to the prosecutors who railroaded the late Alaska Senator Ted Stevens into a conviction just in time for him to be defeated for reelection. (I’ll save you the time - NOTHING. Despite a federal judge overturning the conviction and finding blatant prosecutorial misconduct to have occured.)
Here, and or how they can lose it: Hint think Randy Weaver /Ruby Ridge/Standoff in Idaho in 1992 & Prosecutorial Immunity LOST / Denied held by 9th Circuit.
Excerpts below from the above titled case.
We have grown accustomed to relying on the federal government to protect our liberties against the excesses of state law enforcement. Federal prosecutors may bring criminal charges against state police who violate the rights of citizens. See, e.g., Koon v. United States, 518 U.S. 81, 116 S.Ct. 2035, 135 L.Ed.2d 392 (1996). Those citizens may also seek redress by bringing private suits in federal court. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. While state prosecutions of federal officers are less common, they provide an avenue of redress on the flip side of the federalism coin. When federal officers violate the Constitution, either through malice or excessive zeal, they can be held accountable for violating the state's criminal laws.
If federal agents are to perform their duties vigorously, however, they cannot be unduly constrained by fear of state prosecutions. Accordingly, the Supreme Court has held that the Supremacy Clause cloaks federal agents with immunity if they act reasonably in carrying out their responsibilities. See In re Neagle, 135 U.S. 1, 75, 10 S.Ct. 658, 34 L.Ed. 55 (1890). We explore the outer bounds of Supremacy Clause immunity in the context of Idaho's attempt to prosecute FBI Special Agent Lon T. Horiuchi for killing Vicki Weaver during the infamous Ruby Ridge incident.
Cliff notes version of the "State of IDAHO, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lon T. HORIUCHI," is simply that a Complaining WITNESS (Read Complaining witness: as a Cop {city or county}/Federal Agent / "State Actor" or Prosecutor[s] state or Federal) when they "LIE" under oath in the charging {Complaining} documents, they lose their Prosecutorial Immunity or {Cop {city or county}/Federal Agent / "State Actor"} Qualifying / Qualified Immunity.
Mule-Face & team have a history (See U.S. Supreme Court Ref: Erron Case / Enron scandal)Hint: U.S. Erron case & Arthur Andersen Accounting Firm.
Dr. Corsi is a helluva fighter, may God protect him.
It is interesting to wonder if the case will be allowed to proceed and how much discovery will be allowed. It is clear to many (but not enough people!) where the real crimes occurred. One example is General Flynn - they went after Flynn but did not go even one level deeper to see if any illegal activity took place in the process of unmasking Flynn, spying on Flynn, etc. Clearly Mueller is protecting some people and I think he is trying to mop-up the mess left behind by the Obama WH, DOJ, FBI, CIA etc.
Corsi will claim he need access to the evidence to prove his case. The state will try to deny him a case, deny him evidence, etc. If it goes anywhere. Courts could throw it out before discovery - which is not the norm as I know it, but not unprecedented. IANAL.
#1. Patriot versus Power Hungry Prick!
If he wins I hope he will donate that money to the wall fund...that would REALLY piss off the liberals...lol
No proof has ever been shown that it was the Russians because the FBI/NSA etc claim that it would reveal intelligence operational secrets, etc. However, they have never actually looked at the DNC computer system. Duh!!
Hell! The Soviets and Russians have stolen us blind for the past 80 plus years so I doubt that there is much left they haven’t seen so far And the Red Chinese are getting better than the Moscovites at espionage.
The only publicly revealed operation that remained unknown until officially revealed that I know of was where the US penetrated the Kremlin via Operation SOLO. It was run by a late friend, Ray Wannell, Asst. Dir for Counter-Intelligence, FBI from the 1950’s till the 1980’s or so when ex Communist, turned FBI operative Morris Childs, died.
(Strzok held the same position when he betrayed and went after the President).
Then another friend, John Barron, wrote “Operation SOLO: The FBI’s Man in the Kremlin” which was finally cleared for publication in 1995 because it was about to be exposed by a professor writing a book on Martin Luther King Jr. who had stumbled upon SOLO and Childs had passed away earlier on.
Many other CIA ops were long ago compromised, esp. by Soviet spies like Hansen and Aldrich, the Cuban Communist woman, and even the Tullers.
A lawsuit would find the FBI claiming national security interests in not answering anything about NOT checking the DNC’s computers/system for hacking by anyone. So far it’s the lying Democrats who say it was the Russians, and ironically, I’d trust Putin and the boycheks more than I would any Democrat in Congress. (Schiff, Jackson Lee, Sen. Warner, Kaine, Durbin, Kerry, Pelosi, Schumer, Swalwell, Whitehouse, Coons, Blumenthal, Gillibrand, Kamala Harris, Ocasionally Cortesoned, etc.).
Corsi could win the suit by default, or catch Mueller and his gang of ethically challenged political hacks in a bunch of lies that the jury would love to hear (and Corsi might be able to call Manafort, Stone, Papadopoulous and Flynn as witnesses to the Mueller/Comey corrupt practices used against them.
Let’s hope that Corsi get’s an unbiased judge, which in the DC Circuit is not an easy thing to do.
L8r
There is powerful evidence that this is untrue. Due to the transfer rate on the files. Wiki Leaks has stated emphatically that their source was not the Russians. (unnamed) American intelligence agencies lie. (that is probably from Brennan)
And Seth Rich?
I don’t know a lot about Mr. Corsi but from seeing him in interviews, I tend to think he is a man of truth and knowledge, way above most of the ilk we see these days. Going to read everything I can find that he has written. His courage in going against what he feels is a corrupt group seeking to bring him down without a speck of justice going on is extremely rare and impressive.
I don’t care if he gets $1, that would be a huge win.
Mueller has opened the ‘Justice Dept’ up to liability for corruption and abuse of power. it will cost us more money in taxes now. Thanks WitchFinder Mueller, youre an American Turd.
20,000 emails, less than a GB zipped. That can easily be transferred anywhere in the world via any sort of internet connection in a few minutes at most.
It was 30,000 emails. There were records of the file transfer time, that were not nearly long enough for web transfer.
Fiber to the house or business is only as fast as the local network transfer rate.
This is one of the earliest stories / sources about the hack being an insider job: https://consortiumnews.com/2017/07/24/intel-vets-challenge-russia-hack-evidence/ This is what they say: July 5, 2016: In the early evening, Eastern Daylight Time, someone working in the EDT time zone with a computer directly connected to the DNC server or DNC Local Area Network, copied 1,976 MegaBytes of data in 87 seconds onto an external storage device. That speed is much faster than what is physically possible with a hack.
From my own virtual servers which are at various providers around the world I can send 1916MB at 72.1MB/s in 26 seconds from one server to another. I'm not sure of the significance of the rest of that article. It appears to be unrelated to the issue at hand which is how fast data can be moved among servers.
I have no doubt that the NSA has the exact data. The only public statements about this whole thing have been by criminals like Brennan. None to them are credible, have huge history of lying.
Guess this will eventually come out.
Thanks.
can they get the case before a sympathetic judge/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.