Posted on 12/31/2018 7:22:34 AM PST by yesthatjallen
Former federal prosecutor Joseph Moreno is predicting that the Supreme Court will weigh in on whether an unnamed foreign company should comply with a subpoena that is potentially related to special counsel Robert Mueller's probe into Russian election meddling.
"We're learning step by step there's actually a lot going on, and one of the things that appears to have been going on was this behind the scenes court battle between the special counsel's office, and this mystery witness, who was refusing to either appear or provide documents to a subpoena," Moreno told Hill TV.
"Originally we assumed it was a person, now we're coming to learn it looks like it's more likely a company that's owned in part or in whole by a foreign government," he continued.
"In countries like China, Russia, Ukraine, UAE, that can be fairly common. You can have banks, real estate companies, other kinds of joint ventures that are partially owned by the government," he said. "So that seems like what we're dealing with here, and so far this company has said we don't think we need to respond to this subpoena, whether it's to provide bank records, or emails, or documents, the courts have said 'hey not so fast, it looks like you do.' Ultimately the Supreme Court is going to weigh in on that."
Moreno's comments come after the federal government filed a sealed response on Friday to a temporary pause the Supreme Court put on an order holding an unnamed, foreign government-owned company in contempt.
CNN reported that the move would be the first known challenge to a case apparently related to the Mueller probe to reach the nation's highest court.
The unnamed company claims it was immune from criminal proceedings under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and that the subpoena was unenforceable because it would require “the Corporation” to violate “Country A’s” domestic law.
Speculation has swirled around whether Mueller is involved in the case due to its secrecies and similarities to another Mueller subpoena.
Does the word sovereign still exist in the dictionary?
Sovereignty might be an problem issue for whoever it is if they are doing business on U.S. soil.
The Supreme Court isn’t worth much any more.
I did browse at the immunities act and noticed WE revised it in 2016. Makes me a little suspicious.
It feels wrong for someone to be granted a secret case at their request. What if you try it? Can you keep your case secret? I doubt it. What privilege will allow any company to do this? I think the intention of the constitution is that case will be tried in public, not secretly.
Must be haiti as they are probably trying to tie missing money from the Clinton Crime Family Foundation (s).
“In countries like China, Russia, Ukraine, UAE, that can be fairly common. You can have banks, real estate companies, other kinds of joint ventures that are partially owned by the government,”
BBC, Amtrak, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Canadian Broadcasing Corporation, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Ginnie Mae, Federal Crop insurance, Export-Import bank, National Park Foundation, Alaska railroad, Singapore Airlines, Television New Zealand, Israeli Aerospace Industries, EADS, Airbus, Volkswagen Group, Deutsche Telekom and T-Mobile,... The list of British, American, Aussie, German, and western enterprises owned or partially owned by the government is too exhaustive to list here.
But go back to sleep. It’s only Russia China Ukraine and the UAE that have that kind of business arrangements.
Hell anyone can make a 50 50 prediction!-)
Anyway, the Supreme court issuing a secret precedent, in a secret case going before a secret court, with a secret motion.
Why, that’s as American as apple pie...
” I think the intention of the constitution is that case will be tried in public, not secretly.”
It will probably have a secret jury. They’ll all need clearances. They’ll use recently retired 0-6 and above military officers and pay them each 125k a year.
Why is it that everyone HAS to respond to subpoenas except Democrats?
Not to lay it on too thick, but of course WE don’t have government banks and auto companies. We have banks and auto companies that the government gives hundreds of billions to to when they make poor business decisions and face bankruptcy. It’s a totally different thing, nobody could call that a partnership....see?
“Why is it that everyone HAS to respond to subpoenas except Democrats?”
That is interesting, isn’t it? I envision some poor sap in prison on a dope charge saying, “dammit, I should have just told the DEA and FBI that I would go through my phone and forward them any emails relevant to their investigation. And also, I should have refused to let them search and should have ignored all subpeonas”.
MI6
Something must be terribly wrong that we can’t even know the parties involved.
Sure is food for thought, the meaning of secret trials and court proceedings. That is literally the hallmark of places like East Germany.
It offends every concept our founders created. Imagine explaining secret courts to them. Like it or not, here at FR we are Samizdat, pointing out the bad things that are not widely understood.
If I remember correctly, this happened last week or two, and the entire floor of the courthouse was sealed off. So something has to be kept secret. The hard part is who are the good guys, and who are the bad guys in all this. If Mueller’s witness, the company/country is required to respond, who does it help or hurt? Why would Chief Justice Robert’s step in to temporarily prevent them from being ordered to comply with the subpoena? Would it hurt Trump, Mueller, or possibly the company? Could the company/country be any ally of the U.S.? Possibly one of the Five Eyes, and it would be embarrassing for that country? Robert’s has to either uphold the lower courts and have them comply, or it will go to the entire Supreme Court. As usual, we’ll have to wait and see.
“The hard part is who are the good guys, and who are the bad guys in all this.”
The bad guys are the ones who demand it be kept secret.
“There is not a crime, there is not a dodge, there is not a trick, there is not a swindle, there is not a vice which does not live by secrecy.”
Joseph Pulitzer
“Truth never damages a cause that is just.”
Mahatma Gandhi
Makes sense but it’s probably going to be linked to China somehow.
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.