Posted on 01/17/2018 6:44:03 AM PST by Kaslin
It's not a popular thing to defend Paul Manafort, the international influence peddler who ran Donald Trump's presidential campaign for a short time in 2016. Just search for "Manafort" and, say, "sleazeball," and see what comes up. But even bad guys have a case sometimes. And Manafort has a case in his lawsuit against Trump-Russia special counsel Robert Mueller.
Mueller sent Manafort a strong message last July, when FBI agents working for Mueller, guns drawn, broke into Manafort's house in the pre-dawn hours while Manafort and his wife slept inside. Mueller sent another message last October, when he indicted Manafort on eight counts (out of a total of 12) that targeted allegedly criminal acts that ended in 2014 or 2015, before Manafort's participation in the Trump campaign. None of the counts concerned alleged collusion during the 2016 campaign between Trump or his associates and Russia.
Now, Manafort has pushed back with a lawsuit against Mueller. Manafort argues that the Justice Department gave Mueller overbroad powers, and that, as a result, the investigation of Manafort, and the resulting indictment, has ventured "beyond the scope of (Mueller's) authority" granted to him by deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein.
Some legal analysts have characterized Manafort's lawsuit as frivolous. If Manafort were really serious, they say, he would have filed a motion with the court that will try the case against him. Or he would have made a different legal argument.
This is not to argue with that legal thinking. But everything in the Trump-Russia affair operates on two levels, the legal level and the political level. And on the political setting, Manafort has made a strong case that he is being treated unfairly.
Rosenstein authorized Mueller to investigate three things. First was "any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump."
Second was "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."
Third was crimes like perjury or obstruction of justice that occurred "in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation."
Manafort's objection is to the second part of Mueller's charge, "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation." Manafort's argument is that it virtually invited Mueller to venture far afield from the Trump-Russia topic -- and violated those Justice Department regulations guiding special counsels.
The regulations specify that the special counsel "will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated." That's what Rosenstein did when assigning Mueller to probe alleged coordination between Trump and Russia. Manafort does not object. But the regulations go on to say that if the special counsel feels the need to go beyond his original charge, he "shall consult with the Attorney General," who will decide whether that request should be granted.
Manafort argues that some of the charges against him -- for example, that he failed to file reports on his interest in foreign bank accounts in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014, as well as that he failed to register as a foreign agent between 2008 and 2014 -- not only have nothing to do with the Trump-Russia affair but allegedly began and ended before Manafort's association with the Trump campaign. They clearly do not fall under the first part of Mueller's charge.
If Mueller wanted to pursue those matters, Manafort argues, Justice Department regulations require that he "consult with the attorney general" (or in this case, the deputy attorney general), to get permission to broaden the scope of his investigation. But Mueller did not have to do that because Rosenstein had already given him an overly broad appointment by granting him the authority to pursue "any matters that arose or may arise directly from" that investigation.
"That exceeds the scope of Mr. Rosenstein's authority to appoint special counsel as well as specific restrictions on the scope of such appointments," Manafort's suit argues. "Indeed, the Appointment Order in effect purports to grant Mr. Mueller carte blanche to investigate and pursue criminal charges in connection with anything he stumbles across while investigating, no matter how remote from the specific matter identified as the subject of the Appointment Order."
There is plenty of legal arcana in the suit, and many legal objections to be made to it. And Mueller and Rosenstein could moot the whole thing by explicitly expanding Mueller's authority to include specific activities that have no connection to the Trump-Russia affair. But as a political case, Manafort makes a strong point: Mueller is prosecuting people (Manafort and associate Rick Gates) for alleged crimes that have nothing to do with Donald Trump, Russia and the 2016 election. That political argument may be heard more and more as the Mueller investigation goes on.
Weasel Mueller runs RosenWeasel.
I find it very easy to conclude that RosenWeasel has given the go-ahead to expand the “investigation”.
If the investigation truly has no limits then I can’t see any reason why, for example, it couldn’t investigate the lifelong background and finances of any individual donating to the trump campaign. After all, they might be a russian...
If this investigation get’s Trump, that number 2 (ironically it’s #2 as in $h#$hole) will be the one that gets Trump.
I have to imagine that after 35 - 40 years running the Trump Corporation with all of it’s international ties and billion dollar industry, there are some illegalities there. If a team of lawyers dug into any of our lives they would be able to come up with illegalities. These would be the same lawyers that can’t find the obvious illegal practices of Uranium One, the Clinton Foundation or Hillary’s e-mails...
Mueller was apparently a failure as leader of the FBI and now he’s attempting to clean up the mess he left behind. I used to admire this guy, now I have nothing but contempt for him.
Mueller has been in touch with Andrew Cuomo’s lackeys to file parallel charges against Manafort in NY State. This violates the spirit if not the letter of double-jeopardy, and sets a very dangerous precedent. Future prosecutors who can’t get traction on a Federal case will just farm it out to blue state hacks.
A great quote from The Shooter 2007, “Trust us, we are the FBI”. Yeah. Time to dissolve the FBI.
Wouldn't that be an ex-post-facto justification, and still be fruit of the poisoned tree?
As I pointed out at the time, Rosenstein "authorized" Mueller to investigate anything.
As long as Rosenstein remains in his position, the swamp isn't going to be drained.
the level of cluelessness on these threads is hard to fathom
They being greasy, chinless Rod RosenWeasal.
The other issue the author overlooks is what is known as the "entire controversy doctrine." It's a common law principle that requires any and all known criminal or civil charges between two parties to be adjudicated together. If Mueller was to file any charges against Manafort for anything related to the Trump campaign without filing any charges for matters that had no relation to the campaign, then the DOJ would forever be precluded from filing any of those other charges. Mueller (or another Federal prosecutor) was effectively compelled to file those charges once they became know. Once the credible allegations against Manafort were known to Mueller, Mueller could not have closed his investigation without addressing those charges.
If Rosenstein is removed as the acting Uranium One AG, I suspect Mueller would respond by going after Trump's finances.
First of all, any investigation that goes back 35-40 years is a waste of time. With the exception of some violent crimes like murder and (in some states) rape, the statute of limitations on most crimes would have expired long ago.
The other thing to remember was a piece of James Comey's testimony before the Senate last summer that seems to have gotten very little attention. He testified that President Trump asked him in early 2017 to have the FBI conduct a thorough investigation of Trump in order to exonerate him. Does that sound like a man who thinks he has anything to hide?
“Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” is a 4th Amendment issue. It involves Search & Seizure. It is an extension of the Exclusionary Rule. It has nothing to do with the “SCOPE” of Meuller’s investigation. Too many people have been throwing this phrase around when they don’t know what it is.
I think the point of Manafort's suit is that Rosenstein did that, and that he cannot do that under both the law and the Constitution.
It's worth recalling that SCOTUS threw out the original special-prosecutor law for two reasons: a) you can't have an investigator not under the control of the Executive; and b) part of the reason why is that the investigation must be supervised and limited in scope (probable cause and those pesky 4th Amendment and due process requirements).
Since Sessions has "recused" himself and Rosenstein is manifestly in cahoots with Mueller, I would think Manafort has good grounds to get his case tossed.
I'm only pointing out where the fruit went poisonous.
The suit says, with some legal authority behind it, that the open ended nature of the authorization is what was illegal. The SC statute does not allow it, and the US Constitution does not provide for rogue prosecutors who don’t have a boss.
Rosenstein wrote the authorization so that Mueller can hound every single person who had any association with the Trump campaign, for anything they might have done or not done during their entire lives. Using Manafort as an example, Mueller can easily claim that he had to investigate Manafort’s entire career and finances to see if he had buried, long-term connections to the Russian government. While doing so, Manafort’s failure to register as a foreign agent, and report foreign bank accounts “arose from the investigation.”
Manafort can argue 1) that Rosenstein’s authorization requires the charges to be related to the time and activities of the Trump campaign, and 2) that the charges are unrelated to actual connections to the Russian government. I wish him the best with that, and hope he at least gets to a discovery phase. But Rosenstein is aware of the charges against Manafort. Has he rushed out to say — wait, wait, that exceeds my authorization?
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.