Posted on 05/04/2018 10:48:56 AM PDT by Red Badger
A federal judge expressed deep skepticism Friday in the bank fraud case brought by special counsel Robert Mueller's office against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, at one point saying he believes that Mueller's motivation is to oust President Donald Trump from office. Although Mueller's authority has been tested in court before, Friday's hearing was notable for District Judge T.S. Ellis' decision to wade into the divisive political debate around the investigation. "You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud," Ellis said to prosecutor Michael Dreeben, at times losing his temper. Ellis said prosecutors were interested in Manafort because of his potential to provide material that would lead to Trump's "prosecution or impeachment," Ellis said. "That's what you're really interested in," said Ellis, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.
Ellis repeated his suspicion several times in the hour-long court hearing. He said he'll make a decision at a later date about whether Manafort's case can go forward. "We don't want anyone in this country with unfettered power. It's unlikely you're going to persuade me the special prosecutor has power to do anything he or she wants," Ellis told Dreeben. "The American people feel pretty strongly that no one has unfettered power." When Dreeben answered Ellis' question about how the investigation and its charges date back to before the Trump campaign formed, the judge shot back, "None of that information has to do with information related to Russian government coordination and the campaign of Donald Trump." At one point, Ellis posed a hypothetical question, speaking as if he were the prosecutor, about why Mueller's office referred a criminal investigation about Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen to New York authorities and kept the Manafort case in Virginia.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Mueller is free to bring charges in NY if he wants. Mueller let go of the Cohen case because it was out of his subject matter jurisdiction. If the Cohen case is out of his subject matter jurisdiction, then why isn't a 2005 tax case out of his subject matter jurisdiction?
“(8)(A) The term ‘‘contribution’’ includes—
(i) any gift, subscription, loan, advance, or
deposit of money or anything of value made by
any person for the purpose of influencing any
election for Federal office; or”
“Except as provided in section 30109(a)(8) of this
title, the power of the Commission to initiate
civil actions under subsection (a)(6) shall be the
exclusive civil remedy for the enforcement of
the provisions of this Act.”
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2014-title52/pdf/USCODE-2014-title52-subtitleIII.pdf
Mueller and all of the DoJ have no authority to prosecute campaign law violations apparently.
He should file a complaint to have Michael Dreeben disbarred.
“Mueller and all of the DoJ have no authority to prosecute campaign law violations apparently.”
Except by referral:
“Whenever the Commission refers an apparent
violation to the Attorney General, the Attorney
General shall report to the Commission any action
taken by the Attorney General regarding
the apparent violation. Each report shall be
transmitted within 60 days after the date the
Commission refers an apparent violation, and
every 30 days thereafter until the final disposition
of the apparent violation.”
“(d) Penalties; defenses; mitigation of offenses
(1)(A) Any person who knowingly and willfully
commits a violation of any provision of this Act
which involves the making, receiving, or reporting
of any contribution, donation, or expenditure—
(i) aggregating $25,000 or more during a calendar
year shall be fined under title 18, or imprisoned
for not more than 5 years, or both;”
1. There is no 2005 tax case here. The statute of limitations for such a charge has long since expired.
2. Manafort has made a career out of peddling influence in Washington to foreign governments. I think you'd have a hard time finding a Federal investigation involving Manafort that did NOT come under Mueller's jurisdiction.
I hope this judge kicks the crap out of these yobs
He should declare the defendants not guilty and end the charade...............
Stopping a car ain’t hard. Stopping this coup is a different matter
For the curious (via Wikipedia on Paul Manafort):
United States of America v. Paul J. Manafort, Jr. and Richard W. Gates III, case no. 17-cr-00201, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (October 27, 2017)
https://www.justice.gov/file/1007271/download
I haven’t the time to read it now.
“Cohen being prosecuted by the State of NY”
I thought the Stormy Daniels payment went to a Beverly Hills attorney.
Someone said the plan will be to dismiss the matter upon request by the prosecution so they can re introduce it later before a different judge. If they do that, I hope the judge sees it for what it is and dismisses it with prejudice.
That depends on how one construes Mueller's subject matter jurisdiction. Ellis seems to be of a mind that if it isn't Trump campaign related (what Sessions recused from), then it's not in Mueller's subject matter scope.
What an ignorant deep state apologist douche that dim-wit is...
Amazing, there’s an honest judge left in our judiciary!
This isn’t rocket science. They seek to destroy him politically, socially and economically forever. And Manafort was the money person for funding for the GOP. destroying him is a way to destroy the Republican Party’s ability to get financing and campaign funds. This is much more than a “Fake Collusion” investigation.
I’d like to think that at least a FEW judges are still concerned about the integrity of the law and it’s ethical application.
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.