Posted on 05/05/2018 4:07:10 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
Manafort's lawyers argue that it appears Rosenstein tried to back-date authority for the Special Counsel to investigate Manafort's old business dealings in August 2017, AFTER the Special Counsel had already started using a grand jury and gotten search warrants to go after Manafort on this.
Sleazy counsel for Special Counsel Mueller appears to argue that Rosenstein gave secret authority to go after Manafort on his old business dealings in apparently oral "interactions" with Mueller back in May, before the raid on Manafort's home. How convenient.
And of course, counsel for the Special Counsel can't talk about these secret matters because, you know, um, national security and all that.
I would like to see Manafort's counsel raise the larger question: Stepping back, how can the DOJ take a private citizen, Robert Mueller, and confer on him all the power of a US Attorney to investigate, use a grand jury, indict, convict and send people to prison when the law requires that anyone given the awesome power of a US Attorney must be confirmed by the US Senate?
“It covers bank fraud in 2005 and 2007?”
And no statute of limitations or are there statues of lamentations?
I’m not a lawyer, and I didn’t read every word of this, but I found this impressive. I would not want to try and BS this judge. And I feel like the government was trying to BS this judge.
Mueller is saying it was part of a scheme that went on for years and indicts Manafort and Gates for repercussions that showed up in allegedly false tax filings and bank documents from relatively recent years, such as tax year 2010 and later.
When the judge noted that Archie Cox was his constitutional law professor, it was a way of slapping down Dreeben and warning him that he better not act condescending toward the judge in this court.
This jurisdictional issue involving the Special Counsel may be more serious for the Special Counsel than Rosenstein, Mueller and Dreeben are treating it.
The very first issue in any case in federal court is, does the court have jurisdiction to deal with this matter?
Here, the DOJ has taken a private citizen (not an existing US Attorney, not confirmed by the Senate) Bob Mueller, and unilaterally granted him the power to prosecute people in federal court and send them to prison.
That power depends wholly on the jurisdiction granted Mueller, and if he exceeds it, his legal power vanishes.
This stuff stinks. Why all of a sudden a “Trump-Russia” friendly judge. Me think Manafort is a leftist plant setting up or influencing Trump, the only reason why they are not going after him. Alex Jones-RTNews and Manafort-Putinist Ukrainian axis to me loops back to Obama cck sucking Iran and Russia, and this is why they stopped Mueller there imo.
Alex Jones-Manafort is not getting sued, Hannity and Cohen are.
Federal statute of limitations varies widely from the nominal five years.
Ongoing conspiracies, for example, aren’t subject to the statute.
The judge’s comments about singing under pressure versus composing (making things up under pressure) are perceptive and relevant.
BTW, kudos for your excellent formatting.
I have not followed this as closely as some here, but I have a question. I heard yesterday (can’t recall where) on some news show that the DOJ has previously decided NOT to indict the Manafort case based on the investigation as it existed then. Is this true and does anyone have a link or source for that or did I not hear it correctly? I think the proper wording would be - was a case previously referred for action to the U.S. Attorney in that district. If it were and it was not acted on or presented to a grand jury this is highly irregular to throw all these charges at someone years after the fact. I would have liked the defense to have made further inquiry about this, but they may have in their written brief.
It is possible that I misunderstood what I heard or perhaps my supposition is what I heard. Seems like this would be very important if this evidence already existed pre-dating the campaign formation and Manafort’s involvement. The Judge appears correct in his assessment that the only reason Manafort is in his courtroom is that he became affiliated with the campaign. That does not appear to be very fair and the Judge seems to feel the same way. This is an even more persuasive argument if the case was dormant and not charged two years prior to Manafort accepting the role of campaign chairman.
Yes, I second your kudos.
I pray this judge is getting the protection he needs. He is no doubt angering some very desperate criminals.
Having read the entirety I don’t get the sense the Judge is inclined to quash or dismiss the indictment. His questions and comments were pointed to be sure. That redacted document may have some bearing.
Well, if we go by the recent re-redaction of documents turned over by DOJ, the redactions in Rosenstein’s memos of what the Hell Mueller can and can’t do, and where he gets the authority to do it (FISA court, anyone?) have much more to do with covering DOJ’s crooked ass than they do with any kind of national security interests.
President Trump should declassify and publish all of it. When the Uniparty, Deep State leeches howl at the sunlight and claim it’s too far fetched to be believed, he should declassify and publish the rest of the JFK documents.
He either tears the whole rotten system down or ultimately he loses. The idea that the electorate can make the corrections while they are being bribed with gubmint handouts and pumped full of gubmint/globalist propaganda masquerading as news and entertainment has been debunked over the last few decades.
Ultimately President Trump must either throw most of Washington DC in jail and hang a good portion of the leadership, or he must make them so afraid of the voters that they self deport, and only the later is a long term solution.
Is America still capable of getting that pissed off?
It’s so uplifting to see Judge Ellis’ awesome legal mind at work here.
how come Rosenstein signs as “ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL” when he appointed Mueller on 17 May, 2017? see PDF by scrolling down to link in the following:
4 May: National Review: The Rosenstein Memo
By Andrew C. McCarthy
From the outset, I protested that Rosenstein’s order appointing Mueller (LINK TO ROSENSTEIN’S ORDER) violated governing special-counsel regulations.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/04/russia-investigation-rod-rosenstein-memo-mueller-probe-limits/
was Rosenstein “Acting Attorney General” at the time?
Just from this transcript in the court, Manafort was under investigation by the DOJ as early as 2005. Obviously no indictments were made until the SC was named and wanted something on Trump.
Judge Ellis does not specifically say, but does seem to have the Statute of Limitations in mind. If Manafort’s actions were crimes, why wasn’t he prosecuted years ago?
The SC seems to be lying by claiming the SC investigation uncovered new facts about those long-past Manafort actions.
Just appallingly bad. And Weissman the liar sat there and watched approvingly
The Feds should have known they were going to get excoriated. The questioning was brutal
Thank you for taking the time to post this - it’s easier to read than some other transcripts I tried wading through!
As a non-lawyer my understanding is that years ago the DoJ was working on a case against Manafort for various illegal schemes involving Russia and Ukraine. The case wasn’t active in 2016- maybe lack of proper evidence or interest by DoJ.
When Trump was elected and russiarussiarussia was brought to us for whatever reason, certain people at DoJ “found” this tired old case and used it as a way in the door for russiarussiarussia.
I like that this judge has ordered August 2nd to be read by him. I may be wrong, but I think some fishy stuff will be found in that memo.
Judge Ellis seems tough, fair and wily. Good traits for a 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.