Posted on 08/10/2018 10:29:57 AM PDT by EVO X
A federal judge has found a witness in contempt for refusing to testify before the grand jury hearing evidence in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. U.S. District Chief Judge Beryl Howell made the ruling Friday after a sealed hearing to discuss Andrew Miller’s refusal to appear before the grand jury. Miller is a former aide to longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone. Miller’s lawyer Paul Kamenar said after the hearing that Miller was “held in contempt, which we asked him to be in order for us to appeal the judge’s decision to the court of appeals.” Howell stayed her order while Miller’s legal team appeals the judge’s decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Beryl Howell:
She was nominated by President Barack Obama on July 14, 2010 and confirmed by the U.S. Senate on December 22, 2010. She received her judicial commission on December 27, 2010.
All you need to know!
They are crooks and everybody knows it. About all that can be done is to try and take out their support structure, which is exceedingly hard these days. If somebody gets in legal trouble, their legal bills are paid for and they will get lucrative jobs somewhere if they keep their mouth shut..
Finally someone other than Trump has the stones to call this what it is: Kangaroo court
So all PDJT has to do is wake up his AG
It just takes someone with guts to carry it out. However they better have iron-clad proof if they want to take out the Queen. I mean solid evidence.
I think a liberal judge is busy trying to throw him jail.
Interesting. Judge might have to wake sessions up first
“So he goes before the GJ and take the fifth.”
He’s not doing any such thing. An appeal is being prepared on the matter.
This is the first attempt to test of the constitutionality of Mueller’s appointment.
...
Maybe. I do wonder about the ultimate goal of asking a judge to find your client in contempt.
That sounds fruitless. There is no question about the authority of Grand Juries to compel testimony. What are you thinking along those lines?
Who are those people?
we’re well inside the 90 days and I presume he was extended by Sessions.
Perhaps whether there was a basis to empanel the GJ
Maybe this was the only way to knock the case up to the Appellate level. If he was told to testify or else, what do you do?
This has nothing to do with Manafort's ongoing trial. This is a witness who refused to testify before a grand jury.
But who would be that person Sessions? He recused himself, so would it then be Rosenstein?
It's the only way to get appellate review.
Here's how the process works: A prosecutor calls someone to testify before the grand jury. The witness moves to quash the subpoena on some ground (here, it's the constitutionality of Mueller's appointment; more commonly it's some issue like attorney-client privilege). If the judge denies the motion, that denial is not an appealable order. The only way to get appellate review is for the witness to refuse to comply and be held in contempt. A contempt finding is appealable.
Thanks for your explanation. I guess this tactic is probably common.
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.