Russian firm in election meddling case cites [] Brett Kavanaugh in bid to drop charges

CNBC ^ | July 20, 2018 | Kevin Breuninger

[GonzoII]

•Concord Management and Consulting, a Russian firm accused by special counsel Robert Mueller of illegally interfering in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, cites decisions from President Trump's new Supreme Court pick to argue that the charges against it should be dropped.

•Judge Brett Kavanaugh warned the government in a 2011 court decision that if it wants to charge foreigners with violating laws about political contributions, then it must prove that those foreign nationals were aware of the laws being broken.

•"The Special Counsel attempts to create a make-believe crime that is in fact no crime at all," a lawyer for Concord wrote in a court filing.

[GonzoII]

Full Title: Russian firm in election meddling case cites Trump Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh in bid to drop charges

[Sacajaweau]

Sweet....

Yup said Mueller. We gotcha!

Can we see the evidence?

No said Mueller....

I do believe the charges will be dropped.

[rktman]

Oddly enough, seems like just about all of the libstream media have the whole story wrong anyway. The russkies did NOT meddle in the “elections”. They may have tried to sway opinions in the campaign but as far as I know the did NOT meddle in the “elections”. So, any group that promoted one side or the other during the campaign was “meddling”. The voter outcome is still the voter outcome. Yeah, it may be “just” semantics but they are far reaching with serious implications.

[shelterguy]

Don’t let facts get in the way of a good fake but accurate story. When the 12 Russians were indicted for digging into DNC servers that was not the headline. Every news outlet I saw had the headline as 12 Russians charged with hacking the election.

I might be an uneducated deplorable but even I know pure propaganda when I see it.

[Vlad The Inhaler]

That still doesn't clear Hillary's illegal and unreported $400 million dollar under-the-table payoff.

HAT TIP: Potlatch

[originalbuckeye]

And I speculate that Trump was tired when he answered the gotcha question about Russian meddling. He knew the biggest problem IS China and answered appropriately, but the powers that be didn’t want the China problem out in the open yet. Mueller needs the focus to continue to be on Russia to continue his ‘investigations’.

[rktman]

libstream media-———what $400 million? Never heard of it. “We’re with Her!”

[Soul of the South]

From the article: “Judge Brett Kavanaugh warned the government in a 2011 court decision that if it wants to charge foreigners with violating laws about political contributions, then it must prove that those foreign nationals were aware of the laws being broken.”

It would appear Judge Kavanaugh is suggesting foreigners receive protections not extended to the American people. In the United States “Ignorantia juris non excusat” or “ignorance of the law excuses not” is the legal principle holding that a person who is not aware of the law may not escape liability for violating the law. Perhaps Judge Kavanaugh should think twice about giving foreigners immunity from being prosecuted under US laws they were unaware of while US citizens have no such immunity.

The truth is there are so many federal, state, and local laws on the books it is impossible for any citizen to be aware of all of them, much less the various ways courts and bureaucrats have interpreted them over decades. For example there are over 20,000 laws involving just the use of guns.

Each year Congress, state legislatures, and local governments continue adding to the list of laws citizens are required to obey, yet government rarely takes obsolete laws off the books. In reality citizens are ignorant of most laws on the books as well as the principles of common law. This creates a situation where corrupt officials or a tyrannical government can easily define felonies committed unknowingly by almost any citizen it wishes to lock away.

The plethora of laws on the books, combined with the principle that ignorance of the law is no excuse, gives frightening power to government. We the people should demand our elected representatives protect our liberties and simplify the criminal and tax codes.

[oblomov]

Wheels within wheels!

[jimfree]

Fascinating application of the fair notice requirement. Americans are assumed to have notice of statutes and fair notice of criminal liability is assumed if a statute states clearly what conduct is punishable.

[Pining_4_TX]

All these attacks on Kavanaugh are starting to worry me. Do you think the libs have a chance to derail his confirmation?

[rktman]

Well, except for the turncoats in DC, no.

[Rockingham]

The article falsely implies that Kavanaugh, as one member of a three-judge panel, was solely responsible for the Court of Appeals' decision. For those interested in the details, Judge Kavanaugh's views were stated in his 2010 concurring opinion in United States v. Moore, which in turn relied upon the Supreme Court decision in Bryan v. United States. Kavanaugh's views are squarely based on pertinent Supreme Court precedent.