Paul Manafort sues Mueller and the DoJ

a reply to: shooterbrody

What privileged info does he have?

So you disagree with the judge? He is wrong and you are right?

Lol

Why didn't the transition lawyer go to a court?

Why did manafort's lawyer not file a motion in the criminal court?

originally posted by: Vector99

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: Vector99

Right,..interpreted by a guy on ats..

No, I showed you the statute required for appointing a special prosecutor.

You chose to be ignorant and ignore it.

Lol right,

Well it's a slam dunk or its the deep state I guess. You couldn't possibly be misinterpreting anything or not knowledgeable enough to make the claim.

a reply to: luthier


No I'm not, I'm talking about something completely separate from this lawsuit and that's how the special counsel was appointed.

Here is Title 28, Chapter VI, Section 600.1 - Grounds for appointing a special counsel

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and
(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

Notice that there has to be a criminal investigation of a person or matter. Comey (who has bragged about leaking to get the special counsel) testified multiple times that this was not a criminal probe but a counter intelligence probe. Further, the declaration that appointed the special counsel did not specify any crime to be investigated.

In case you have lost your memory and think I'm wrong, here is the justification given by the Rosenstein letter:

By virtue of the authority vested in me as Acting Attorney General, including 28 U.S.C.
§§ 509, 510, and 515, in order to discharge my responsibility to provide supervision and
management of the Department of Justice, and to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the
Russian govemmenfs efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as
follows:
......
The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confinned by then-FBI

Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals

There you have it, the entire special counsel is set up on a faulty foundation that will crumble under the slightest scrutiny.

originally posted by: luthier
a reply to: shooterbrody

What privileged info does he have?

So you disagree with the judge? He is wrong and you are right?

Lol

Why didn't the transition lawyer go to a court?

Why did manafort's lawyer not file a motion in the criminal court?

none of what you deflect with removes the ethics responsibilitys mueller has

or perhaps you could ask your fathers brothers twice removed uncle on your mothers side to explain it to you
tell them to use small words

a reply to: Dfairlite

Yep I read the lawsuit. It's going to get thrown out.


And is while he made it a civil claim. As a professional stunt.

a reply to: shooterbrody

I did he said your full of crap and go ogling things you don't even understand.

And what privileged info does he have speaking of deflection...where is the proof?

Ah..it's nowhere.

Ps does mueller need to inform the public of his investigation tactics like if he gets warrants or sealed indictments?

a reply to: luthier


The post you responded to isn't about the lawsuit. I don't think you've read anything (I know you haven't read my post) other than some moveon.org or shareblue propaganda.

a reply to: luthier

You couldn't possibly be misinterpreting anything or not knowledgeable enough to make the claim.

But apparently you cannot be simply because your father in law and sister are involved in the legal field so you are the guru of it?

My personal opinion on the matter is as followed;
*The laws pertaining to appointing a special prosecutor are very clear.
*The scope of the investigation is fairly clear.
*None of the charges Manafort face can be tied to the scope of the investigation.
*Further jurisdiction was never sought, essentially wiping away evidence found out of jurisdiction.

I personally think Manafort has a good case, and I've presented why I think so. You are purposely derailing with feelings and ad-homs, and if you could provide a solid legal counterargument that would be greatly appreciated.

a reply to: luthier

the only thing here full of crap is you
but it is your typical no source all opinion bs
today is different only because of your pretend legal inlaws claims
lawyers always file high profile bogus lawsuits so they can look ridiculous
no worries the truth will come out

a reply to: Vector99

You would think such a great legal mind could present something other than: :nuh-uh, it's going to be thrown out!"

a reply to: Vector99

Of course I could be wrong.

I will own it.

You all will say oh its the deep state because I Googled these statutes..

Mueller cannot keep Manafort under house arrest without due process. This is illegal.

a reply to: Dfairlite

I did. The procedure if he was confident is to file a motion in the criminal court. Not to file a civil lawsuit. That is going to really piss of the criminal judge.

a reply to: strangelets

He didn't he was released for 10 million.

a reply to: Vector99

*None of the charges Manafort face can be tied to the scope of the investigation.

They (crimes) were uncovered throughout the course of a lawful investigation. Mueller was granted authority to investigate criminal activity if uncovered, even if outside the scope of the original investigation.

Morrison v. Olson also helps.

a reply to: shooterbrody

How about

The transition lawyer filed no lawsuit.

There is no proof of priveledged info.

There was no motion in the criminal court by manafort?

Have no opinion..must be beyond Google.

a reply to: luthier

No, actually I will look objectively at why it would be dismissed and go from there. It very well could be dismissed, but the reasons why could vary as well. It could be dismissed for improper filing, while being completely valid under another filing. There are too many pages of law and even the experts of it make mistakes and learn daily.

The case as presented right now seems to have merit. Under current written statutes, the charges filed against Manafort don't fall under the jurisdiction of the investigation.

a reply to: Liquesence

Mueller was granted authority to investigate criminal activity if uncovered, even if outside the scope of the original investigation.

And that is not legal.

a reply to: Vector99

Really what is your opinion on why it was filed in a civil court?

a reply to: luthier
Maybe that is the proper place to file the complaint?

Can you show me why this wouldn't be valid due to it being filed in a civil court?