Judge Mulls Dismissal Of Manafort Charges, Sharply Questioned By Mueller Overreach

Like most motions to dismiss, Paul Manafort's was initially viewed as a long-shot bid to win the political operative his freedom and get out from under the thumb of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

But after today's hearing on a motion to dismiss filed by Manafort's lawyers, it's looking increasingly likely that Manafort could escape his charges - and finally be free of his ankle bracelets - as judge Amy Berman Jackson questioned Mueller's "unfettered power" to prosecute over charges that have nothing to do with collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians.

Berman said she's concerned Mueller is only pursuing charges against Manafort to pressure him to turn on his former boss, and said the charges against Manafort didn't stem from Mueller's collusion probe, but a preexisting case that was nearly brought by the FBI years ago before it was eventually dropped.

Berman has given prosecutors two weeks to show what evidence they have that Manafort was complicit in colluding with the Russians. If they can't come up with any, she will presumably dismiss the case. She said she would also like to see the letter signed by Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein outlining the scope of the Mueller probe.

Of course, such a dismissal would be nothing short of groundbreaking. It would potentially make it much harder for Mueller to turn witnesses against the president.

www.zerohedge.com...

Have to run but I am seeing if i can find sources that back this up. I am not sure it is legit yet.

Here is another source saying that a judge is saying the manafort charges have nothing to do with russia collusion.

talkingpointsmemo.com...

a reply to: Grambler

This just in...judge dies in tragic car accident...

That's how I feel this could go...

I look forward to seeing everyone that claimed she was an Obama plant and legislating from the bench suddenly making a 180 on their opinion of her.

originally posted by: RickyD
a reply to: Grambler

This just in...judge dies in tragic car accident...

That's how I feel this could go...

OR Robbery, 'cause that's still a thing.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I look forward to seeing everyone that claimed she was an Obama plant and legislating from the bench suddenly making a 180 on their opinion of her.

She should have never let it get this far in the first place...

a reply to: Grambler

I'm so sure. Lol.
Manafort is going on trial July first. Mueller has requested 35 blank subpoenas for witnesses.
Zero hedge may as well be mother goose.

a reply to: Xcalibur254

Different judge. This is TS Ellis who took over the case in the Eastern District of Virginia in March.

a reply to: theantediluvian

The OP says that it's still Jackson.

ETA: It looks like Zero Hedge edited their article. They originally named Jackson but have now changed it to Ellis.

a reply to: Grambler

holy smokes the judge is pretty candid
from your link

"I don’t see how this indictment has anything to do with anything the special prosecutor is authorized to investigate," Ellis said at a hearing in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia, concerning a motion by Manafort to dismiss the case.

"You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud," Ellis said. "You really care about what information he might give you about Mr. Trump and what might lead to his impeachment or prosecution."

Ellis also asked the special counsel’s office to share privately with him a copy of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosentein’s August 2017 memo elaborating on the scope of Mueller’s Russia probe. He said the current version he has been heavily redacted.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Not if this judge doesn't like what he sees from the special prosecutors office...2 weeks to show that these charges have anything to do with russian collusion...whatever that means as there is no law that really covers that.

Now I know that breaking your delusions will never happen, but the reality is way different than your perception of it...

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

I'm so sure. Lol.
Manafort is going on trial July first. Mueller has requested 35 blank subpoenas for witnesses.
Zero hedge may as well be mother goose.

Did you even bother to read the link?
This is the results from motions filed by Manforts lawyers weeks ago.
This is a BIG deal.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Grambler

I'm so sure. Lol.
Manafort is going on trial July first. Mueller has requested 35 blank subpoenas for witnesses.
Zero hedge may as well be mother goose.

Did you even bother to read the link?
This is the results from motions filed by Manforts lawyers weeks ago.
This is a BIG deal.

Either chooses not to read or can't.

I'm leaning towards one over the other, just from past performances....

I said it months ago in past threads....Manafort and Flynn will walk...Fruit from a poisonous tree among other things...

Well well...go figure the only judge that has taken a sane approach to these matters would be a judge not appointed by Obama...as I think most of the judges involved have been (I may be wrong here). This judge was appointed by Regan and it appears like he has had quite a bit of experience over the years to draw on. Here's to hoping we can actually follow the rules regarding these matters moving forward...instead of witch hunting.

It's a legitimate question. The FBI has known about the Ukrainian stuff for a while now. If they declined to prosecute then, it's fair to ask why Mueller is so interested in charging him now. And if it turns out his motives are unethical, then by all rights Manafort should be freed.

I'm actually more interested in Flynn. It appears that he was framed for perjury by Andrew McCabe, which I suspect is the real reason Muller keeps pushing back Flynn's sentencing. Because when the sentencing hearing finally does happen, it will become clear that the charge was bogus to begin with.

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
I look forward to seeing everyone that claimed she was an Obama plant and legislating from the bench suddenly making a 180 on their opinion of her.

That would be the absolute least important aspect of this story.

When the state of our union is at stake, preferring to just sit and watch folks eat crow is tantamount to fiddling while Rome burns.

a reply to: Grambler

Some of the things the judge said are really head scratching:

"You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud. You really care about getting information Mr. Manafort can give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump and lead to his prosecution or impeachment."

Even if that were true, it's irrelevant. There's no legal defense that a person can't be prosecuted for crimes they've committed because the prosecution has its sights set higher. It's also a giant leap on the part of the judge to assume that the Mueller team even believes that Manafort has information that could lead to the prosecution or impeachment of Trump.

He also conceded that "I’m not saying it’s illegitimate." :

Ellis agreed, but he made no immediate decision on the defense motion. He said even without such a connection the special counsel, which is investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election, may well still have the authority to bring the charges.

“I’m not saying it’s illegitimate,” Ellis said.

I suspect that he's going to get the unredacted Rosenstein memo and the case will proceed. I can't find any other quotes but I suspect that the above was followed by something to do with this:

Though Ellis appeared to go tougher on prosecutors, he acknowledged that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein did spell out Mueller’s authority to investigate Manafort’s Ukraine work in a memo issued on Aug. 2, 2017, more than two months after the initial order appointing Mueller. The memo made public by Mueller’s team in its response to Manafort’s push to dismiss the indictments against him is heavily redacted, only revealing details related to Manafort.

In fact, Rosenstein explicitly gave Mueller and his team authority to investigate/prosecute these charges. That much is made perfectly clear in the unredacted portion of the memo:

The following allegations were withing the scope of the Investigation at the time of your appointment and are within the scope of the Order:

Allegations that Paul Manafort:

Committed a crime or crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and during the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovych.

So while the (conservative btw, since that's important to note when a judge is presumed liberal) judge might have wanted to take a moment to go on a rant, it's pretty clear that Mueller's team does have the authority.

a reply to: theantediluvian

There isn't...but the FBI investigating him prior and choosing to not pursue at that time tells you quite a bit about the motives here.

Had Mueller done something new that was uncovered, i'd have a pitchfork in hand with you. But this...this reaffirms my belief that there is a coup underway currently.

a reply to: RickyD

Except Rosenstein explicitly gave Mueller the authority to investigate Manafort's Ukrainian government work:

Committed a crime or crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and during the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovych.

a reply to: Grambler

www.reuters.com...
here is a msm source for the same story

At tense hearing at the federal courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia, the judge said Mueller should not have “unfettered power” in his Russia probe and that the charges against Manafort did not arise from the investigation into Moscow’s alleged meddling in the 2016 U.S. election.

The judge questioned why Manafort’s case there could not be handled by the U.S. attorney’s office in Virginia, rather than the special counsel’s office.

Seems Mueller will have to justify his scope.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Except this all comes from before Manafort was even apart of any trump campaign...probably before trump ever thought to run. So how is this in any way covered by his mandate which relates to the election?