U.S. judge says Mueller should not have 'unfettered power' in Russia probe

[Andaman Al]

13 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

What a poor excuse for a dictator. Stalin would be pissed if you think Trump is any way comparable.

He is not comparable, the danger is that Trump thinks he is comparable, in fact he thinks he is more important than any man that has ever lived.

[Andaman Al]

9 hours ago, MajarTheLion said:

This article is incorrect. Mueller must be given whatever power necessary to overturn the results of the 2016 presidential election. It was Hillary's turn, not some outsider who has no intention of playing ball with the establishment goons. Trump must be taken out at all costs and the status quo returned to immediately!

That would be a most odd thing to say or purposely do for both Mueller and Rosenstein who have both been life long Republicans - don't ya think?

 

They are both simply true examples of patriots. They are putting their party loyalty aside and carrying out their sworn duty to protect the interests of the United States. True Patriots, following the law. Shame on you for not supporting what they do. If people are found guilty of crime they will be charged, if they are not then they will not be charged. Simple. If only you loved the USA and your constitution as much as Mueller and Rosenstein.

Edited May 5, 2018 by Andaman Al

[lannarebirth]

8 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Seems like a shamelessly partisan "judge" that watches too much Fox News. Definitely not a credit to his profession. He should make rulings based on the rule of law. Nothing more. Nothing less. 

 

I get the "trump" fans are exploiting this as a propaganda victory. It's one obviously corrupted judge. If they think that will stop Mueller from getting to the truth, whatever it is, they have another thing coming. 

 

It doesn't mean anything. If you've spent any time in a courtroom you'll notice different judges have different MO's. Some are super strict in their discipline never to interject their thoughts in a case, some less so. They usually get to the same place in the end. I can't find any documentation of this particular judge getting overturned much.

Edited May 5, 2018 by lannarebirth

[riclag]

5 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

It doesn't mean anything. If you've spent any time in a courtroom you'll notice different judges have different MO's. Some are super strict in their discipline never to interject their thoughts in a case, some less so. They usually get to the same place in the end. I can't find any documentation of this particular judge getting overturned much.

One thing is for certain the rats won't be lookin for cheese anymore in that jurisdiction. It's nice to see he wants what America wants, to see the Rosenstein memo without redaction's . The much debated scope of the investigation is coming to light .Rudy is doing a hell of a job ,he's got his fingers in everybody's cookie jar  

Edited May 5, 2018 by riclag

[selftaopath]

7 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

What are the charges that Congress has failed to act on so far?

They could pass a budget. I'll refer you to a site that might be more informative:

http://harvardlpr.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/1.1_2_Schumer.pdf

 

I realize this is an Opinion article however the suggestions/facts are noteworthy:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/01/29/republican-house-leaders-are-complicit-in-obstruction/?utm_term=.c8ec08d8a61b

Edited May 5, 2018 by selftaopath
addendum

[Chomper Higgot]

7 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

What are the charges that Congress has failed to act on so far?

Congress does not act on ‘Charges’, that’s the job of the courts.

 

You of course know that and therefore understand you are asking a meaningless question.

[Chomper Higgot]

59 minutes ago, riclag said:

One thing is for certain the rats won't be lookin for cheese anymore in that jurisdiction. It's nice to see he wants what America wants, to see the Rosenstein memo without redaction's . The much debated scope of the investigation is coming to light .Rudy is doing a hell of a job ,he's got his fingers in everybody's cookie jar  

Rosenstein’s letter appointing Mueller to the Post of Specila Council is publically available, as are the statutes to which it refers when specifying the breadth of the Scope of investigation.

 

There’s no hope for the Traitor Manafort in finding a way around the SC’s scope.

 

Illiberals sbrace yourself for the good nes, Manafort is going down for crimes against the US.

[lannarebirth]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Congress does not act on ‘Charges’, that’s the job of the courts.

 

You of course know that and therefore understand you are asking a meaningless question.

Congress does act on charges (or not) and none have been brought before them. They can also act without charges having been brought, but at their own political peril. Impeachment is a political process, it is neither a criminal nor civil process. Courts have nothing to do with impeachment proceedings which is the topic I was responding to.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

Congress does act on charges (or not) and none have been brought before them. They can also act without charges having been brought, but at their own political peril. Impeachment is a political process, it is neither a criminal nor civil process. Courts have nothing to do with impeachment proceedings which is the topic I was responding to.

Agreed, hence the focus on the mid-terms.

 

Congress has stood silent while Trump handed state secrets to the Russians, while Trump refused to sign off on sanctions on Russia, while Trump has failed to take action to prevent further attacks by Tussia on the electoral process, while Trump has attacked the Justice Department.

 

The mid-terms are going to be very interesting.

[riclag]

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Rosenstein’s letter appointing Mueller to the Post of Specila Council is publically available, as are the statutes to which it refers when specifying the breadth of the Scope of investigation.

 

There’s no hope for the Traitor Manafort in finding a way around the SC’s scope.

 

Illiberals sbrace yourself for the good nes, Manafort is going down for crimes against the US.

"Ellis also complained that the bulk of that August memo he received was highly redacted. He told Mueller’s office to take two weeks to consult with U.S. intelligence agencies to see whether they would sign off so that he can personally review a sealed, unredacted version of the memo".

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort/u-s-judge-says-mueller-should-not-have-unfettered-power-in-russia-probe-idUSKBN1I51WE

 

Why is Manafort a traitor?

[lannarebirth]

7 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Agreed, hence the focus on the mid-terms.

 

Congress has stood silent while Trump handed state secrets to the Russians, while Trump refused to sign off on sanctions on Russia, while Trump has failed to take action to prevent further attacks by Tussia on the electoral process, while Trump has attacked the Justice Department.

 

The mid-terms are going to be very interesting.

 

Except for your last allegation which "may" be obstruction of justice those are all  prerogatives of the presidency.

[lannarebirth]

10 minutes ago, riclag said:

"Ellis also complained that the bulk of that August memo he received was highly redacted. He told Mueller’s office to take two weeks to consult with U.S. intelligence agencies to see whether they would sign off so that he can personally review a sealed, unredacted version of the memo".

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-manafort/u-s-judge-says-mueller-should-not-have-unfettered-power-in-russia-probe-idUSKBN1I51WE

 

Why is Manafort a traitor?

 

The word traitor gets thrown around a lot but it has a very narrow definition under the US Constitution. The first thing to know is that one cannot be considered a traitor except in wartime. 

[riclag]

12 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Agreed, hence the focus on the mid-terms.

 

Congress has stood silent while Trump handed state secrets to the Russians, while Trump refused to sign off on sanctions on Russia, while Trump has failed to take action to prevent further attacks by Tussia on the electoral process, while Trump has attacked the Justice Department.

 

The mid-terms are going to be very interesting.

"The minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."

We found broad agreement that a president, using powers granted by the Constitution, is able to declassify essentially anything. 

Share The Facts

 

James Risch

U.S. Senator, R-Idaho

 

"The minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."

remarks to reporters – Monday, May 15, 2017

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/may/16/james-risch/does-president-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/

[Srikcir]

5 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The first thing to know is that one cannot be considered a traitor except in wartime. 

See https://listverse.com/2010/07/04/top-10-traitors-in-us-history/

Several Americans have been identified as having committed treason not related to wartime. For example American citizen Adam Yahiye Gadahn who was indicted by the US Justice Department for  treason - the first since WW2.

More recently Edwards Snowden has been considered a traitor by some Americans.

http://www.ibtimes.com/should-edward-snowden-be-pardoned-poll-finds-29-percent-americans-favor-prosecution-2469895

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/edward-snowden-rasmussen-poll-hero-russia/2016/09/23/id/749866/

 

 

[lannarebirth]

6 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

See https://listverse.com/2010/07/04/top-10-traitors-in-us-history/

Several Americans have been identified as having committed treason not related to wartime. For example American citizen Adam Yahiye Gadahn who was indicted by the US Justice Department for  treason - the first since WW2.

More recently Edwards Snowden has been considered a traitor by some Americans.

http://www.ibtimes.com/should-edward-snowden-be-pardoned-poll-finds-29-percent-americans-favor-prosecution-2469895

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/edward-snowden-rasmussen-poll-hero-russia/2016/09/23/id/749866/

 

 

 

I misspoke with respect to wartime, but it is narrowly defined as "making war" against the US.

 

Quote

 

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I misspoke with respect to wartime, but it is narrowly defined as "making war" against the US.

 

 

Cyber warfare!

 

Not just the attack on the election but also the hacking and infiltration of Utility companies across the US.

 

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Cyber warfare!

 

Not just the attack on the election but also the hacking and infiltration of Utility companies across the US.

 

Yeah, that is a type of warfare I agree, but unless done or conspired to by an American is does not fit the definition of traitorous. Probably something along the lines of an enemy combatant.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, lannarebirth said:

Yeah, that is a type of warfare I agree, but unless done or conspired to by an American is does not fit the definition of traitorous. Probably something along the lines of an enemy combatant.

Hence the investigation.

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Hence the investigation.

And investigate they should; but all I read are judgements based on incomplete information.

[Chomper Higgot]

39 minutes ago, riclag said:

"The minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."

We found broad agreement that a president, using powers granted by the Constitution, is able to declassify essentially anything. 

Share The Facts

 

James Risch

U.S. Senator, R-Idaho

 

"The minute the president speaks about it to someone, he has the ability to declassify anything at any time without any process."

remarks to reporters – Monday, May 15, 2017

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/may/16/james-risch/does-president-have-ability-declassify-anything-an/

Correct, but when the President Hand’s State secrets to nation that has attacked the US electoral process, has hacked and infiltrated the control systems of Utility Companies across the US and when the President is under investigation for collusion with Russia the Question has to be asked ‘is he collaborating with an enemy’?

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

And investigate they should; but all I read are judgements based on incomplete information.

There are 5 guilty pleas and one man in the slammer.

[lannarebirth]

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

There are 5 guilty pleas and one man in the slammer.

 

For treason?

[Srikcir]

42 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

unless done or conspired to by an American is does not fit the definition of traitorous

Myth No. 4

Noncitizens in the United States (other than ambassadors and their staffs) owe a duty of temporary allegiance, the Supreme Court found in an 1872 case. While they are within the United States and receiving protection from it, noncitizens are governed by American treason law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-treason/2017/02/17/8b9eb3a8-f460-11e6-a9b0-ecee7ce475fc_story.html?utm_term=.8af196569234

[lannarebirth]

8 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Myth No. 4

Noncitizens in the United States (other than ambassadors and their staffs) owe a duty of temporary allegiance, the Supreme Court found in an 1872 case. While they are within the United States and receiving protection from it, noncitizens are governed by American treason law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-treason/2017/02/17/8b9eb3a8-f460-11e6-a9b0-ecee7ce475fc_story.html?utm_term=.8af196569234

 

Truth to tell, I did not know that. Is that non citizens as in Permanent Residents and other non immigrant visa holders or does it include any visitor to the US?

 

That's funny, because I posted that article several months ago.

Edited May 6, 2018 by lannarebirth

[Srikcir]

2 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

Is that non citizens as in Permanent Residents and other non immigrant visa holders or does it include any visitor to the US?

Carlisle v. United States, 83 U.S. 16 Wall. 147 147 (1872)

Aliens domiciled in the United States owe a local and temporary allegiance to the government of the United States; they are bound to obey all the laws of the country not immediately relating to citizenship during their residence in it, and are equally amenable with citizens for any infraction of those laws.

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/83/147/case.html

This case was cited by the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission in 1965 in the matter of a claim by Walter Ludwig Koerber to define the term "National of the United States" - "a natural person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance."

https://www.jstor.org/stable/20689976?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

So would not apply to a visitor the the US.

 

[Andaman Al]

3 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I misspoke with respect to wartime, but it is narrowly defined as "making war" against the US.

 

Quote

 

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

 

 

well it is not quite as narrowly defines as you would have us believe is it.

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

 

Both Manafort and Trump could be in trouble.

 

What I don't get is this, unless you are overwhelmed by some form of cultism, why would you not want to see someone go through judicial process if law enforcement consider they have committed felony crimes? Why are Trump supporters making any excuse necessary to conceal or indeed eradicate/ignore crimes that have been identified?

 

The scope of Mueller's probe is irrelevant, because IF in the process of the investigation it is found that the subject has committed felony's then those crimes cannot be ignored. We actually have right wingers, the normal sticklers for rapid, harsh justice wanting alleged crimes to be ignored because they are not part of that particular investigation. What if it is discovered that Manafort has murdered someone? Is he to be given a free pass because that is not on Rosenstein's terms of reference? And if you say "ridiculous of course we can't ignore Murder", then OK, where exactly do we draw the line with felony's and say - "ok lets ignore that"? Don't Trump supporters see what they are doing. If Trump and Manafort are guilty of ANY Felony they must answer for it the same as any other man. The fact they are scrutinised more closely by being in public life is their lookout and one that Trump should have been acutely aware of BEFORE he took office. Trump supporters are so obsessed with the SOB (Presidentially used term) that they are completely blinded. They will all only be found guilty of crime IF they have committed one, and IF they have committed one, why are supporters trying to cover that up?

[lannarebirth]

1 minute ago, Andaman Al said:

well it is not quite as narrowly defines as you would have us believe is it.

"Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort."

 

Both Manafort and Trump could be in trouble.

 

What I don't get is this, unless you are overwhelmed by some form of cultism, why would you not want to see someone go through judicial process if law enforcement consider they have committed felony crimes? Why are Trump supporters making any excuse necessary to conceal or indeed eradicate/ignore crimes that have been identified?

 

The scope of Mueller's probe is irrelevant, because IF in the process of the investigation it is found that the subject has committed felony's then those crimes cannot be ignored. We actually have right wingers, the normal sticklers for rapid, harsh justice wanting alleged crimes to be ignored because they are not part of that particular investigation. What if it is discovered that Manafort has murdered someone? Is he to be given a free pass because that is not on Rosenstein's terms of reference? And if you say "ridiculous of course we can't ignore Murder", then OK, where exactly do we draw the line with felony's and say - "ok lets ignore that"? Don't Trump supporters see what they are doing. If Trump and Manafort are guilty of ANY Felony they must answer for it the same as any other man. The fact they are scrutinised more closely by being in public life is their lookout and one that Trump should have been acutely aware of BEFORE he took office. Trump supporters are so obsessed with the SOB (Presidentially used term) that they are completely blinded. They will all only be found guilty of crime IF they have committed one, and IF they have committed one, why are supporters trying to cover that up?

 

I don't know where you got the idea I am not in favor of the Mueller investigation going forward and charges being brought if warranted. I'm in favor of it.

 

What I'm not in favor of is 10 million words about people's feelings and speculation based on nothing or at best anonymous sources. Let the process run its course and the chips fall where they may. I believe in the process, but if there is any tinkering with the process, which we've seen some evidence of, I'd like to see those folks brought to justice as well.

[riclag]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Correct, but when the President Hand’s State secrets to nation that has attacked the US electoral process, has hacked and infiltrated the control systems of Utility Companies across the US and when the President is under investigation for collusion with Russia the Question has to be asked ‘is he collaborating with an enemy’?

They started the interference in the 2016 election  in 2014.

"The Russian effort to meddle in the election( sow discord) began way back in 2014, long before anyone viewed Trump as a serious candidate for the presidency, much less a likely nominee. The goal was simply to create division and chaos by exploiting existing cleavages in American society—or as the indictment puts it, operators were instructed to create “political intensity through supporting radical groups, users dissatisfied with [the] social and economic situation and oppositional social movements.”

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/02/mueller-roadmap/553604/

PT gave the Russians intel on about Isis,some reports have said that he sourced Israel, which was denied. There doesn't appear to be a problem with the head of Israel about this  ,during a press conference questions where asked  Netanyahu  about the matter,he said, "Intelligence cooperation is terrific. It's never been better." 

http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-essential-washington-updates-trump-says-he-never-mentioned-israel-1495468601-htmlstory.html

Can you post a source for the utilities interference? In another post you claimed that Manafort was a traitor,Why? 

Edited May 6, 2018 by riclag

[Chomper Higgot]

23 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I don't know where you got the idea I am not in favor of the Mueller investigation going forward and charges being brought if warranted. I'm in favor of it.

 

What I'm not in favor of is 10 million words about people's feelings and speculation based on nothing or at best anonymous sources. Let the process run its course and the chips fall where they may. I believe in the process, but if there is any tinkering with the process, which we've seen some evidence of, I'd like to see those folks brought to justice as well.

The only ‘tinkering with the process’ has been Trump firing the woman who notified him of concerns over Flynn, firing Comey for refusing to offer ‘personal loyalty to Trump’, Nunes faking statements in favour of Trump, Trumps attempts to fire the Special Council, Trump’s ongoing attempts to thwart the investigation, Trump’s efforts to dangle promises of pardons to those under investigation, the Congressional comittee’s failure to follow evidence and yet publishing a report that tries to exonerate Trump before the Special Council completes his investigation.....the list goes on.

[Andaman Al]

26 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I don't know where you got the idea I am not in favor of the Mueller investigation going forward and charges being brought if warranted. I'm in favor of it.

 

What I'm not in favor of is 10 million words about people's feelings and speculation based on nothing or at best anonymous sources. Let the process run its course and the chips fall where they may. I believe in the process, but if there is any tinkering with the process, which we've seen some evidence of, I'd like to see those folks brought to justice as well.

A misunderstanding. From below the bold text it is a general musing aimed generally at people it applies to. Not you. The ones it apply to know who they are even if I don't.