Quote:As of Friday, three separate Judges have rendered harsh setbacks to the Mueller investigation - demanding, if you can believe it, facts and evidence to back up the Special Counsel's claims - in unredacted format as one Judge demands, or risk having the cases tossed out altogether.

The first major setback happened in February, when the federal judge assigned to the criminal case against Trump's former National Security Advisor, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan ordered Mueller's team to turn over any "exculpatory evidence" to Flynn's defense.

Instead, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan issued the order "sua sponte," or at his discretion, invoking the "Brady Rule" - which requires prosecutors to turn over previously unfiled evidence that might have a material impact on a defendant's case. Two days before Sullivan issued the order, Mueller filed a motion for a protective order regarding the use of evidence in the case, including "sensitive materials," which would be provided to Flynn's lawyers by the office of the Special Counsel.

Fox's Judge Andrew Napolitano thought Sullivan's decision at the time was a complete bombshell.

"Why would he we want that after General Flynn has already pleaded guilty? That is unheard of. He must suspect a defect in the guilty plea. Meaning, he must have reason to believe that General Flynn pleaded guilty for some reason other than guilt." -Andrew Napolitano

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan


Then there's the judge in the Manafort Case, who excoriated a Special Counsel attorney on Friday during a "motion to dismiss" hearing. A leaked transcript of the heated exchange between attorney Michael Dreeben and Eastern District of Virginia Judge T.S. Ellis reveals that the entire Manafort case is in jeopardy if the Special Counsel doesn't produce an unredacted copy of the original order from Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein authorizing the original investigation.

Ellis also said that Mueller shouldn't have "unfettered power" to prosecute Manafort for charges that have nothing to do with collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, and called out the DOJ's efforts in the case as an attempt by Mueller to gain leverage over Manafort.

"You really care about what information Mr. Manafort can give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump or lead to his prosecution or impeachment or whatever. That's what you're really interested in." -Judge Ellis

The Judge also notes that the Special Counsel's indictment against Manafort doesn't mention:

(1) Russian individuals
(2) Russian banks
(3) Russian money
(4) Russian payments to Manafort

Judge T. S. Ellis


Last - but we're quite sure not least, was last week's ruling by federal Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, denying Mueller a trial delay over the high-profile February indictment of 13 Russians for interfering in the 2016 US election.

Mueller accused 13 Russian nationals and three Russian entities - one of which was Concord Management and Consulting, of "knowingly and intentionally" conspiring to interfere with the election by using social media to disparage Hillary Clinton and support Donald Trump.

And Concord Management decided to fight it...

As PowerLine notes, Mueller probably didn't see that coming - and the indictment itself was perhaps nothing more than a PR stunt to bolster the Russian interference narrative.

I don’t think anyone (including Mueller) anticipated that any of the defendants would appear in court to defend against the charges. Rather, the Mueller prosecutors seem to have obtained the indictment to serve a public relations purpose, laying out the case for interference as understood by the government and lending a veneer of respectability to the Mueller Switch Project.

One of the Russian corporate defendants nevertheless hired counsel to contest the charges. In April two Washington-area attorneys — Eric Dubelier and Kate Seikaly of the Reed Smith firm — filed appearances in court on behalf of Concord Management and Consulting. Josh Gerstein covered that turn of events for Politico here. -Powerline Blog

Judge Dabney Friedrich


https://csnbbs.com/newthread.php?fid=540

Quote:DEMS TRASH FEDERAL JUDGE FOR QUESTIONING SCOPE OF MUELLER POWER

At a hearing Friday, Judge T.S. Ellis scorched Robert Mueller's legal team, accusing them of "lying" and seeking "unfettered power." Ellis, who is overseeing the case against Paul Manafort, said it appeared Mueller was using unrelated charges against Manafort to try and score testimony they could use to effect impeachment proceedings against President Trump.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) said he's "concerned" the judge would question Robert Mueller's motives. His Democratic colleague, Rep. Gerald Connolly (D-Va.) called Judge Ellis "outrageous."

"It does concern me," Schiff said, that "the judge [is] questioning the motives of the special counsel."

"While it’s certainly within the judge’s prerogative to ask these questions, I don’t think it really bears on the legal issues," Schiff continued. And so I think that Bob Mueller will prevail, in the sense of being able to go forward with this litigation. I don’t think there is really any legal question about that. But, yes, it is concerning that the judge would express this opinion."

Schiff also attacked the judge for asking how much Robert Mueller's probe is costing taxpayers.

"I’m not sure that it is germane, for example, for the judge to be asking how much Bob Mueller has spent on the investigation," Schiff told CNN's Jake Tapper during an appearance on Sunday's State of the Union. "Mueller is well within his jurisdiction. I can understand the judge asking certain of these questions, although some seem to be non-germane to the legal issues involved."

https://news.grabien.com/story-dems-trash-federal-judge-questioning-scope-mueller-power

(05-07-2018 01:26 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Breaking.... Mueller has indicted Judges Ellis and Friedrich on possible obstruction charges and with Russian collusion.

(05-07-2018 01:26 PM)gdunn Wrote:  Breaking.... Mueller has indicted Judges Ellis and Friedrich on possible obstruction charges and with Russian collusion.