DONATE

Showing posts with label Paul Manafort. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Paul Manafort. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 28, 2018

My Intro Thoughts on WND’s Limbaugh on Perjury Traps


John R. Houk
© November 28, 2018


Special Prosecutor – or is it Counselor or perhaps Deep State Persecutor – Robert Mueller has been using his prosecutorial powers NOT TO INVESTIGATE  a Trump/Russia connection to subvert the 2016 Election. RATHER Mueller has used nearly unlimited power provided by Deep State acolyte Rod Rosenstein to create the delusion of Trump obstruction of justice via totally unconnected to the Special Counsel purpose to manufacture perjury traps.

To date every American indicted by Mueller’s team of Dem/Hillary witch hunters has been tried or plea dealed for undermining the election as agents of Russia, but perjury traps based on faulty memories rather than lies

WORSE! How did Mueller get agreements to plea deals from the accused? Not by evidence of wrong doing, but by taking miniscule differences in under oath interviews results.

Why wouldn’t the accused fight the accusations? Because of the threat of horrendously outrageous legal bills that would bankrupt the accused families. These Prosecutors/Persecutors – win or lose – have no personal financial stake. And so at the end of the day, they go home to their families planning activities, vacations, birthdays, Christmas gatherings, etc. WITHOUT the worry that litigation placed a strain on their budgets.

I have noticed Jerome Corsi is the latest victim of this expensive to defend perjury trap ploy. It appears that Corsi – so far – is not willing to cave to the financial burdens imposed by Mueller with frivolous legal traps to bring down Trump and all who support the President against Democratic Party wickedness.

Below are some details of Corsi’s plight from a WND article.

JRH 11/28/18
So readers, I’ve been using a seven year old laptop to fulfill the
old blogging habit. It’s time for an upgrade. The best laptop
with buzzes & whistles for my purposes is about a
$1,000.00. My grandson found a similar but not quite all the
buzzes & whistles for a little over $500.00. I’m a relatively
small-time blogger but with a consistently growing readership
despite some token censorship from the liberal-oriented
blog and social platforms.
Whatever my readers can chip in
for a laptop upgrade will
be appreciated: https://www.paypal.me/johnrhouk

*****************************
LIMBAUGH: 'NOTHING ANYBODY CAN DO TO STOP THESE PEOPLE'

'I've run out of words to express my anger'

November 28, 2018


Radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh became audibly livid Wednesday as he lamented how the probe by special counsel Robert Mueller into alleged Russian collusion with Donald Trump continues with no end in sight, ruining the lives of people tangentially connected in the meantime.

“It’s all rooted in the fact that they’ve got nothing!” Limbaugh shouted. “And I’m sorry if I sound mad about this, ’cause I am! I am fit to be tied over it! It has been a hoax. It has been a travesty from the very get-go.”

He blamed what called a “fake, phony, fraudulent dossier” about Trump as the main reason for the ongoing probe, saying it “frosts me to the degree that I’ve run out of words to express my anger.”

“A made up political opposition research document that contains not one element of truth was used to get FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign. It’s why [former Trump campaign manager Paul] Manafort’s going to jail. It’s why [author] Jerome Corsi’s being pressured with threatened with going to jail and [former Trump adviser Roger] Stone and all these ancillary players that had nothing to do with anything regarding the 2016 election.



“And there’s nothing anybody can do to stop these people. You’ve got the rest of the Drive-By Media acting as cheerleaders for all of this. It is a travesty. It is an outrage. And all the while we’re being told the people running this investigation have impeccable honor, impeccable integrity. The people we can trust, of all people in Washington. What an absolute crock this is.”

Limbaugh said minor players such as Stone and Corsi in the drama “have as much do with Russian collusion as Mickey Mouse and Minnie Mouse.”

“The idea that Jerome Corsi has anything to do with this is literally absurd! But because they think they found a connection between Corsi and Julian Assange and WikiLeaks and the Podesta emails – wait a minute. What happened to Trump colluding with Putin? What happened to the Russians tampering with votes? What happened to the Russians colluding the – what is this about WikiLeaks and all these people supposedly connected to WikiLeaks?”


Limbaugh said the only way to battle what’s taking place is to flood the American people with truth and facts about this:

What really galls me is that we keep hearing and have always heard about the integrity of Robert Mueller. You must be very careful criticizing Robert Mueller. Robert Mueller has served as the director of the FBI, served presidents of both parties. He’s perfectly nonpartisan. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Open our mouths and let them shovel it all in. And we happily chew away, and it’s all a crock!

If there were any integrity – and I mean this from the bottom of my sizable and beating-in-rhythm heart – if there were any integrity in this investigative team, they would have shut this thing down a month after they learned what has never happened and they would have shifted their direction toward the Democrats and the Hillary campaign and all of the fraud that existed in taking a phony document to the FISA court to get warrants to spy on innocent people while the FBI planted spies in the Trump campaign.

People with integrity, the kind of integrity we’re told Mueller has in abundance, would have immediately seen what’s gone on and brought a stop to all this. But no. That’s not what happened. It’s very clear what this is. This is the Washington establishment, the elites, the Deep State, whatever you want to call it, remaining focused and using every ounce of federal power they can amass to continue their efforts to overturn the results of the election of 2016 and to destroy anybody they can who had anything to do with Trump winning.
_____________________________
My Intro Thoughts on WND’s Limbaugh on Perjury Traps
John R. Houk
© November 28, 2018
___________________________
LIMBAUGH: 'NOTHING ANYBODY CAN DO TO STOP THESE PEOPLE'

© Copyright 1997-2018. All Rights Reserved. WND.com.

Wednesday, August 22, 2018

Leftist Shark-fest over Manafort-Cohen Guilt Verdicts-Pleas


John R. Houk
© August 22, 2018

Yesterday guilty verdicts came to light against Paul Manafort and Michael Cohen, both have a connection to President Trump. If you were paying attention to the Leftist MSM you would think blood was in the water stirring a shark frenzy was erupting with bloodthirsty glee. They all believe Trump association to guilty parties means Trump’s Administration is about to come tumbling down.

The poor delusional Left are forgetting to report the guilty verdicts have ZERO to do with collusion between Trump and Russia to manipulate the 2016 election.

Manafort was found accused of 18 counts but the jury could only agree on eight counts of guilt:

In a verdict announced at the same hour as President Trump’s longtime fixer pleaded guilty to other financial charges, Manafort was convicted of filing a false tax return in each of the years from 2010 to 2014, failing to report a foreign bank account in 2012, and two counts of bank fraud.


But the panel of six men and six women deciding Manafort’s fate in Alexandria, Virginia, deadlocked on 10 counts. U.S. District Court Judge T.S. Ellis III declared a mistrial on those charges.


The 10 deadlocked charges were three instances of failing to file a foreign bank account in 2011, 2013 and 2014, two counts of bank fraud, and five counts of conspiracy to commit bank fraud.


Michael Cohen chose a guilty plea deal rather than face a jury:

Cohen pled guilty to eight felonies. While the five counts of failure to pay taxes on over $4 million in income are the most consequential to him, most significant to the country are two counts of illegal “in kind” campaign contributions. …

… The media narrative suggests that these payments violate federal law because they were made to influence the outcome of the election. That is not quite accurate. It was not illegal to pay hush money to the two women — Karen McDougal and Stephanie Clifford (a.k.a. “Stormy Daniels”). It was illegal for Michael Cohen to make in-kind contributions (which is what these pay-offs were) in excess of the legal limit. (Bold text by blog Editor)


So what’s the deal with the press? Why the shark-fest of glee? Could it be because the Left is planting Fake News against Trump to stir-up hatred to enhance future impeachment sentiment and plant more Dems in Congress for such a proceeding?

JRH 8/22/18 (Hat Tip Elvis Knot in G+ Community The Resistance)
Please Support SlantRight 2.0
*************************
MUST SEE: Former Head of Federal Elections Says Cohen Payment IS NOT an In Kind Campaign Contribution (AUDIO)


By Jim Hoft
August 21, 2018


Conservative author and radio-TV host Mark Levin interviewed the former FEC Chairman on his show.

Professor Bradley Smith said the payment Cohen pled guilty to DO NOT qualify as campaign violations.

Last night Mark Levin interviewed a former FEC Chairman who explained why a hush money payment to Stormy Daniels cannot be considered an in kind contribution to the Trump campaign, thus violating campaign finance law.


“When the FEC wrote the regulation that says what constitutes campaign expenditures and what constitutes personal use, it rejected specifically the idea that a campaign expenditure was anything related to a campaign, and instead says it has to be something that exists only because of the campaign and solely for that reason.”

Here’s the audio:


[Posted by TheNewsCommenter
Published on Aug 21, 2018]

Professor Bradley Smith wrote about this in the Wall Street Journal in April.

Shortly before the 2016 election, one of President Trump’s lawyers, Michael Cohen, arranged a $130,000 payment to the porn star in return for silence about a 2006 affair she claimed to have had with Mr. Trump. (Both the president and Mr. Cohen have denied the affair; Mr. Trump has said he did not know of the payment to Ms. Daniels until this February.)

Not satisfied with an old-fashioned sex scandal—perhaps because the president seems impervious to that—some want to turn this into a violation of campaign-finance law. Trevor Potter, a former member of the Federal Election Commission told “60 Minutes” the payment was “a $130,000 in-kind contribution by Cohen to the Trump campaign, which is about $126,500 above what he’s allowed to give.” The FBI raided Mr. Cohen’s office, home and hotel room Monday. They reportedly seized records related to the payment and are investigating possible violations of campaign-finance laws.

But let’s remember a basic principle of such laws: Not everything that might benefit a candidate is a campaign expense.

Campaign-finance law aims to prevent corruption. For this reason, the FEC has a longstanding ban on “personal use” of campaign funds. Such use would give campaign contributions a material value beyond helping to elect the candidate—the essence of a bribe.

FEC regulations explain that the campaign cannot pay expenses that would exist “irrespective” of the campaign, even if it might help win election. At the same time, obligations that would not exist “but for” the campaign must be paid from campaign funds.

If paying hush money is a campaign expense, a candidate would be required to make that payment with campaign funds. How ironic, given that using campaign funds as hush money was one of the articles of impeachment in the Watergate scandal, which gave rise to modern campaign-finance law.
++++++++++++++++++
Fmr head of the FEC blows up media narrative that Trump broke the law, by referring to the actual law


August 22, 2018 

No sooner had Michael Cohen pleaded guilty than a Democrat lawmaker called for a new investigation to determine if President Donald Trump committed a crime.

Rep. Joaquin Castro accused Trump of being an “unindicted co-conspirator” and called on Congress to launch a probe into possible criminal action by the president.


“And now the question is what will the US Congress do about that,” Castro, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said. “I believe that the judiciary committee in both the House and the Senate should open an investigation tomorrow morning.”

But conservative author and radio-TV host Mark Levin provided a hard lesson in how the law actually works, noting how what the president is accused of doing is not even illegal.

“I want to help the law professors, the constitutional experts, the criminal defense lawyers, the former prosecutors and of course the professors and I want to help them understand what the law is,” Levin told Fox News’ Sean Hannity on Tuesday.


[Posted by Fox News
Published on Aug 21, 2018

'Life, Liberty & Levin' host Mark Levin says Lanny Davis had Michael Cohen plead guilty to two counts of criminality that don't exist on 'Hannity'.

FOX News Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most watched television news channel for more than 15 years and according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll, is the most trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox, FNC is available in more than 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.]

The general counsel for the Clinton mob family Lanny Davis, he had his client plead to two counts of criminality that don’t exist,” he added. “It is a plea bargain between a prosecutor and criminal. A criminal who doesn’t want to spend the rest of his life in prison. That is not precedent. That applies only to that specific case. Nobody cites plea bargains for precedent.”

“Just because a prosecutor says that somebody violated a campaign law doesn’t make it so. He is not the judge. He is not the jury. We didn’t adjudicate anything,” Levin argued, using an example to drive home his point.

“Say a candidate had said we owe vendors a whole lot of money. We have had disputes with them. But I want you to go ahead and pay them. I’m a candidate, I don’t want the negative publicity. So he says to the private lawyer, you pay them, I’ll reimburse you, get it done,” Levin explained. “Is that illegal? It’s perfectly legal. Yet according to the prosecution of the Southern District of New York, it’s paid at the direction of the candidate to influence the election. Yes, Mr. Prosecutor, how stupid is your point?”

The former head of the Federal Election Commission, appearing on Levin’s show, also clarified how Cohen’s alleged “hush” payment to porn star Stormy Daniels ahead of the 2016 election is not an in kind contribution to the Trump campaign or a violation of campaign finance law.

VIDEO of Audio: Levin Lays Out a Case That There is no Campaign Violation [SEE ABOVE in The Gateway Pundit post]

“When the FEC wrote the regulation that says what constitutes campaign expenditures and what constitutes personal use, it rejected specifically the idea that a campaign expenditure was anything related to a campaign, and instead says it has to be something that exists only because of the campaign and solely for that reason,” Professor Bradley Smith told Levin Tuesday.

The expenditures alleged by Cohen, Smith explained, are not violations of campaign finance law even though they “might incidentally benefit your campaign,”

“The argument seems to be, and it hasn’t changed,” Levin summed up, “is that, if I spend money to make myself look better, or to take away negative issues in my private life, my business life, my employment life and use my own money, then somehow that is a campaign contribution…which it is not.”
____________________
Leftist Shark-fest over Manafort-Cohen Guilt Verdicts-Pleas
John R. Houk
© August 22, 2018
___________________
MUST SEE: Former Head of Federal Elections Says Cohen Payment IS NOT an In Kind Campaign Contribution (AUDIO)

© 2018 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.
_________________
Fmr head of the FEC blows up media narrative that Trump broke the law, by referring to the actual law

Copyright © 2018. All Rights Reserved. BizPac Review


Saturday, July 21, 2018

Tony Podesta offered immunity to testify against Paul Manafort

Tony Podesta

In this article you will see Dem/Clinton/Obama justice in all its corrupt operation.

JRH 7/21/18
*********************
Tony Podesta offered immunity to testify against Paul Manafort

By  Amy Lieu
July 20, 2018

Exclusive: Two sources tell 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has offered lobbyist Tony Podesta immunity to testify against Paul Manafort. #Tucker


[Posted by Fox News
Published on Jul 19, 2018

Exclusive: Two sources tell 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' that Special Counsel Robert Mueller has offered lobbyist Tony Podesta immunity to testify against Paul Manafort. Fox News [#Tucker FOX] Channel (FNC) is a 24-hour all-encompassing news service dedicated to delivering breaking news as well as political and business news. The number one network in cable, FNC has been the most watched television news channel for more than 15 years and according to a Suffolk University/USA Today poll, is the most trusted television news source in the country. Owned by 21st Century Fox, FNC is available in more than 90 million homes and dominates the cable news landscape, routinely notching the top ten programs in the genre.]

Tony Podesta has been offered immunity by Special Counsel Robert Mueller to testify against Paul Manafort, Fox News' Tucker Carlson reported, citing two unnamed sources.

Podesta is the founder of the Podesta Group and brother of John Podesta, who was chairman of Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign.

The Podesta Group reportedly worked with Manafort -- a former chairman of Donald Trump's 2016 campaign -- to lobby on behalf of Ukrainian interests in the United States, without properly registering at the time under the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA), Carlson said.

Manafort and the group worked on a campaign called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine, the Washington Times reported.

"In other words, for a near identical crime, Bill and Hillary's friend could escape and emerge completely unscathed while Paul Manafort may rot in jail," Carlson said.

Podesta did not register as a foreign agent under FARA, Carlson said in a segment last October.


[Posted by Fox News
Published on Oct 31, 2017

Tony Podesta reportedly tells his staff he will fight the allegations; reaction from Rep. Doug Collins, vice chair of the House Republican Conference and a member of the Judiciary Committee.]

Mueller is also offering immunity to five potential witnesses in the upcoming trial of Manafort, the Washington Examiner reported.

Mueller's team is requesting "use immunity," which is a limited type of immunity, the publication reported, citing court documents filed Tuesday.

The five people have not been charged or identified publicly with the case, prosecutors for Mueller’s team said, according to the Examiner.

Tony Podesta resigned from his lobbying group in October in response to Mueller’s investigation of the firm, the report said.
The firm was reportedly closed by the end of last year.

The special counsel’s office did not immediately respond for comment.

Manafort is accused of multiple financial crimes in connection with lobbying work he performed in Ukraine. The first of his two upcoming trials, in Virginia, is scheduled to begin next week.

Fox News' Samuel Chamberlain contributed to this story.
_______________________
Amy Lieu is a news editor and reporter for Fox News.

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.



Sunday, May 6, 2018

Judge Ellis Excoriates Mueller & Team

It Should End Mueller Agenda, But Will It?

John R. Houk, Editor
© May 6, 2018

Judge Ellis, Manafort, Mueller & Rosenstein

On Friday I posted an exposé on Robert Mueller written by Rep. Louie Gohmert. That post makes remarkable sense after I read that Federal Judge T.S. Ellis III excoriated a Special Prosecutor team member in charge of the Paul Manafort prosecution. WHY?

Judge Ellis caught Mueller’s team using a,

… pre-existing FISA Title-1 warrant that was originally applied to U.S. person Carter Page and the Trump campaign.

Under normal criminal investigation any search warrant or surveillance warrant would normally proceed through U.S. courts, under Title-3, where the Mueller team would need to show probable cause for a warrant.  However, by using the Title-1 warrant from the FBI counterintelligence operation, as extended by AAG Rod Rosenstein, Robert Mueller was able to use far more intrusive and unchecked searches and seizures for his criminal probe.” (Federal Judge Catches Robert Mueller Using Preexisting FISA Title-1 Warrant Against Paul Manafort Instead of Title 3 Authority…; By sundance; The Last Refuge [aka ConservativeTreeHouse.com]; 5/4/18)

Good for Judge T.S. Ellis III!

Under any normal legal circumstances, I have little doubt the bank fraud case would be dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct. Which would mean the Special Prosecutor and his team must be discredited on ANY work they have down to find collusion between Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government to become POTUS.

To get the gist of Judge Ellis’ legal anger, I have four articles from Conservative sources (including the quote above) providing perspectives that are doubtful to be heard or read from the Leftist MSM.

JRH 5/6/18 (Hat Tip Ali Hoppe posting at G+ Community United We Stand One Nation Under God)
Please Support SlantRight 2.0
***********************************
Federal Judge Catches Robert Mueller Using Preexisting FISA Title-1 Warrant Against Paul Manafort Instead of Title 3 Authority…


May 4, 2018

Well, well, well…. they say timing is everything.

Today U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III appears to have caught on to an explosive issue CTH noted yesterday.  In building the case against Paul Manafort, special counsel Robert Mueller’s team used the pre-existing FISA Title-1 warrant that was originally applied to U.S. person Carter Page and the Trump campaign.

Under normal criminal investigation any search warrant or surveillance warrant would normally proceed through U.S. courts, under Title-3, where the Mueller team would need to show probable cause for a warrant.  However, by using the Title-1 warrant from the FBI counterintelligence operation, as extended by AAG Rod Rosenstein, Robert Mueller was able to use far more intrusive and unchecked searches and seizures for his criminal probe.

The media, and broad media-consumption public, are currently unaware the Mueller probe was simply a continuance of the 2016 FBI counterintelligence operation. Most people think the special counsel investigation is a separate issue. It’s not.

However, in addition to a scathing rebuke of the underlying prosecutorial premise, ie.  Mueller trying to keep the originating structure hidden, Judge Ellis demanded today that Mueller unredact the August 2, 2017, instructions from AAG Rosenstein.  That removal will expose the use of the FISA Title-1 warrant use that drove the investigative origin.

WASHINGTON – A federal judge on Friday harshly rebuked Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team during a hearing for ex-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort – suggesting they lied about the scope of the investigation, are seeking “unfettered power” and are more interested in bringing down the president.

“You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort,” U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III told Mueller’s team. “You really care about what information Mr. Manafort can give you to lead you to Mr. Trump and an impeachment, or whatever.”

Further, Ellis demanded to see the unredacted “scope memo,” a document outlining the scope of the special counsel’s Russia probe that congressional Republicans have also sought. […] The Reagan-appointed judge asked Mueller’s team where they got the authority to indict Manafort on alleged crimes dating as far back as 2005.

The special counsel argues that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein granted them broad authority in his May 2, 2017 letter appointing Mueller to this investigation. But after the revelation that the team is using information from the earlier DOJ probe, Ellis said that information did not “arise” out of the special counsel probe – and therefore may not be within the scope of that investigation.

“We don’t want anyone with unfettered power,” he said.

Mueller’s team says its authorities are laid out in documents including the August 2017 scope memo – and that some powers are actually secret because they involve ongoing investigations and national security matters that cannot be publicly disclosed.

Ellis seemed amused and not persuaded.

He summed up the argument of the Special Counsel’s Office as, “We said this was what [the] investigation was about, but we are not bound by it and we were lying.”

He referenced the common exclamation from NFL announcers, saying: “C’mon man!”  (read more)


The Mueller team saying: “some powers are actually secret” is a direct reference to their use of the FISA Title-1 warrant, which they took over from the FBI counterintelligence operation and applied to their criminal investigation.

With the third 90-day extension of the FISA warrant, issued by AAG Rod Rosenstein (July 18, 2017), Mueller’s team were obviously using the FISA warrant from May through October of last year.  [The FISA warrant expired 90 days from July 18.]

 
The Conservative Treehouse on Scribd


Michael Caputo discusses the scope of the Mueller Evidence – HERE

The timeline of Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller – Available HERE

+++++
Whoa: Judge Goes Off on Mueller Staff Prosecutor, Says He’s Only Prosecuting Manafort for Bank


May 4, 2018

This has been the presumption for some time, of course. Robert Mueller wasn’t appointed to prosecute bank fraud cases. He was appointed to find out if the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. So why is he prosecuting Paul Manafort on an unrelated bank fraud case?

The answer is obvious: He’s doing it for the same reason he had his team stage a 6 a.m. raid of Manafort’s home at a time when Manafort was already cooperating with him. He’s trying to harass and intimidate Manafort into flipping and giving Mueller something he can use to bring down Trump.

U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis, who drew the case, sees exactly what’s going on here, and today in court he stunned Mueller’s chosen man on the case by calling a spade a spade:

A federal judge expressed deep skepticism Friday in the bank fraud case brought by special counsel Robert Mueller’s office against former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, at one point saying he believes that Mueller’s motivation is to oust President Donald Trump from office.

Although Mueller’s authority has been tested in court before, Friday’s hearing was notable for District Judge T.S. Ellis’ decision to wade into the divisive political debate around the investigation.

“You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud,” Ellis said to prosecutor Michael Dreeben, at times losing his temper. Ellis said prosecutors were interested in Manafort because of his potential to provide material that would lead to Trump’s “prosecution or impeachment,” Ellis said.

“That’s what you’re really interested in,” said Ellis, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan.

Ellis repeated his suspicion several times in the hour-long court hearing. He said he’ll make a decision at a later date about whether Manafort’s case can go forward.

“We don’t want anyone in this country with unfettered power. It’s unlikely you’re going to persuade me the special prosecutor has power to do anything he or she wants,” Ellis told Dreeben. “The American people feel pretty strongly that no one has unfettered power.”

When Dreeben answered Ellis’ question about how the investigation and its charges date back to before the Trump campaign formed, the judge shot back, “None of that information has to do with information related to Russian government coordination and the campaign of Donald Trump.”

When Ellis talks about someone having unfettered power, he’s referring to Mueller. Mueller seems to think his original charge is irrelevant, and that he can go beyond it and use his prosecutorial power to bring pressure on anyone he wants, in any way he wants, regardless of the matter’s relevance to the Russia investigation, if the end result is that it will yield him something he can use to damage the president.

Judge Ellis is right to call BS on that.

If Mueller has evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, let’s see it. If he doesn’t, let’s wrap this up. He’s had enough time.

If Paul Manafort committed bank fraud that’s worthy of prosecution, let Mueller refer that to the Justice Department proper and then stick to the matter he was appointed to deal with. Everyone can see what’s going on here, but it’s really jarring to hear it from a federal judge, from the bench. And today that’s exactly what happened.

Dan Calabrese’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain.com

A new edition of Dan’s book “Powers and Principalities” is now available in hard copy and e-book editions. Follow all of Dan’s work, including his series of Christian spiritual warfare novels, by liking his page on Facebook.
++++++++
Federal Judge Drops Two-Word Bomb on Mueller’s Prosecutors


BY BENJAMIN ARIE
MAY 4, 2018 AT 4:12PM

For months, the special counsel led by Robert Mueller has been spinning its wheels. Initially set up to investigate alleged “collusion” between Russia and Donald Trump’s campaign team, the probe has so far been largely a dud … and now even a federal judge is fed up with it.

On Friday, Judge T.S. Ellis III had harsh words for prosecutors who are working to charge former Trump adviser Paul Manafort.

Manafort, who served as a campaign leader for a few months before leaving, is facing bank and tax fraud charges for activities that happened over a decade ago, but they appear to be unrelated to the administration.

The case looks increasingly like a “fishing expedition” being conducted by Mueller to dredge up anything that can be used against President Trump.

That’s certainly what Judge Ellis seems to think; he just accused prosecutors of trying to gather unrelated evidence against Trump team members in order to pressure them to “flip” on the president.

“You don’t really care about Mr. Manafort’s bank fraud,” Ellis told prosecutors on Friday, according to The Washington Post. “You really care about getting information Mr. Manafort can give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump and lead to his prosecution or impeachment.”

According to a report from The Daily Caller journalist Saagar Enjeti, Judge Ellis went even further and openly scoffed at the prosecution’s insistence that decade-old tax issues had anything to do with the special counsel’s mission.

“He summed up the Special Counsel’s Office as, ‘We said this was what (the) investigation was about but we are not bound by it and we were lying,'” Enjeti explained. At one point, the judge apparently stopped taking Mueller’s team seriously, responding “C’mon man!” to their unconvincing argument.

Manafort’s defense attorney Kevin Downing maintained that the financial charges — which occurred in the state of Virginia — are not connected to the Russia probe and that Mueller’s team is dramatically over-reaching.

“This doesn’t make any sense,” Downing said in court. “It’s so unrelated as to be in violation (of the Mueller mandate).”

Judge Ellis seemed to agree and even warned prosecutors about exceeding their purview. “The American people feel pretty strongly about no one having unfettered power,” he said.

To be clear, Manafort could, in fact, be guilty of the financial crimes he’s accused of in Virginia, although of course he is presumed innocent at this time. That will be for a court to decide, but the larger question right now is whether those accusations have anything to do with Donald Trump, Russia, and the 2016 election.

For months, conservatives have maintained that the Mueller investigation has dragged on too long and produced almost no solid results. The response from Judge Ellis shows that he likely agrees.

While Manafort certainly has his problems, the overwhelming indication after months of inquiries has been that it was the FBI and the DOJ, not the Trump team, which has some serious explaining to do.

As evidence continues to show that there was political bias and perhaps an active push to undermine Trump, it looks increasingly likely that Mueller has ulterior motives.

It may be time to reel him back in and end the special counsel circus once and for all.
+++++++++++++++++++
HUGE NEWS! As TGP Predicted — Judge in Manafort Case BLASTS MUELLER SPECIAL COUNSEL on lawless “Unfettered Power”


Post by Jim Hoft
Guest post by Joe Hoft
May 4, 2018


In April The Gateway Pundit reported that the US is now in a constitutional crisis due to the unconstitutional and corrupt Mueller investigation kept in place by corrupt FBI and DOJ Leadership.

Former Trump Campaign Manager Paul Manafort may soon be the one to shut it all down.

Mueller’s illegal Trump-Russia investigation continues to take corrupt and unconstitutional actions while criminal activities in Obama’s FBI, DOJ and State Department are ignored. If there is justice, America will soon have a real investigation looking into the Obama and Clinton criminal acts while in office.

Paul Manafort first made arguments in a suit with Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions as Head of the DOJ, related to illegalities in the way that Rosenstein set up the Mueller special counsel. Rosenstein’s special counsel order was not based on a crime and unconstitutionally stated that Mueller could basically look at anything he wanted to look at. These provisions are against the law and are now for the courts to settle.

In addition to the above suit, Robert Barnes wrote last week at Law and Crimes that Mueller’s actions not related to the 2016 campaign are outside the scope of Jeff Sessions recusal as AG and therefore unconstitutional –

Paul Manafort‘s legal team brought a motion to dismiss on Tuesday, noting that Rosenstein could not appoint Mueller to any investigation outside the scope of the 2016 campaign since Sessions did not recuse himself for anything outside the campaign. I agree with this take on Mueller’s authority. If we follow that argument that would mean Sessions himself has exclusive authority to appoint a special counsel for non-collusion charges, and Sessions has taken no such action. Sessions himself should make that clear to Mueller, rather than await court resolution. Doing so would remove three of the four areas of inquiry from Mueller’s requested interview with President Trump.

Sessions formally notifying Mueller that he does not have authority to act outside of campaign-related cases and cases related to obstruction of Mueller’s investigation would be doing what the Constitution compels: enforcing the Appointments Clause of the Constitution. Additionally, Sessions notifying Mueller that he does not have authority to act outside of campaign-related cases would be exercising Sessions’ court-recognized Constitutional obligation to “direct and supervise litigation” conducted by the Department of Justice Furthermore, Sessions notifying Mueller that he does not have authority to act outside of campaign-related cases protects against the inappropriate use of the federal grand jury that defendant Manafort now rightly complains about.

Sessions limiting Mueller to the 2016 campaign would also be restoring confidence in democratic institutions, and restore public faith that democratically elected officials.

One thing to remember about Sessions’ recusal: Sessions only recused himself from “any existing or future investigations of any matters related in any way to the campaigns for President of the United States.” This recusal letter limits the scope of Sessions’ recusal to the 2016 campaigns; it does not authorize Sessions’ recusal for anything beyond that. Constitutionally, Sessions has a “duty to direct and supervise litigation” conducted by the Department of Justice. Ethically, professionally, and legally, Sessions cannot ignore his supervisory obligations for cases that are not related to the “campaigns for President.”

In April Mueller and Rosenstein presented to the courts a rebuttal for Manafort’s latest action – they presented a previously undisclosed memo to a federal court in Washington supposedly addressing Manafort’s argument. The problem is it doesn’t.

The memo is dated August 2, 2017 and is from Rosenstein to Mueller supposedly directing Mueller to look into Manafort actions with a Russian operative perhaps before 2016. This however is clearly outside the scope of Sessions’ recusal as argued by Manafort and doesn’t even address Manafort’s argument that these actions are not for Mueller to take or Rosenstein to order but are Sessions actions alone as AG.

On Friday a federal judge agreed with Paul Manafort that the Mueller witch hunt was out of control and out of bounds.




The hearing is taking place before US District Judge Amy Berman Jackson in Alexandria, Virginia.
— Steve Herman (@W7VOA) May 4, 2018

++++++++++++++++++
Further reading from Gateway Pundit

______________________
Judge Ellis Excoriates Mueller & Team
It Should End Mueller Agenda, But Will It?

John R. Houk, Editor
© May 6, 2018
_____________________
Federal Judge Catches Robert Mueller Using Preexisting FISA Title-1 Warrant Against Paul Manafort Instead of Title 3 Authority…

_____________________
Whoa: Judge Goes Off on Mueller Staff Prosecutor, Says He’s Only Prosecuting Manafort for Bank

[CFP] Site Copyright 1997 – 2018

_________________________________
Federal Judge Drops Two-Word Bomb on Mueller’s Prosecutors

Copyright ©2017 Liftable Media Inc. All rights reserved.

______________________________
HUGE NEWS! As TGP Predicted — Judge in Manafort Case BLASTS MUELLER SPECIAL COUNSEL on lawless “Unfettered Power”

© 2018 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.



Thursday, February 1, 2018

Whining Dems & Mueller Investigation



I found some interesting thoughts from MLMcCarren relating Robert Mueller’s so-called Trump-Russia collusion investigation.

MLM goes through the known facts indicating not one indictment has been handed down pertaining Trump-Collusion. The indictments that have been handed down are about potential crimes by individuals BEFORE the November 2016 election and two indictments for gotcha-lying moments possibly attained by illegal FISA Warrants. The lies had nothing to do with Trump-Russia collusion (BECAUSE IT DIDN’T HAPPEN), but rather with a couple of guys covering their butts or mis-recollecting (an excuse Crooked Hillary is fond of) events as they took place.

Who knows? Maybe the FISA Memo will become public revealing tons more corruption by FBI and (Obama) DOJ leadership?

I am unsure how much of MLMcCarren’s G+ post is his (I guess it could be “hers”) or how much is quoted material; nevertheless the sentiment should alert every red-blooded American.

JRH 2/1/18
*******************
Whining Dems & Mueller Investigation



As per usual, the Progressives, in their desperation to find something relevant to disparage Trump over, are now making "Much Ado About Nothing" which stems from the following article ⤵⤵⤵⤵

Trump has “nothing to hide” regarding the Russia investigation
By Michael S. Schmidt and Maggie Haberman
Jan. 25, 2018

WASHINGTON — President Trump ordered the firing last June of Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel overseeing the Russia investigation, according to four people told of the matter, but ultimately backed down after the White House counsel threatened to resign rather than carry out the directive.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/01/25/us/politics/trump-mueller-special-counsel-russia.html?referer=https://
🔼🔼🔼

Of course the article stated
"They spoke on the condition of anonymity because they did not want to be identified discussing a continuing investigation."
...which may be a felony!?

What is at the epicenter of the Left attempting to make political hay over the allegations of Trump trying to dismiss Mueller, is the fact that Trump had at one time raised the issue about three conflicts of interest that may have disqualified Mueller from overseeing the investigation:


First, he claimed that a dispute years ago over fees at Trump National Golf Club in Sterling, Va., had prompted Mr. Mueller, the F.B.I. director at the time, to resign his membership.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trumps-lawyers-seek-to-undercut-muellers-russia-investigation/2017/07/20/232ebf2c-6d71-11e7-b9e2-2056e768a7e5_story.html?utm_term=.a2fb8f467c8a

The president also said Mr. Mueller could not be impartial because he had most recently worked for the law firm that previously represented the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/18/business/jared-kushner-trump-russia-election-investigation.html

Finally, the president said, Mr. Mueller had been interviewed to return as the F.B.I. director the day before he was appointed special counsel in May.


Maybe Donald Trump wanted to fire the special counsel, Robert Mueller for conflict, maybe he didn't, but does he not have a right to raise those questions?


The president dismissed the revelations on Friday, when asked about them by reporters as he arrived at the Congress Center in Davos, Switzerland, for meetings with world political and business leaders.

“Fake news, folks,” Mr. Trump said. “Fake news. A typical New York Times fake story.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/26/business/davos-world-economic-forum-trump.html

There have been news media reports revealed that several of Mr. Mueller’s prosecutors had donated to Democrats.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/us/politics/robert-mueller-special-counsel.html

But nonetheless, the quickest way to clear the cloud of suspicion is to cooperate with Mr. Mueller, not to fight him. And there is every indication that is exactly what president Trump has been doing. The White House has denied nearly a dozen times since June that Mr. Trump was considering firing Mr. Mueller.


Last month, as Republicans were increasing their attacks on the special counsel, Mr. Trump said in an interview with The Times that he believed Mr. Mueller was going to treat him fairly.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/us/politics/trump-interview-excerpts.html

White House Director of Legislative Affairs Marc Short
said on “Fox News Sunday.”
“I’m not aware of the president ever intimating he wanted to fire” special counsel Robert Mueller.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) noted on CNN’s “State of the Union” that Trump cannot directly fire Mueller. He would have to pressure deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein to do so.


She said that at a Senate hearing last year, she questioned Rosenstein “at length on this issue, and he was adamant that he would never give in to any White House pressure to remove” Mueller.


US taxpayers have spent millions and millions of dollars on investigations that have not proven any collusion thus far between Russia and Trump’s presidential campaign. Through it all the White House continues to cooperate in every manner providing any document the special counsel has asked for. They have continued to comply fully, which is a far cry from the Obama administration's conduct!!!

Admittedly Trump is agitated by the unwillingness of the House Intelligence Committee to release a four-page classified memo that reportedly suggests FBI officials may have used politically motivated sourcing to justify a request for a secret surveillance warrant in the Russia probe’s early stages.

I believe the president is more inclined for transparency in this investigation than being given credit for.

Interestingly enough, Tom Brokaw is a voice of reason in all of this:

🔽Tom Brokaw comments on the alleged reports that President Trump considered firing special counsel Robert Mueller last summer.


TOM BROKAW: "They thought that was the right thing to do. That their base would support them and that the president had a legal grounds for doing what he did. In this case, in the climate in which we now live, people move on in a hurry. He didn't fire him. He didn't get close to firing him because the White House was pushing back and he knew what the response would be on the Hill. So I think for the country... it's kind of a non-issue now that he was thinking about firing him six months ago but he did not. I think that they moved on. I honestly think in the next year there are going to be three big factors. One is the economy. If it continues to go roar along the way that it is a lot of people are going to put aside these other concerns that they have and say, "Enjoy the prosperity." The other one is what does Mueller find? Do we hear from them this year? And then just down from that, of course, is what happens with immigration. I think those are the three big factors that are in play out there for the country. And that's what they're paying attention to."
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/01/28/tom_brokaw_non-issue_that_trump_considered_firing_mueller_he_didnt_fire_him.html

💡LET'S LOOK AT SOME HISTORY AND FACTS TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT

The Department of Justice announced the appointment of Mueller to oversee the federal investigation into Russia’s alleged meddling in the 2016 election in May 2017.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/17/former-fbi-head-robert-mueller-named-to-oversee-russia-election-probe.html

The appointment came after a growing cry – mostly from Democrats – mounted for someone outside the Justice Department to handle the probe. Attorney General Jeff Sessions had already recused himself from the investigation.

💡Has anyone been charged?

In leading the probe, Mueller took over an ongoing investigation into Paul Manafort's financial dealings in Ukraine.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/11/24/how-paul-manafort-is-connected-to-trump-russia-investigation.html

💡Manafort, Trump’s former campaign chairman, and Richard Gates were indicted on Oct. 27, 2017 on 12 counts, including: conspiracy against the U.S., conspiracy to launder money, false statements and multiple counts of failure to file reports of foreign bank and financial accounts
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/11/02/rick-gates-charged-in-muellers-russia-probe-who-is.html

ALL OF WHICH HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP OR HIS CAMPAIGN!

💡Michael Flynn, the administration’s short-lived national security adviser, was charged in December for lying to the FBI about certain conversations he had with a Russian ambassador. He pleaded guilty.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12/01/michael-flynn-charged-in-russia-investigation-guilty-plea-expected.html

💡Additionally, George Papadopoulos pleaded guilty in 2017 to one count of making false statements to investigating FBI agents, according to court documents.
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.justice.gov_file_1007346_download&d=DwMFaQ&c=cnx1hdOQtepEQkpermZGwQ&r=lEhLS_GPhWUCcVMYQxBvj1BGHOaVYRSWTZAJW1jDYO0&m=nCDsYlToY0aV-1hbqo1X0D02k19au0_ncNvLaKlOwjU&s=478BwDpzJyTcHlWxQZIppNkyHBwNR_qRxMFquiO_-IA&e=

(read more here)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/24/mueller-probe-meet-lawyers-who-gave-to-hillary-now-investigating-team-trump.html


💡In August 2017, Mueller's investigation reportedly expanded to include several lobbying firms, including the Podesta Group.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_Counsel_investigation_(2017%E2%80%93present)

👉The Podesta Group was a lobbying and public affairs firm based in Washington, D.C. It was founded in 1988 by brothers John Podesta and Tony Podesta.

Podesta Group represents American corporations as well as nonprofits and governments, and has "close ties to the Democratic Party.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)

...and the Obama administration.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidency_of_Barack_Obama

John David Podesta Jr. (born January 8, 1949) is an American political consultant who served as White House Chief of Staff to President Bill Clinton from October 20, 1998 until January 20, 2001 and as Counselor to President Barack Obama from January 1, 2014 until February 13, 2015. Before that he served as the White House Staff Secretary and White House Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations for the Clinton Administration between January 20, 1993 until October 20, 1998.

John Podesta was chairman of the 2016 Hillary Clinton presidential campaign.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_presidential_campaign,_2016
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podesta_Group

So we see implications tying associates of Hillary Clinton into the investigation, just like we did with Uranium One

At long last, the Senate Judiciary Committee is probing this. The GOP Congress finally may hold a hearing on Uranium One. According to Judiciary Committee chairman Charles Grassley (R., Iowa), very serious questions remain about the basis for the finding that this transaction did not threaten to impair US national security.

Bribes, kickbacks, gag orders, blackmail, Russians, uranium. What more do the broadcast networks need before they find this mushrooming story worthy of some air time?

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.nationalreview.com/article/452941/russian-clinton-uranium-scandal-media-silence-damning


💡What is the controversy with Mueller’s staff?


The Trump administration heavily criticized Muellers investigation as several of his attorneys on staff donated to Democratic campaigns, including to Trump’s 2016 rival, Hillary Clinton.

Additionally, two FBI officials Peter Strzok and Lisa Page are under fire for the anti-Trump text messages they exchanged during the election. Strzok was part of Mueller’s team but was removed from the probe after the text messages were revealed.


💡What has Trump said about Mueller’s investigation?

Trump has oftentimes dismissed the allegations that he colluded with Russia during his presidential election. He said he is “looking forward” to being questioned eventually under oath by Mueller.

He’s said the allegations are a “fake story that is demeaning to all of us and most of all demeaning to our country and demeaning to our Constitution.”

This has turned into a last ditch effort by the Left to undermine the will of the American people who voted to put Trump in charge of our country!

The fact that the alleged desire of President Trump to dismiss Mueller occurred six months ago.

Surely if there were any evidence pointing to misconduct on the part of president Trump, there is every reason to expect it would have been uncovered by now.

It's time to end this circus sideshow, & for the Democrats to put on their big boy pants, stop their incessant whining, and accept the fact that Trump is president and likely will be through 2024!!!

MLMcCarren
______________
Edited by John R. Houk. II used a bit of the old spellcheck tool.