HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » Trump ex-Campaign Chair M...

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:21 PM

Trump ex-Campaign Chair Manafort sues Mueller, Rosenstein, and Department of Justice

Source: CNBC

Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort has sued special counsel Robert Mueller, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, and the U.S. Department of Justice.

The suit alleges that Mueller has strayed beyond the scope of the investigation he was authorized to pursue, and argues that the charges filed against Manafort have nothing to do with the 2016 presidential election that spurred Mueller's appointment.

"The actions of DOJ and Mr. Rosenstein in issuing the Appointment Order, and Mr. Mueller's actions pursuant to the authority the Order granted him, were arbitrary, capricious, and not in accordance with the law," the suit reads.

The appointment order authorizing Mueller as special counsel permits him to investigate any matters that "may arise directly from the investigation."

Read more: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/03/trump-ex-campaign-chair-manafort-sues-mueller-rosenstein-and-department-of-justice.html

35 replies, 2555 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 35 replies Author Time Post
Reply Trump ex-Campaign Chair Manafort sues Mueller, Rosenstein, and Department of Justice (Original post)
EarthFirst Jan 3 OP
Happyhippychick Jan 3 #1
TexasBushwhacker Jan 3 #25
mpcamb Jan 3 #30
Lil Missy Jan 3 #2
Bernardo de La Paz Jan 3 #21
PatSeg Jan 3 #22
unblock Jan 3 #3
groundloop Jan 3 #4
Roland99 Jan 3 #5
Eliot Rosewater Jan 3 #26
onenote Jan 3 #7
notdarkyet Jan 3 #16
unblock Jan 3 #20
jpak Jan 3 #6
woodsprite Jan 3 #8
EarthFirst Jan 3 #15
onenote Jan 3 #19
Bernardo de La Paz Jan 3 #23
MGKrebs Jan 3 #9
onenote Jan 3 #10
iluvtennis Jan 3 #11
0rganism Jan 3 #12
BlueIdaho Jan 3 #13
SunSeeker Jan 3 #14
onenote Jan 3 #32
SunSeeker Jan 4 #35
Lil Missy Jan 4 #34
paleotn Jan 3 #17
BigmanPigman Jan 3 #18
bluestarone Jan 3 #24
enid602 Jan 3 #27
onecaliberal Jan 3 #28
Thekaspervote Jan 3 #29
riversedge Jan 3 #31
PoliticAverse Jan 4 #33

Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:22 PM

1. I hope he bankrupts himself with the legal fees

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Happyhippychick (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 06:58 PM

25. I was going to say that his lawyers better demand payment up front

Paul will have nothing once Mueller is done with him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Happyhippychick (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 07:54 PM

30. "bankrupts himself with the legal fees" He had to hock a couple houses, didn't he?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:25 PM

2. Don't know why his accusations are relevant.

Why would it matter HOW he got caught?

Rhetorical question - I'll stay tuned ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lil Missy (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 06:20 PM

21. They aren't relevant. But it does matter how a person is caught. Look up Oliver North.


He skated though he was clearly guilty. Because it mattered how he was caught.

But Manafort's main premise that Mueller exceeded his mandate is not a valid legal theory. Mueller's mandate is to follow the facts wherever they go.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lil Missy (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 06:22 PM

22. Yeah

A crime is still a crime, even if it isn't what the prosecutor was looking for. If you investigate someone for larceny and in the process uncover a murder, is the murder then invalid?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:26 PM

3. remind me under what authorization did republicans investigate that whole monica thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:30 PM

4. Oh, but that was different..... acts between consenting adults are everybody's business

Treason, not so much.

Oh my God, these damned repuke traitors are getting desperate aren't they?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:32 PM

5. Or Benghazi or fail to properly investigate 9/11...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Roland99 (Reply #5)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 07:02 PM

26. GOP would investigate President Hillary Clinton for

serving caviar at a WH function, as in treason for serving caviar, a Russian delicacy.

But their guy goes into business with the KGB, nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:40 PM

7. Different authorizing statute

Starr was operating under the auspices of the Independent Counsel Act, which authorized the appointment of an "independent prosecutor" by a panel of the DC Circuit who, upon request could (and did) expand or alter the scope of the independent prosecutor's investigation. The Independent Counsel Act expired in 1999 and was replaced by the Special Counsel Act which operates within the DOJ and is not supervised by the Court of Appeals. I haven't looked at the Special Counsel Act closely enough to see how it defines the scope of a special counsel's investigatory power, but from what the article says, it appears that Mueller was granted broad authority and the claim is that Rosenstein didn't have the power under the law to give Mueller such broad authority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to unblock (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 04:36 PM

16. Starr went everywhere trying to make a case. Went on for over a year. I think it all

Started with whitewater. (I think) Starr jailed Susan?forget last name for over a year for refusing to testify. He’s a real pos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to notdarkyet (Reply #16)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 05:48 PM

20. five years, believe it or not.

he investigated ever stupid, crazy wacky idea the right wing could come up with.
couldn't find a thing.
finally he talked paula jones' lawyers into suing clinton in civil court so they could try to get him on perjury.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:39 PM

6. Lock Him Up!

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:45 PM

8. Maybe he's using this to hamstring Mueller's investigation

Could he stop Mueller from announcing any more info re: the Russia/money laundering investigation because they were doing their own investigation of the special counsel?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woodsprite (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 04:23 PM

15. This was my thought as well...

Someone with much more legal savvy would have to explain this to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Reply #15)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 05:42 PM

19. See posts 7 and 10

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to woodsprite (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 06:22 PM

23. Yes. Trump Gang main weapon is endless litigation. . . . . nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:45 PM

9. So Mueller is just supposed to ignore any crimes he might uncover?

At worst he could just refer it to an appropriate jurisdiction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MGKrebs (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 03:59 PM

10. That, in essence, is the crux of Manafort's lawsuit

It's that there is a process by which the Special Counsel can go to the Attorney General (or in this case Rosenstein) and, after consultation, the Atty Gen'l can expand the scope of the Special Counsel's investigation beyond that specified in the original authorizing order. The claim is that the original authorizing order circumvented this process by giving Mueller authority to investigate matters beyond those specifically described in the authorizing order without having to go to the AG with a showing of need for such expanded authority.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 04:07 PM

11. Never heard of such a thing...unbelievable. So this means Harvey Weinstein can file suit against

District Attorney once they file charges against him? Maybe Bill Cosby can sue now as charges already filed against him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 04:12 PM

12. ordinarily, discovery would be a deterrent to this kind of legal abuse

but in this case, i'd bet everything worth discovering has already been ... discovered. so go for it mr. Manafort, good luck not saying something you regret while under oath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 04:15 PM

13. Good luck asshole...

I hope you end up dead broke and in jail. It could not happen to a meaner son of a bitch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 04:17 PM

14. How is this not a SLAPP suit? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 11:32 PM

32. There is no federal anti-SLAPP lawsuit law.

And this suit against the government wouldn't be a SLAPP suit in any event.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onenote (Reply #32)

Thu Jan 4, 2018, 12:02 PM

35. Sure it would be. It names specific individuals (Brownstein & Mueller).

And as far as whether anti-SLAPP laws apply in federal court there is a circuit split on the issue. The Ninth and First Circuits have both accorded federal-court defendants the full procedural advantages of anti-SLAPP laws. See, e.g., Batzel v. Smith, 133 F.3d 1018, 1024-26 (9th Cir. 2003); Godin v. Schencks, 629 F.3d 79, 88 (1st Cir. 2010). The DC Circuit, on the other hand, has concluded that anti-SLAPP motions don’t belong in federal courts because they directly conflict with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Abbas v. Foreign Policy Grp., LLC, 783 F.3d 1328, 1333-37 (DC Cir. 2015).

Alas, I just realized this case is in the DC Circuit, so you are right in this instance.

But there's always Rule 11!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SunSeeker (Reply #14)

Thu Jan 4, 2018, 08:33 AM

34. They'd be SLAPPIN' the wrong party!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 05:02 PM

17. Well...good luck with that.

Grasping at straws me thinks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 05:15 PM

18. This BASTARD has broken probation rules

by contacting a Russian to write an article together while he is under indictment and now he pulls this shit?!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 06:35 PM

24. my thoughts are as days go by Manaforts

Russian people are feeding him ways to fight his charges. This is why Mueller needs to act fastest possible way here

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 07:19 PM

27. AG

It seems like the person he should sue is Schneiderman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 07:22 PM

28. Jail that piece of shit now

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 07:54 PM

29. And speaking of Schneiderman

If manafort somehow manages to skate, which the NYT piece quoting several federal prosecutors said the suit is baseless, Schneiderman will immediately pick up and go with RICO charges against him. He's a fool. He thinks the advise he's getting from the Russians will help him?? Really?? They will dump him so fast!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EarthFirst (Original post)

Wed Jan 3, 2018, 09:43 PM

31. According to this, it could get interesting if the suit goes forward........





...............“If the ultimate objective is to continue to try to undermine the credibility of Mueller and his prosecutors, it could have some value,” said Jimmy Gurulé, a Notre Dame law professor who was a senior Justice Department official in the administration of the first President George Bush. “But in terms of a legal strategy, it’s highly unlikely to prevail.”

Worse for the White House, the lawsuit also invites Mr. Mueller to give a “devastating response” that spells out all the ways Mr. Manafort is relevant to Mr. Trump and the Russia investigation, said Peter Zeidenberg, a former prosecutor who worked on a special counsel investigation during the George W. Bush administration. “If I’m the government, I’m licking my chops to file this response. He’s going to tie a bow on this,” he said of Mr. Mueller.

Even if Mr. Manafort succeeds at every turn, his problems are not over. He could still face charges if new prosecutors decided to bring them. But any court ruling that narrowed Mr. Mueller’s authority would give him less leeway to use unrelated charges as leverage against people close to the president.

Mr. Mueller won the cooperation of Mr. Trump’s former national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, for instance, after investigating him for unregistered foreign lobbying and lying to the F.B.I. on matters unrelated to the election.

The lawsuit provides fodder for Republicans who are trying to discredit Mr. Mueller’s investigation. As evidence that Mr. Mueller is biased, critics have pointed to Democratic donations by members of his team and anti-Trump text messages sent by an F.B.I. agent whom Mr. Mueller removed from the investigation.....................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Reply #31)

Thu Jan 4, 2018, 03:20 AM

33. Indeed it is more a delaying/diversionary tactic rather than one with any likelihood to prevail. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread