Poll: Manafort Trial in Virginia After Judge Receives Un-redacted Memo

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Plutonius, May 17, 2018.

?

How will Judge Ellis rule after receiving the investigation mandate from Mueller

  1. The case against Manafort can continue.

    5 vote(s)
    50.0%
  2. The case will be transferred away from Manafort to Federal Prosecuters

    1 vote(s)
    10.0%
  3. This particular case against Manafort is thrown out.

    4 vote(s)
    40.0%
  4. Other.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Plutonius, May 17, 2018
    Last edited: May 17, 2018

    Plutonius macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    #1
    In the Virginia trial of Manafort for 2005, 2007 accusations of bank fraud and money laundering, the Judge had requested the un-redacted memo specifying Mueller's power to prosecute Manafort.

    Now that the Judge has received the memo, what is your prediction on how he will rule ?

    My prediction is that he will move the trial elsewhere to Federal prosecutors (if not that, he will let it stand).

    Recently, an Obama appointed judge ruled that Mueller has the authority to prosecute Manafort in the District of Columbia.

    Judge Ellis is a Reagan appointed judge and seemed more skeptical towards Mueller.
     
  2. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #2
    I interpreted the original skepticism as "You better show good faith because I'm not putting my ass and career on the line for you based on your word."

    Whether Trump is guilty or not, he'd better leave Manafort out to dry, so to speak. It's in his best interest, and possibly Manaforts's family.
     
  3. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #3
    Addendum: It appears Manafort's former son-in-law flipped to Federal authorities for a plea deal.
     
  4. Plutonius thread starter macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    #4
    I don't believe that anyone is claiming Manafort's innocence but Manafort himself :).

    I took the Judge's issue as Mueller was using old information that the DOJ had on Manafort (not acquired during the Mueller investigation) to try and get Manafort to flip (the DOJ declined to press charges against Manafort at that time). While that is not illegal unless the statute of limitations had expired, the judge was asking for proof that the investigation had the power to prosecute using information that was already known and not acquired from their investigation. The Judge asked why the Mueller team didn't refer the case to Federal prosecutors as they did with Trump's lawyer ?

    From a standpoint of special prosecutor's power, this decision will set an interesting precedent for future special prosecutors.
     
  5. Zenithal macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #5
    No where did I insinuate that's what you meant.

    It wouldn't matter in that case if a sitting president couldn't be indicted as RG gleefully claims. The only plausible ability to do so dates back to a memo statement by Ken Starr. Why go all that trouble to "get at" POTUS when he can't be indicted until he either steps down or is voted out?
     
  6. Plutonius thread starter macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    #6
    Apologies :).

    I wonder if most people are thinking of the possible outcome of the investigation ?

    I also doubt that a sitting president would be indicted but I also doubt the President will be removed by the Senate even if impeached.

    I think in the end the only effect it might have is on the 2018 midterms.
     
  7. ronntaylor macrumors regular

    ronntaylor

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Location:
    Flushing/Queens, New York
    #7
    I think at this point it won't have too much effect on this year's midterms. Depending on what happens with those, it may effect the 2020 race and the jostling just before it amongst contenders.

    It should be extremely difficult for a president to be impeached. Only the most egregious behavior that is proven should even warrant consideration. For Manafort, Flynn and those already pleading guilty, I think Mueller's already fulfilled his obligations and should be allowed to continue where the evidence leads him.
     
  8. Plutonius thread starter macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    #8
    I agree but I also think that any special prosecutor should have oversight and a well defined limit of prosecutorial power (i.e. any investigation by a special prosecutor should not be open ended).
     
  9. Plutonius thread starter macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire, USA
    #9
    and it gets more convoluted :).

    This article from Politico shows that four of Mueller's lawyers were declared as SAUSAs (Special Assistant United States Attorneys). SAUSAs are allowed to prosecute any of Mueller's prosecutions without needing any mandates (i.e they can prosecute any case for any reason even if the case is not covered / approved under the special prosecutor's powers - (unlimited power)).
     

Share This Page