Robert Mueller’s Brilliant Strategy for Outmaneuvering Trump Pardons

Somad said:
Right. Because your legal expertise dwarfs Mueller's.... :palm:
Click to expand...

If I'd said my "legal expertise dwarfs Mueller's", you'd have a point.

Since I didn't, you don't.

BTW, is Robert Mueller the author of the piece you cited in your OP?

It appears that Jed Handelsman Shugerman is speculating about something Mueller may or may not be thinking.
 
Legion said:
I wasn't aware that the charges against Manafort were related to Trump, lol. :dunno:
Click to expand...

Money_Laundering_Flow_Chart.jpg
 
Yaya said:
What do you think the new york thing is about? This isn't even about collusion or obstruction.

He is well beyond his mandate.
Click to expand...

No he isn't. He has broad discretion to investigate any crimes that he might find out about during the course of said investigation.

The NY State thing is about maintaining the ability to apply pressure to lower level witnesses and co-criminals to tell what they know without Trump being able to trump the law to protect himself.

Nothing unusual, illegal or unconstitutional about it.
 
Nomad said:
No he isn't. He has broad discretion to investigate any crimes that he might find out about during the course of said investigation.

The NY State thing is about maintaining the ability to apply pressure to lower level witnesses and co-criminals to tell what they know without Trump being able to trump the law to protect himself.

Nothing unusual, illegal or unconstitutional about it.
Click to expand...

Cite the mandate that says what you claim.

So, again, changing NY law solely to stop Trump etc is in fact a bill of attainder.

You don't know what words mean and yet you claim its bullshit.

Nothing Mueller has indicted or indicated so far relates to any Trump Collusion, you know, the reason for the investigation and all you liberals claimed he colluded and promised us he would be convicted.

How did that work out for you?
 
Yaya said:
Cite the mandate that says what you claim.

So, again, changing NY law solely to stop Trump etc is in fact a bill of attainder.

You don't know what words mean and yet you claim its bullshit.

Nothing Mueller has indicted or indicated so far relates to any Trump Collusion, you know, the reason for the investigation and all you liberals claimed he colluded and promised us he would be convicted.

How did that work out for you?
Click to expand...

You just ripped GoMad a new asshole.
 
Yaya said:
Cite the mandate that says what you claim.

So, again, changing NY law solely to stop Trump etc is in fact a bill of attainder.

You don't know what words mean and yet you claim its bullshit.

Nothing Mueller has indicted or indicated so far relates to any Trump Collusion, you know, the reason for the investigation and all you liberals claimed he colluded and promised us he would be convicted.

How did that work out for you?
Click to expand...

Do your own research, lazy bitch.

You want me to cite mandates yet you have yet to explain exactly how changing the wording of a law amounts to a bill of attainder which is defined as:

A special legislative enactment that imposes a death sentence without a judicial trial upon a particular person or class of persons suspected of committing serious offenses, such as Treason or a felony.

A bill of attainder is prohibited by Article I, Section 9, Clause 3 of the Constitution because it deprives the person or persons singled out for punishment of the safeguards of a trial by jury.

bill of attainder:
n. a legislative act which declares a named person guilty of a crime, particularly treason. Such bills are prohibited by Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution.

bill of attainder formerly, a legislative act finding a person guilty without trial of treason or felony and declaring him attainted. See ATTAINDER.
Click to expand...

The common thread appears to be finding a person guilty of something without benefit of a trial.

Explain how rewording a state law to prevent a Presidential pardon from disallowing a state to pursue charges for the same crime the federal pardon was for, is the same thing as declaring a defendant guilty without a trial.
 
Somad said:
No he isn't. He has broad discretion to investigate any crimes that he might find out about during the course of said investigation. The NY State thing is about maintaining the ability to apply pressure to lower level witnesses and co-criminals to tell what they know without Trump being able to trump the law to protect himself. Nothing unusual, illegal or unconstitutional about it.
Click to expand...

What about the fact that Mueller hasn't said anything about this purported "brilliant strategy" that you're peddling, as far as I can see?

What about Statutes of Limitation?

What about attorney-client privilege re: Cohen? What about joint privilege?

What about Rule 501?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top