Manafort Suing DOJ

[Issa]

You can laugh if you want but if brings up good points.
Do you or do you not want the govt held accountable?

Nope we dont since we already have a dictator who has been throwing the pillars of democracy under the bus (media, justice, freedom of speech)

 

[buckeye45_73]

You can't sue a prosecutor for doing their job...

"Prosecutor Immunity
One of the biggest challenges in malicious prosecution cases based on the filing of criminal charges is prosecutor immunity. State and federal laws give prosecutors and other law enforcement employees immunity from liability for malicious prosecution. This immunity is meant to protect prosecutors and law enforcement so they can do their job without constantly having to defend against accusations of malicious prosecution. The concern is that every person who claims innocence might try to sue the prosecutor for wrongful prosecution.

There are, however, limits to this immunity. If the person bringing a malicious prosecution suit can show that the prosecutor acted outside his authority in the process of instigating or pursuing a criminal case, the immunity will not extend to those actions in most jurisdictions. If the businessman can prove, for example, that the prosecutor paid a witness to testify to certain things or created false documents, the prosecutor probably would not have immunity, because those actions would be outside the scope of the prosecutor’s job."

Suing for Damages: Malicious Prosecution in a Criminal Case

True, but Mueller isn't a DA and we still have no idea what he is investigating...if it's Russia.....it's over.......just come out and say nothing happened.

 

[Ricky LIbtardo]

DOJ didn't have the authority to appoint Mueller.

There was no crime.

You can't go fishing for a crime. Just political witch hunt which will backfire when we find out once and for all the FBI paid Fusion for the dossier.

I would suggest a good doctor. They can cure anything these days even insanity. The fact is that the Justice Department was investigating Manafort even before Mueller was appointed.

Was that supposed to be some sort of wisecrack, snowflake?

Here's the facts, petunia. This suit will allow Manafort to push the discovery process deep in to the Justice department. The Grand Jury and the prosecutors, not just Mueller. Manafort just made the legal move Mueller didn't think about and he will now be on defense.

It coincides with Congress' investigation and every stinking one of the losers are going to be exposed. Including the FBI's paying for the dossier. Today was the date for the Justice dept. to turn over the information that was requested. If it doesn't show up they will be in contempt of Congress.

Lock her up.

 

[Lewdog]

You can't sue a prosecutor for doing their job...

"Prosecutor Immunity
One of the biggest challenges in malicious prosecution cases based on the filing of criminal charges is prosecutor immunity. State and federal laws give prosecutors and other law enforcement employees immunity from liability for malicious prosecution. This immunity is meant to protect prosecutors and law enforcement so they can do their job without constantly having to defend against accusations of malicious prosecution. The concern is that every person who claims innocence might try to sue the prosecutor for wrongful prosecution.

There are, however, limits to this immunity. If the person bringing a malicious prosecution suit can show that the prosecutor acted outside his authority in the process of instigating or pursuing a criminal case, the immunity will not extend to those actions in most jurisdictions. If the businessman can prove, for example, that the prosecutor paid a witness to testify to certain things or created false documents, the prosecutor probably would not have immunity, because those actions would be outside the scope of the prosecutor’s job."

Suing for Damages: Malicious Prosecution in a Criminal Case

True, but Mueller isn't a DA and we still have no idea what he is investigating...if it's Russia.....it's over.......just come out and say nothing happened.

He doesn't have to be a DA. He is a Special PROSECUTOR.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Manafort's arguments are asinine. This will be thrown out on its face.

https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4343227/1-3-18-Manafort-v-DOJ-Complaint.pdf

Essentially, he's arguing that "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation" is not "a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated" - except that he's missing the point of the restriction.

It doesn't exist to restrain the Attorney General (in this case, "acting"), it restrains the IC from acting out of the bounds of the will of the AG.

The AG can instruct the IC to investigate any topic, no matter how broad - the IC is restrained only by the AG's order. In this case, the AG (acting) ordered him to investigate any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.

This will be thrown out.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

The complaint argues from the position that the old special prosecutor law was bad, and therefore this is bad, too - except all the issues with the old special prosecutor law was that they gave Congress the power to appoint a special prosecutor, which arguably created a separation of powers issue.

That argument doesn't apply here, because Congress didn't appoint Mueller - the DoJ did. There's no separation of powers issue.

 

[bendog]

Well I thing Manafort is trying to argue that Mueller is going way back before the election to find charges, and his appointment was to investigate Russian interference in the election. However, we all know that Mueller is throwing the kitchen sink at Manafort because Manafort refused to assist in telling all he knows of Russian interference. And Mueller isn't bringing the charges. The DOJ brings them. So, rotsaruck

 

[Correll]

If the Whitewater investigations hadn't ended in impeachment over a consensual bj then I'd say Manafort might have a point!

Manafort's argument here? "I've spent my career working for Russia's benefit, but that has NOTHING to do with Russia sabotaging our election process in favor of the campaign I was running !"

Wow. You're very confused.

 

[Siete]

Federal Rule 4(i) says that when you sue the U.S. government, or its agencies, officers, or employees in their official capacities, you will need to serve summonses on three separate parties. They are: 1. The United States Attorney General Office of the Attorney General Department of Justice 10th & Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 2. The head of the agency you are suing-- If you are suing a local government agency, you need to serve that office’s headquarters, usually in Washington, D.C. For example, if you were injured at a local Post Office, you would actually serve the Postmaster General in Washington, not the local Post Office.

so where in the **** are Manaforts summonses ??


aint nobody suing the doj --

another RW idiot posts a lie and other RW idiots believe the horseshit.

THE END.

 

[g5000]

DOJ didn't have the authority to appoint Mueller.

There was no crime.

You can't go fishing for a crime. Just political witch hunt which will backfire when we find out once and for all the FBI paid Fusion for the dossier.

Poor Manafort. He's just a swamp gator/Putin whore who only tried to launder his ill-gotten millions illegally.

LEAVE PAULIE ALONE!!!

 

[miketx]

If the Whitewater investigations hadn't ended in impeachment over a consensual bj then I'd say Manafort might have a point!

Manafort's argument here? "I've spent my career working for Russia's benefit, but that has NOTHING to do with Russia sabotaging our election process in favor of the campaign I was running !"

You mean when Clinton brought world wide embarrassment to the highest office in the land?

 

[Siete]

If the Whitewater investigations hadn't ended in impeachment over a consensual bj then I'd say Manafort might have a point!

Manafort's argument here? "I've spent my career working for Russia's benefit, but that has NOTHING to do with Russia sabotaging our election process in favor of the campaign I was running !"

You mean when Clinton brought world wide embarrassment to the highest office in the land?

BY NOT GETTING ELECTED ?????????


idiot

 

[miketx]

If the Whitewater investigations hadn't ended in impeachment over a consensual bj then I'd say Manafort might have a point!

Manafort's argument here? "I've spent my career working for Russia's benefit, but that has NOTHING to do with Russia sabotaging our election process in favor of the campaign I was running !"

You mean when Clinton brought world wide embarrassment to the highest office in the land?

BY NOT GETTING ELECTED ?????????


idiot

No, if I recall Clinton was president of the United States and brought world wide embarrassment to the office by what he did. Since regressive liberals have no morals, I don't expect you to understand.

 

[Old Rocks]

What if Trump uses Manafort's allegation as cause to order the firing of not Mueller, but Rosenstein? Or both of them?

Mueller: YOU'RE FIRED!

Trump, you are convicted and impeached. Prosecutors are bringing treason charges.

 

[miketx]

What if Trump uses Manafort's allegation as cause to order the firing of not Mueller, but Rosenstein? Or both of them?

Mueller: YOU'RE FIRED!

Trump, you are convicted and impeached. Prosecutors are bringing treason charges.

Fantasy. Maybe Clinton will end up like that.

 

[buckeye45_73]

You can't sue a prosecutor for doing their job...

"Prosecutor Immunity
One of the biggest challenges in malicious prosecution cases based on the filing of criminal charges is prosecutor immunity. State and federal laws give prosecutors and other law enforcement employees immunity from liability for malicious prosecution. This immunity is meant to protect prosecutors and law enforcement so they can do their job without constantly having to defend against accusations of malicious prosecution. The concern is that every person who claims innocence might try to sue the prosecutor for wrongful prosecution.

There are, however, limits to this immunity. If the person bringing a malicious prosecution suit can show that the prosecutor acted outside his authority in the process of instigating or pursuing a criminal case, the immunity will not extend to those actions in most jurisdictions. If the businessman can prove, for example, that the prosecutor paid a witness to testify to certain things or created false documents, the prosecutor probably would not have immunity, because those actions would be outside the scope of the prosecutor’s job."

Suing for Damages: Malicious Prosecution in a Criminal Case

True, but Mueller isn't a DA and we still have no idea what he is investigating...if it's Russia.....it's over.......just come out and say nothing happened.

He doesn't have to be a DA. He is a Special PROSECUTOR.

no shit, Either you're dumb or you made this post to change the subject

my point was he is a special prosecutor, so it's not the same thing man.......
DAs are elected, Mueller is not
DAs deal with crimes, Mueller is dealing with politics
DAs cant just investigate what they want, they have to have proof, Mueller does not have to have any proof to investigate

DA and special prosecutors are not the same thing..........

 

[Lewdog]

You can't sue a prosecutor for doing their job...

"Prosecutor Immunity
One of the biggest challenges in malicious prosecution cases based on the filing of criminal charges is prosecutor immunity. State and federal laws give prosecutors and other law enforcement employees immunity from liability for malicious prosecution. This immunity is meant to protect prosecutors and law enforcement so they can do their job without constantly having to defend against accusations of malicious prosecution. The concern is that every person who claims innocence might try to sue the prosecutor for wrongful prosecution.

There are, however, limits to this immunity. If the person bringing a malicious prosecution suit can show that the prosecutor acted outside his authority in the process of instigating or pursuing a criminal case, the immunity will not extend to those actions in most jurisdictions. If the businessman can prove, for example, that the prosecutor paid a witness to testify to certain things or created false documents, the prosecutor probably would not have immunity, because those actions would be outside the scope of the prosecutor’s job."

Suing for Damages: Malicious Prosecution in a Criminal Case

True, but Mueller isn't a DA and we still have no idea what he is investigating...if it's Russia.....it's over.......just come out and say nothing happened.

He doesn't have to be a DA. He is a Special PROSECUTOR.

no shit, Either you're dumb or you made this post to change the subject

my point was he is a special prosecutor, so it's not the same thing man.......
DAs are elected, Mueller is not
DAs deal with crimes, Mueller is dealing with politics
DAs cant just investigate what they want, they have to have proof, Mueller does not have to have any proof to investigate

DA and special prosecutors are not the same thing..........

That clause doesn't just stick with DAs. Please show some kind of links to support your position. Please forgive me for not believing you.

 

[Reasonable]

DOJ didn't have the authority to appoint Mueller.

There was no crime.

You can't go fishing for a crime. Just political witch hunt which will backfire when we find out once and for all the FBI paid Fusion for the dossier.

You go with that conspiracy theory...and Bob Mueller will continue accumulate volumes of evidence on Trump's crimes.

 

[Reasonable]

I love it when deplorables say Trump's campaign manager, Manafort had nothing to do with him.
Always cracks me up.

 

[Ted Frazier]

DOJ didn't have the authority to appoint Mueller.

There was no crime.

You can't go fishing for a crime. Just political witch hunt which will backfire when we find out once and for all the FBI paid Fusion for the dossier.

Ricky weeps House chaplain’s mysterious firing triggers uproar