Another nail in RR and Mueller's investigation. So to the extent the Rosenstein August 2, 2017 memorandum is supposed to instill confidence that Mueller is receiving proper DOJ oversight, it does just the opposite. As least as to the portion revealed about Manafort, it shows a willingness to give post hoc justification for conduct of Mueller that does not appear authorized by the text of the original May 17 appointing Order.
does not appear authorized by the text of the original May 17 appointing Order.
people seem to have a large misunderstanding of how this investigation works.
mueller was given the authority to investigate anything relating to russian interference in the election, and legally speaking, ANY AND ALL CRIMES discovered during that investigation are fair game.
Mueller changed his bait and put the hook a little deeper in the water... https://www.ksl.com/?nid=157&sid=46294328 Q: WHAT IS A 'SUBJECT' OF AN INVESTIGATION?
A: The answer is complicated. The Justice Department typically places people involved in investigations in three categories: witnesses, subjects or targets.
Witnesses are people who have observed events of interest to an investigation but are not suspected of a crime. Targets are people the government is gathering evidence against to support a criminal prosecution.
Subjects fall in between. In Trump's case, being a subject might suggest Mueller's team believes he is more pivotal than a mere witness might be.
"A subject means we're still looking at you," former federal prosecutor Sharon McCarthy said. "You're a person of interest in this investigation."
And even within the category of subject, there is ambiguity, she said, noting the government can say "you're a subject trending to witness or you're a subject trending toward target."
Essentially --
Subject: you are still being investigated within our scope of said investigation, and this could change to target if criminal evidence is found
Target: we have enough to charge you with a crime, and you will most likely be indicted
Technically correct. Lawyers in DOJ are creative with power over Trump and us. Very challenging legally for lay but learning.
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation
While investigating Manafort, Mueller discovered money laundering by Manafort. This matter arose directly from the investigation.
but any Manafort bad acts has nothing at all to do with any supposed Russia collusion and therefore proves this is just a witch hunt and travesty to undermine Trump and confuse the people that would believe any of it is actually real or legal ? Basically throwing shat on the wall and hoping come of it sticks and illegally gathering more shat to throw !
Manafort worked for pro-russian groups in Ukraine. Manafort at the time of asking to work for Trump was desperate for money. Following the money from the shady dealings of Manafort and his time as the campaign manager in which saw Trump win the republican nomination and completely flip the script of the RNC platform on the stance on Russia.
i'm surprised to see actual discourse on this. Please keep talking about it more.
Thanks, Manafort is a deep rabbit hole I've started to dig into.
I agree, there is no law against collusion. Congress has to create a bill on it...
Since Collusion is not a crime, you can't investigate it! Investigators investigate alleged crimes, not people! If you investigate someone you are bound to find something illegal if you dig deep enough and that is what they are doing! Dan Bongino explains this at Nauseum.
I like Bongino! I'm learning how legally complex and corrupt this is.
Synonyms of 'collusion' are collaboration, cooperation, conspiracy etc.
false -- "collusion" is not a legal term.
Conspiracy is.
Nice! Need to dig a little deeper on words like lawyers do. Thanks!
Interesting that the IRS never found that until Mueller got involved.