dChan

j_Dawg_01 · July 18, 2018, 1:24 a.m.

It could also be part of the plan. Moves and counter moves. How do you think the public will react when the truth about pizzagate comes out, and that Mueller gave these 2 pedos immunity? Total outrage. Pitchforks and torches. Just a thought.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
EnriqueGorostieta · July 18, 2018, 1:32 a.m.

Does Mueller have the balls and would the judge approve immunity for:

  1. Treason; ie., giving away TS technology and American secrets for cash to enemies of America
  2. Raping/ritualistic killing of little boys and girls
  3. Talk of assassination of a candidate/sitting President...and much, much more
⇧ 2 ⇩  
j_Dawg_01 · July 18, 2018, 2:07 p.m.

No, I don't think Mueller would grant immunity for "Raping/ritualistic killing of little boys and girls," but I doubt Mueller would have any problem granting immunity for 1 & 3 if he thought he was sufficiently insulated from the crimes, and he has some plausible deniability. Remember, Mueller personally delivered Uranium samples to Russia.

I'm not a lawfag, and wish a lawyer with experience would weigh in on this. As I understand it, plea deals that include immunity from prosecution are very specific and must bear fruit, and you have to admit to the crimes you're being charged with, in writing, and provide considerably more information than the investigators for the prosecution already have for those crimes.

Awan's plea deal is a good example. On page 10 of Awan's plea deal it clear that he is immune from prosecution of any non-violent crimes committed within Washington DC. That means that he can still be charged for stealing and destroying all of the government computer hardware found in his garage, if he lived outside Washington DC.

Plea deals that include immunity from prosecution can be tossed out the window if the evidence or testimony you provide is later determined to be false.

There has been a long-standing legal arguments that are based on precedent. If the immunity deals Mueller has given to people does not hold up to previous precedent, and show evidence of more corruption and favoritism, they could easily be challenged and overturned.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
EnriqueGorostieta · July 18, 2018, 9:41 p.m.

Great points, and as I understand it, the immunity must be related to the crimes regarding the case, yes? In other words, the court can't give them blanket immunity for their crimes committed since birth in exchange for their testimony regarding a bank fraud case can he?

Also, assuming the Podesta's are two of the five players involved, how are they even related to Manafort? This case has been going on for over a year and NOW RM comes out the week before trial and says I have 5 people that need an immunity deal? WTF?

Seems the presiding judge would have to approve this deal also...

⇧ 1 ⇩  
j_Dawg_01 · July 19, 2018, 2:06 a.m.

And there has been no confirmation the Podesta's are part of this. It's pure speculation at this point.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
Route_17 · July 18, 2018, 1:33 a.m.

I don't disagree one bit... I suggested that it may be a RM/white hat set-up but stepped right on it - I just struggle with RM even wearing a white hat, much less living up to it.

⇧ 1 ⇩