Mueller WILL NOT Present Collusion Evidence At Manafort Trial

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Only if you pay for it, dumbass,

Not true at all. I am not sure at all where you get this nonsense, though I suspect you just pulled it out of your ass.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Prosecuters don't get to decide what evidence the defence is allowed to see, moron.

Of course they do, if it is not evidence pertinent to the charges. Therefore, it is not evidence at all. The statement that you clearly min derstood delineates this for you, as it is referred to evidence of something else, not the charges against manafort.

You are so excitable!

No they don't, moron. Judges decide what the defence is entitled to see. Thousands of convictions get thrown out every year because the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence.

I fail to understand why you are constantly pontificating about the law when you obviously don't know the first thing about it.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Prosecutors' offices would never be forced to present evidence for another case and charge at a separate trial, nor will the Mueller team be forced to do so in this instance. You really are embarrassing yourself.

 

[bripat9643]

Only if you pay for it, dumbass,

Not true at all. I am not sure at all where you get this nonsense, though I suspect you just pulled it out of your ass.

I've seen dozens of legal scholars say so on television, moron. I could probably do a search and find a dozen links saying the same thing.

Just admit you don't know the law. Your understanding is based on what you wish was true, not what is actually true.

 

[bripat9643]

Prosecuters don't get to decide what evidence the defence is allowed to see, moron.

Of course they do, if it is not evidence pertinent to the charges. Therefore, it is not evidence at all. The statement that you clearly min derstood delineates this for you, as it is referred to evidence of something else, not the charges against manafort.

You are so excitable!

No they don't, moron. Judges decide what the defence is entitled to see. Thousands of convictions get thrown out every year because the prosecution withheld exculpatory evidence.

I fail to understand why you are constantly pontificating about the law when you obviously don't know the first thing about it.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Prosecutors' offices would never be forced to present evidence for another case and charge at a separate trial, nor will the Mueller team be forced to do so in this instance. You really are embarrassing yourself.

What the fuck are you talking about? What "other case?"

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I've seen dozens of legal scholars say so on television

Wow!!!!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

What "other case?

Good grief, you insufferable idiot. The other rmatter he is investing. For fuck's sake go read post #1 again .

 

[nat4900]

The SC has ruled that information does not count as "something of value.

Really, fuck head???..............Could you cite the SCOTUS decision??

 

[CrusaderFrank]

You mean like selling a dossier to Hillary on Trump?

You want to "lock her up".......GO FOR IT.....

Do you also want to lock up Trump???.....Otherwise you'd a be a hypocritical scumbag, don't you think?????.......(or do you EVER "think").............LOL

It's too late to lock her up, not worth the effort. She's on Death's doorstep. No point to locking her up.
No reason to lock Trump up. He hasn't done anything that deserves criminal prosecution.

Dont lock her up, shes Starkeys choice for democrat 2020 candidate

 

[nat4900]

Not at all. Trump hasn't broken any laws. Hillary has.

Ahhhhh. so any day "lock her up"???............And who the fuck is being investigated by a special counsel?

Get your head out of Trump fat ass, moron............LOL

 

[bripat9643]

What "other case?

Good grief, you insufferable idiot. The other rmatter he is investing. For fuck's sake go read post #1 again .

OK, I read it again. So what "other case" are you talking about?

 

[bripat9643]

Not at all. Trump hasn't broken any laws. Hillary has.

Ahhhhh. so any day "lock her up"???............And who the fuck is being investigated by a special counsel?

Get your head out of Trump fat ass, moron............LOL

You have a special talent for babbling non sequiturs.

 

[beagle9]

Mueller has no evidence of 'collusion'. Hard to present something that never existed...

Gee.........Isn't Mueller going after "obstruction of justice"????

BUT, nice try, Queasy.....Haniity would be proud.......LOL

Obstruction for what ? A case for collusion that never existed ??? LOL

 

[easyt65]

Not at all. Trump hasn't broken any laws. Hillary has.

Ahhhhh. so any day "lock her up"???............And who the fuck is being investigated by a special counsel?

Get your head out of Trump fat ass, moron............LOL

Barry the Traitor is no longer President & Rosenstein's ability to protect Mueller is evaporating now that he is criminally in violation of refusing to Comply with a Congressional Subpoena on a continuous daily basis now.

 

[beagle9]

The investigation just needs to go a few more months until the elections. Throw how some red meat as to give the appearance of something
nefarious that the Trump administration is guilty of.
The result hopefully will be maximum damage in the midterms with no time to refute with the actual truth.
Straight from the democrat playbook.

So Hillary and team are still interfering with the election process in an attempt to sway elections, and doing it all in an under the radar colluding manor ?? Talk about the underscoring obstruction of an election process in order to sway the vote... How long are they gonna unofficially collude one wonders ??

 

[WEATHER53]

Why is Trump be investigated with zip results and Hillary has a dossier no one talks about?

 

[Avatar4321]

The mueller probe is one that is supposed to be of limited scope focused on Russian collusion. Defense should be entitled to an evidence found by the probe. I would argue it’s all exculpatory. I would also be arguing the this prosecution is beyond the scope of Muellers authority and be demanding that mueller prove that he has the authority to prove it and to hand over all evidence of the probe he has to prove that he has the scope.

Defense has a good argument for release of that evidence. If the prosecutor wishes to keep that evidence hidden, he can withdraw the charges

 

[G.T.]

The mueller probe is one that is supposed to be of limited scope focused on Russian collusion. Defense should be entitled to an evidence found by the probe. I would argue it’s all exculpatory. I would also be arguing the this prosecution is beyond the scope of Muellers authority and be demanding that mueller prove that he has the authority to prove it and to hand over all evidence of the probe he has to prove that he has the scope.

Defense has a good argument for release of that evidence. If the prosecutor wishes to keep that evidence hidden, he can withdraw the charges

You're not a Lawyer, clearly. First of all, his scope limits have already been challenged and ruled on.

What on god's green fucking earth makes you think that if crimes are discovered in an investigation, of ANYfuckin thing, they could just be ignored for some reason?

The warrants have also been affirmed by judges. So, your post was just asinine.

 

[Avatar4321]

The mueller probe is one that is supposed to be of limited scope focused on Russian collusion. Defense should be entitled to an evidence found by the probe. I would argue it’s all exculpatory. I would also be arguing the this prosecution is beyond the scope of Muellers authority and be demanding that mueller prove that he has the authority to prove it and to hand over all evidence of the probe he has to prove that he has the scope.

Defense has a good argument for release of that evidence. If the prosecutor wishes to keep that evidence hidden, he can withdraw the charges

You're not a Lawyer, clearly. First of all, his scope limits have already been challenged and ruled on.

What on god's green fucking earth makes you think that if crimes are discovered in an investigation, of ANYfuckin thing, they could just be ignored for some reason?

The warrants have also been affirmed by judges. So, your post was just asinine.

The judge may have ruled. Doesn’t change the validity of the argument.

Defense is still entitled to all the evidence that may be exculpatory

 

[G.T.]

The mueller probe is one that is supposed to be of limited scope focused on Russian collusion. Defense should be entitled to an evidence found by the probe. I would argue it’s all exculpatory. I would also be arguing the this prosecution is beyond the scope of Muellers authority and be demanding that mueller prove that he has the authority to prove it and to hand over all evidence of the probe he has to prove that he has the scope.

Defense has a good argument for release of that evidence. If the prosecutor wishes to keep that evidence hidden, he can withdraw the charges

You're not a Lawyer, clearly. First of all, his scope limits have already been challenged and ruled on.

What on god's green fucking earth makes you think that if crimes are discovered in an investigation, of ANYfuckin thing, they could just be ignored for some reason?

The warrants have also been affirmed by judges. So, your post was just asinine.

The judge may have ruled. Doesn’t change the validity of the argument.

Defense is still entitled to all the evidence that may be exculpatory

Your opinion is what doesnt matter...the court of law is what matters.

Plus this disturbing notion you seem to have that while investigating one thing, any other crimes should be ignored is really disturbed.

If youre smoking crack and get pulled over for speeding, you dont get to demand the crack gets ignored because you were pulled over for speeding. This whine is the dumbest and most disturbed part of this whole thing, it means your partisanship supercedes your respect of the Law itself.

 

[mudwhistle]

Mueller WILL NOT Present Collusion Evidence At Manafort Trial

Special counsel Robert Mueller said in a court filing Friday that his prosecutors will not present evidence regarding Trump campaign collusion with Russia at an upcoming trial for former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

“The government does not intend to present at trial evidence or argument concerning collusion with the Russian government,” reads a filing submitted by Mueller’s team in federal court in Virginia on Friday.

He won't present evidence because he does not have any.
He doesn't want to get laughed out of court.