WTH??? I have been openly wondering about the Statute of Limitations issues. But Team Mueller secretly got it suspended and never told Manafort's lawyers until now??Quote:
"The bottom line is that Cyprus had not fully satisfied the government's official request when the original and superseding indictment of Manafort were returned on February 13 and 22, respectively," Weissman notes. "As a result, no 'final action' had yet occurredand the applicable statute of limitations remained suspended."
Manafort was unaware of the existing order when he made his request to have the count tossed, Weissman adds. A copy of the order has since been provided to the defense.
A waiver of the statute of limitations cannot exceed three years.
Yeah, that one shocked me too!jjeffers1 said:Uh...What?RoscoePColtrane said:
One can only hope!RoscoePColtrane said:
Well Hillary, Lerner and Holder may have a problem then if you can secretly waive the SL at will
Holy Cow! Imagine the fun times that could be had with all present, and prior, defendants if a loop hole is found in the SL law.RoscoePColtrane said:
Well Hillary, Lerner and Holder may have a problem then if you can secretly waive the SL at will
Think about all of this. Regardless of the outcome Flynn hasn't complained or pointed fingers. I'm pretty certain he knew anything he said on the phone was monitored. I don't think he could 100% recall what he said on the call, and when they ambushed him with this interview with Strzok and Pientka he recalled best he could, and Weissmann came back with the Charging Document he figured he screwed up and stood ready to take his medicine, when actually he did nothing wrong. He stood ready to take the cigarette and blindfold and go out like a soldier. Hard to get much more Patriotic than that.SpreadsheetAg said:
It will be great if Flynn is proven to be a genuine and great patriot and father through all of this.
Good point but it's likely his pivot line to the FBI doesn't address ongoing investigations and don't even acknowledge if they even exist. It's the go to pass linecoyote68 said:
The answer to Cotten's question was not classified. He did not ask who it was.
Corrupt actorsFarmer Ag said:
I'm just a lay person so I'll ask ... I'm taking it that the statute of limitations can not be waived secretly or not secretly, can it? If it's a law, I don't understand how a judge or anyone else can waive it. What did I miss?
I know there is a legal mechanism to extend the SL timer, but it's the in secret part that is the big issue I think. There is a set outline of requirements to have to be met, but the SL can be extended, I just think there has to be a hearing over it you'd think, or at least formal notification in the GJ and indictment phase. Blindley or Hawg may have to clarify that.Farmer Ag said:
I'm just a lay person so I'll ask ... I'm taking it that the statute of limitations can not be waived secretly or not secretly, can it? If it's a law, I don't understand how a judge or anyone else can waive it. What did I miss?
.RoscoePColtrane said:Good point but it's likely his pivot line to the FBI doesn't address ongoing investigations and don't even acknowledge if they even exist. It's the go to pass linecoyote68 said:
The answer to Cotten's question was not classified. He did not ask who it was.
I can say this now since blindey and Hawg are traveling and making appointments, and may slap down my cynical butt later.Farmer Ag said:
I'm just a lay person so I'll ask ... I'm taking it that the statute of limitations can not be waived secretly or not secretly, can it? If it's a law, I don't understand how a judge or anyone else can waive it. What did I miss?
What happened here was the "need" for evidence from banks in Cyprus and that foreign evidence was sufficient enough for a judge (presumably the one overseeing the grand jury, it is unclear) suspended the SoL while Team Mueller was trying to get the evidence. A narrow exception that is inapplicable in the vast number of everyday cases.BMX Bandit said:
a defendant could waive the statute of limitations defense in theory, but no one in history ever has or ever would.
a judge cannot waive limitations.
however, they can be tolled in some situations. the only ones I can thing of that would possibly apply here (potentially) would be a superseding indictment or if there is evidence in a foreign country that a grand jury needs.
Well, yes and no. Seems to me a motion for change of venue would have been the more direct way of addressing this. Voir dire has its limits in detecting bias, however. But Weissman gets even further out of his lane with this (IMO.)Quote:
Special Counsel Robert Mueller asked a federal judge Monday to deny Paul Manafort's request for a hearing exploring "allegedly improper disclosures" made by the media, which the former Trump campaign chairman says ruined his chances for a fair trial.
Monday's request came in a flurry of filings at the federal Virginia Court where Manafort faces trial on bank and tax fraud charges beginning July 10.
According a 19-page motion filed by Andrew Weissman, special assistant to special counsel Robert Mueller, Manafort's claims of prejudice fall short since his "sampling of press reports" don't point to specific information about his grand jury investigation last year.
"The government attorneys and agents involved in this case understand and respect their duty to preserve grand-jury secrecy as required by Rule 6(e) [of the Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure] and to avoid public disclosures that could jeopardize a defendant's right to a fair trial," the motion states. "Manafort's speculative claim of improper conduct falls far short of the showing necessary to warrant a hearing on potential violations of Rule 6e or of his constitutional rights."
Any concerns of pretrial prejudice can be resolved during jury selection, Weissman wrote.
This doesn't sit well with me for a couple of reasons, starting with the gag order on Manafort and his attorneys. Team Mueller can leak with impunity and Manafort is helpless to say anything in his defense.Quote:
Weissman says a threshold question must be answered to prove prejudice: Did information disclosed involve any specific matter occurring before the grand jury? He noted courts have emphasized federal rules "should not be read to require [that] a 'veil of secrecy be drawn over all matters occurring in the world that happen to be investigated by a grand jury."
It's also a matter of who the officials are and what rules they are subject to, Weissman says. References to "officials" or "American officials" in media reports could very well be individuals not subject to Rule 6e's restrictions, he says.
Manafort' request that the court "conduct an inquiry to identify and punish" government officials who disclosed the information, including suspected classified information, should also be ignored, the motion states.
"That would place the court in an inquisitorial role, that is, to say the least, unusual," Weissman writes. "While federal courts have some authority to investigate misconduct [in grand jury proceedings] they generally do not have the power to act as investigators or prosecutors of misconduct."
It's in the other case before Judge Berman Jackson.blindey said:
Is there a gag order in place? If so, Weissman is effectively trying to tell the judge he can't control the practice of law in his own court. That's a bold move, Cotton. Let's see if it pays off for him.
LINKQuote:
Newly released court documents show that a federal judge reprimanded Paul Manafort for breaking a gag order she had imposed on his case.
At a court appearance in Washington, D.C. on February 28, Judge Amy Berman Jackson chastised President Trump's former campaign chairman, saying, "I want to reiterate, Mr. Manafort, that the order that I issued, over no one's objection, does not just apply to Mr. Downing [Manafort's lawyer], but it applies to you, and issuing a statement about the prosecution, I believe, is contrary to the order," according to an official court transcript.
Jackson referenced a statement issued on behalf of Manafort on the day that his former business associate and co-defendant Rick Gates pleaded guilty in his own case. She didn't specify what the statement said, but it appears to be the one Manafort released on Feb. 23, which read, "Notwithstanding that Rick Gates pled today, I continue to maintain my innocence."
