User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: Meet The Very Shady Prosecutor Robert Mueller Has Hired For The Russia Investigation

  1. #1
    Points: 139,018, Level: 89
    Level completed: 88%, Points required for next Level: 432
    Overall activity: 42.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    stjames1_53's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    58437
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    50,853
    Points
    139,018
    Level
    89
    Thanks Given
    104,982
    Thanked 29,458x in 20,418 Posts
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Meet The Very Shady Prosecutor Robert Mueller Has Hired For The Russia Investigation

    Meet The Very Shady Prosecutor Robert Mueller Has Hired For The Russia Investigation
    Sidney Powell | Former federal prosecutor

    Long before Donald Trump ran for president or most people had heard of Paul Manafort, fabled Judge Alex Kozinski proclaimed a veritable epidemic of prosecutorial misconduct. The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times and even The New York Times joined the Kozinski chorus. Abuses of power by prosecutors have changed the balance of power in the United States Senate and sent countless innocent people to prison.
    Prosecutors have unbridled discretion. With the stroke of a pen, they can indict and ruin anyone, while they enjoy immunity from suit and are rarely even rebuked.
    Now, those close to the president have crossed the scope of a squad of prosecutors highly trained and experienced in abuses of that power — especially Andrew Weissmann, who just indicted Manafort and Richard Gates.
    Mr. Weissmann has been portrayed recently as having “unimpeachable ethics” and as “the prosecutor you would want” if your family member was innocent. He was extolled for having “a hunch” that a former treasurer of Enron was “willing to say more” and would “cooperate.”
    But what do the cases and indisputable facts show?
    Let’s start with Mr. Weissmann’s “hunch” that young Enron treasurer Ben Glisan was ready to “cooperate.” Mr. Glisan was about 30 years old when Enron CFO Andrew Fastow — then a cover-boy for CFO Magazine — conned Glisan into one of Fastow’s fraudulent get-rich-quick schemes.
    Mr. Glisan was an easy squeeze for prosecutors like Mr. Weissmann who honed for their own uses the tactics of organized crime bosses they convicted. Ben Glisan had made a fast million dollars, had a young family, and he was guilty. Weissmann charged him quickly with an onerous 26 counts. Mr. Glisan pleaded guilty to a five-year count and just wanted to do his time. The problem was he refused to “cooperate” with Mr. Weissmann.
    Federal authorities took Mr. Glisan to prison. He was placed straight into solitary confinement — a hole of a cell with a slit for light and barely enough room to stand. Men far tougher than Ben Glisan will tell you that 24 hours in solitary confinement can drive a man insane.

    Mr. Weissmann and his Enron Task Force left Mr. Glisan in solitary for almost two weeks. The broken Ben Glisan then faced hardened criminals in the daily prison population. That is how Mr. Weissmann got that “hunch.”
    As for “the prosecutor you would want if you were innocent,” four former Merrill Lynch executives beg to differ. Mr. Weissmann ran the grand jury interrogating many of the witnesses and at least one of the defendants. He then sat in the courtroom with his arm around Houston Chronicle reporter Mary Flood and oversaw every aspect of the prosecution. The prosecutors obtained convictions against Merrill Lynch employee Bill Fuhs and three superiors.
    Mr. Fuhs, like Ben Glisan, was about 30 years old with a young family. He had steadfastly maintained his innocence and merely handled the paperwork for a transaction which had been taken through all the steps within Merrill Lynch by Merrill’s own in-house counsel.
    Weissmann’s team vehemently argued against allowing the defendants bail pending their appeals. They sent Bill Fuhs to a maximum security federal transfer facility with the worst federal prisoners imaginable — hundreds of miles from his little children.
    Eight months later, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals completely exonerated Mr. Fuhs and ordered his release from prison within three weeks of the oral argument — before the court even issued its decision.
    Mr. Fuhs will not speak of what he endured.
    The Fifth Circuit held that the conduct of the Merrill defendants was not criminal as charged — and the indictment was “flawed.”
    Mr. Weissmann had made up a crime.
    The Merrill executives suffered up to a year of wrongful imprisonment. They were all released.
    As for Mr. Weissmann’s ethics, the ethical rules to which prosecutors are supposed to be held require the prosecutor to disclose all evidence that may be helpful to a defendant. Mr. Weissmann and his team did the opposite.
    They yellow-highlighted the statements of witnesses most helpful to the defense long before the trial. They threatened those witnesses with indictments which kept them from talking with the defense, and they gave the defendants incomplete and affirmatively misleading “summaries” of what those witnesses would say.
    The Fifth Circuit held the prosecutors “plainly suppressed” evidence favorable to the defense — enough for an ethics violation but not for reversal of the only two convictions that survived the first appeal while the evidence was still hidden.
    One of the country’s leading legal ethics experts, Bill Hodes, filed a substantial grievance with hundreds of pages of exhibits against Mr. Weissmann with the New York Bar. (I co-signed.)
    At the time, Mr. Mueller had already brought Mr. Weissmann under his wing at the FBI, so the Department of Justice was defending Mr. Weissmann against the grievance for which he could have been disbarred.
    What happened to that grievance? The New York Bar kept it for several months.
    Unexpectedly, we received a declination letter from the “Office of Professional Responsibility” for the Department of Justice. With no notice, the New York Bar had slipped the grievance to the Department of Justice to decide a serious complaint that the Department of Justice was defending.
    The federal swamp is deep, dense, and deceiving. It is infested with a corrupt cabal that protects its own, and it can’t be drained fast enough.

    http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/20/me...investigation/

    Sidney Powell (@SidneyPowell1) was a federal prosecutor in three districts under nine U.S. attorneys from both political parties, then in private practice now for more than 20 years. She is a past president of the Bar Association of the 5th Federal Circuit and of the American Academy of Appellate Lawyers. A veteran of 500 federal appeals, she published “Licensed to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice.” She consulted with Arthur Andersen on appeal and represented one of the Merrill Executives.

    So, he's brought in a fricking thug who creates crime out of thin air. This is going to bite Mueller on the ass..........this guy has had more cases overturned than the 9th District Court...............
    For waltky: http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/
    "The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools."
    - Thucydides

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" B. Franklin
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to stjames1_53 For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (07-09-2018)

  3. #2
    Points: 11,595, Level: 25
    Level completed: 83%, Points required for next Level: 155
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    Dangermouse's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    26435
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Southern England
    Posts
    1,750
    Points
    11,595
    Level
    25
    Thanks Given
    1,143
    Thanked 737x in 528 Posts
    Mentioned
    31 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Mueller has to prosecute some very shady people. Why not fight fire with fire?
    News: Rich people paying rich people to tell middle class people to blame poor people.

    They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance.

  4. #3
    Points: 139,018, Level: 89
    Level completed: 88%, Points required for next Level: 432
    Overall activity: 42.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger First ClassSocial50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    stjames1_53's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    58437
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    50,853
    Points
    139,018
    Level
    89
    Thanks Given
    104,982
    Thanked 29,458x in 20,418 Posts
    Mentioned
    175 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dangermouse View Post
    Mueller has to prosecute some very shady people. Why not fight fire with fire?
    so, it's ok to go low.................I expect no better response from you............it's the liberal way to lie.
    For waltky: http://quakes.globalincidentmap.com/
    "The Nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools."
    - Thucydides

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote" B. Franklin
    Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum

  5. #4
    Points: 6,375, Level: 19
    Level completed: 4%, Points required for next Level: 675
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran5000 Experience Points
    DLLS's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    557
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    827
    Points
    6,375
    Level
    19
    Thanks Given
    140
    Thanked 547x in 344 Posts
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I used to have this as a signature line. It is from the movie Billy Jack.

    When politicians are allowed to break the law, then there isn't any law - just a fight for survival.
    “I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”
    — Atlas Shrugged (Part 3, Chapter 1, Page 731)

    "The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master."
    — The Fountainhead (Part 4, Chapter 14, Page 637)

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DLLS For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (07-10-2018),stjames1_53 (07-09-2018)

  7. #5
    Points: 11,803, Level: 26
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 847
    Overall activity: 7.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    mamooth's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1089
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    3,594
    Points
    11,803
    Level
    26
    Thanks Given
    15
    Thanked 1,080x in 797 Posts
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DLLS View Post
    When politicians are allowed to break the law, then there isn't any law - just a fight for survival
    And yet you have no problems with Trump appointing a SC justice specifically because that justice says the president is immune from any prosecution.

    Meanwhile, the OP savagely attacks the rule of law.

    The current purpose of the Republican party is to make all lawbreaking by Republicans legal, and to make it a criminal act to even investigate Republican criminal acts.

  8. #6
    Points: 6,375, Level: 19
    Level completed: 4%, Points required for next Level: 675
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran5000 Experience Points
    DLLS's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    557
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    827
    Points
    6,375
    Level
    19
    Thanks Given
    140
    Thanked 547x in 344 Posts
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    When did the people of this Nation decide it was okay to trust, without question, a bunch of politicians and political operatives?
    Last edited by DLLS; 07-10-2018 at 02:21 PM.
    “I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”
    — Atlas Shrugged (Part 3, Chapter 1, Page 731)

    "The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master."
    — The Fountainhead (Part 4, Chapter 14, Page 637)

  9. #7
    Points: 265,586, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 57.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    308005
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,807
    Points
    265,586
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,879
    Thanked 39,379x in 27,945 Posts
    Mentioned
    389 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by mamooth View Post
    And yet you have no problems with Trump appointing a SC justice specifically because that justice says the president is immune from any prosecution.
    It seems reasonable. Why would you object to a President being immune from prosecution?
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  10. #8
    Points: 6,375, Level: 19
    Level completed: 4%, Points required for next Level: 675
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran5000 Experience Points
    DLLS's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    557
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    827
    Points
    6,375
    Level
    19
    Thanks Given
    140
    Thanked 547x in 344 Posts
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    It seems reasonable. Why would you object to a President being immune from prosecution?
    If a President has to worry about defending himself in court he cannot worry about protecting the nation. That is why all that can happen to a President while in office is impeachment with any criminal prosecution occurring after he leaves office.

    That is unless his Vice-President, upon being elevated to the big office, pardons him. Oh but that would never happen...er...never mind.
    “I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”
    — Atlas Shrugged (Part 3, Chapter 1, Page 731)

    "The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master."
    — The Fountainhead (Part 4, Chapter 14, Page 637)

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to DLLS For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (07-10-2018)

  12. #9
    Points: 8,447, Level: 21
    Level completed: 99%, Points required for next Level: 3
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points
    barb012's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1469
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    1,909
    Points
    8,447
    Level
    21
    Thanks Given
    1,156
    Thanked 1,459x in 906 Posts
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by mamooth View Post
    And yet you have no problems with Trump appointing a SC justice specifically because that justice says the president is immune from any prosecution.

    Meanwhile, the OP savagely attacks the rule of law.

    The current purpose of the Republican party is to make all lawbreaking by Republicans legal, and to make it a criminal act to even investigate Republican criminal acts.
    I would argue that is exactly what the Democrats did.

  13. #10
    Points: 11,803, Level: 26
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 847
    Overall activity: 7.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    mamooth's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    1089
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    3,594
    Points
    11,803
    Level
    26
    Thanks Given
    15
    Thanked 1,080x in 797 Posts
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by barb012 View Post
    I would argue that is exactly what the Democrats did.
    But as all the evidence flatly contradicts such an insane conspiracy theory, it would be a bad argument.

    Do you agree with the others here that the founders thought the president should be able to openly murder someone and not face prosecution?

    A good counter argument would be that the founders didn't even dream it was possible that any Americans could ever be as corrupt as the current Republican congress, and so they were counting on congress to keep a criminal president in check.

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts