Skip to comments.Judge holds Roger Stone associate in contempt for refusing to testify in Russia investigation
Posted on 08/10/2018 10:29:57 AM PDT by EVO X
A federal judge has found a witness in contempt for refusing to testify before the grand jury hearing evidence in special counsel Robert S. Mueller IIIs investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. U.S. District Chief Judge Beryl Howell made the ruling Friday after a sealed hearing to discuss Andrew Millers refusal to appear before the grand jury. Miller is a former aide to longtime Trump confidant Roger Stone. Millers lawyer Paul Kamenar said after the hearing that Miller was held in contempt, which we asked him to be in order for us to appeal the judges decision to the court of appeals. Howell stayed her order while Millers legal team appeals the judges decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Mark Levin and a law professor buddy suggested someone do this a while back..
Contemptuous beyotch she was...
I should have known a FReeper would have the answer at the ready!
So he goes before the GJ and take the fifth.
Bring it all out to force the issue.
Or pulls a Hillary Clinton and answers every question "Sorry, I don't recall..."
I hope that person doesn't have to spend time in a prison cell.
GREAT for Mark Levin! BUT: It is worth noting that both Disqus and Fakebook CENSOR any mention of a website, www.CodeIsFreeSpeech.com that provides FREE downloads of 3D-printable firearm blueprints. And, since Facebook logins are so prevalent for posting commentary across the Internet, they are very effectively suppressing this Forbidden knowledge almost EVERYWHERE. Please go to the website, download some or all 10 of the free blueprints, and then, repost it to your friends and across the Internet, to the extent you can. Strike a BLOW against Fakebook and judicial CENSORSHIP! Support TWO amendments at once, the First and the Second!
According to a link in the article the judge says Mueller’s appointmentment is legitimate because he is supervised by a constitutionaly appointed officer. Levin made the case Mueller had the powers of constitutionally appointed official without being confirmed by the senate. Mueller is running his own office with broad powers. It is not like he is just an aid to Rosenstein.
IIRC, he stated that eventually this argument would be made in court, perhaps at the appeals stage, and would be found to be a valid argument, thereby rendering moot, null, and void everything Mueller did.
Do I read this correctly...?
A Judge outside of any involvement in the trial is mandating someone testify?
Maybe I read it wrong....
when the HELL will PDJT shut this damned Mueller farce down!?
Constitutionality? :-) It’s rendered almost irrelevant if no one challenges anything.
Somebody with standing has to contest in court. Manafort only went so far as to contest the scope letter. Somebody with deep pockets is funding Miller.
Ditto. You have to have deep pockets to make the challenge.
When I read this article I imagined police showing up at Hillary’s home with a warrant to arrest her. I then tried to imagine what she would do. She would have no choice to let the police arrest her and fight it later.
The Clintons are just people. It is a myth that they can’t be touched. It just takes someone with guts to carry it out. However they better have iron-clad proof if they want to take out the Queen. I mean solid evidence.
The Special Counsel may be disciplined or removed from office only by the personal action of the Attorney General. The Attorney General may remove a Special Counsel for misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or for other good cause, including violation of Departmental policies. The Attorney General shall inform the Special Counsel in writing of the specific reason for his or her removal.
...90 days before the beginning of each fiscal year, the Special Counsel shall report to the Attorney General the status of the investigation, and provide a budget request for the following year. The Attorney General shall determine whether the investigation should continue and, if so, establish the budget for the next year.
28 CFR 600
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.