[Alberta's Child]

If the judge really said these things, then I'm wondering if he's losing his marbles. I never heard of a case where the prosecutor was compelled to explain his motivations in filing the charges.

What point is the defense trying to make here -- that Manafort may be guilty as hell but a different prosecutor should have filed the charges?

[Flick Lives]

If the judge really said these things, then I'm wondering if he's losing his marbles. I never heard of a case where the prosecutor was compelled to explain his motivations in filing the charges.

---

Mueller’s team says its authorities are laid out in documents including the August 2017 scope memo – and that some powers are actually secret because they involve ongoing investigations and national security matters that cannot be publicly disclosed.

Ellis seemed amused and not persuaded.

He summed up the Special Counsel’s Office as, "We said this was what [the] investigation was about, but we are not bound by it and we were lying."

Sounds like the judge is pretty sane to question the prosecution unless it is now ok to prosecute someone based on secret evidence. Evidence Mueller won't show the defense attorney.

[xkaydet65]

Manafort’s attys are claiming that these indictments did not emerge from any investigation re collusion. They were old matters from USAs in Virginia 12 years ago. The only reason they are being used today is to force anti Trump testimony from Manafort. The judge wants to see the DoJ order creating the SC because while it might say he can investigate other matters stemming from collusion, it does not say he can seek out other matters from the past, not associated in any way with collusion, and use them as a club to make Manafort a cooperating witness.