Skip to comments.Judge Ellis Wants to See Mueller's Hunting License
Posted on 05/06/2018 7:14:35 AM PDT by libstripper
My friend Tom Lipscomb, commenting on the newsworthy but welcome judicial challenge to the scope of the special counsel's power in the Manafort case in Virginia, says it reminds him of the Tom Lehrer song about a man and his hunting license. In relevant parts, the lyrics are:
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I expect this judge will soon be attacked as...over zealous, politically motivated, etc etc
If the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court weren’t part of the SWAMP, he could shut the circus down.
Since the treason party is suing Trump for not allowing the career felon who is above the law Hillary from stealing the election through her Russian collusion, can’t he sue them back? I mean my God, I would think he more than anybody would have a case. Constant harassment and investigations over an unnamed crime, costing his friends, associates a fortune in lawyers fees, I me give me a break
James Comey graduated from William & Mary in 1982.
He and his family will be threatened
Yes that is what the swamp has become
He and his family will be threatened
Kids and grandchildren, no doubt.
Mueller needs to check his Gestapo privilege. The boy is out of control.
Ellis needs to shore up everything before the Monday morning assault by the networks and for the Mueller goon squad.
OUCH! Thats gonna leave a mark. In the first instance, Ellis rightly demands to see the mandate Mueller received from Rosenstein - and in the second place, he asks what business Rosenstein has giving anyone a mandate in a case where Rosenstein himself "is considered an important witness.
That last is a rationale by which Judge Ellis could simply rule that Morrison v. Olsen was wrongly decided, and that Justice Antonin Scalias famousThat is what this suit is about. Power. The allocation of power among Congress, the President, and the courts in such fashion as to preserve the equilibrium the Constitution sought to establish. Frequently an issue of this sort will come before the Court clad, so to speak, in sheeps clothing: the potential of the asserted principle to effect important change in the equilibrium of power is not immediately evident, and must be discerned by a careful and perceptive analysis. But this wolf comes as a wolf.solo dissent is vindicated by history and by the actions by both Rosenstein and Mueller in the present case.
That is, he could assert that the Special Counsel office as such is a rogue institution which is out of constitutional bounds.
Such a ruling would require brass - but would it really require more than the Ninth Circus routinely puts on display? Incidentally, AFAIK none of the 8 justices from whom Scalia dissented are still on the bench. I think Justice Kennedy is senior in terms of years on the Court, and he was appointed after Scalia made that solo dissent as a freshman.
Rosenstein and Mueller could appeal to the 4th Circuit, and nominally that appeal would be a no-brainer. But that could serve only as a stall, because the loser would appeal to SCOTUS - and in the nature of things, the best remedy would be for SCOTUS to ask the 4th Circuit to refuse to hear the appeal - and for SCOTUS to hear it on an expedited basis. But that is a pretty optimistic scenario . . .
- but would it really require more than the Ninth Circus routinely puts on display...”
It would require far less brass in that it is the Truth.
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.