Um, no. The reason to raise distance between Ukraine money laundering and election is to challenge SCO mandate.https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/927539181789810688 …
-
1) Every single time SC has been used (ex Kiriakou) it gets challenged 2) This WASN'T uncovered during investigation.
At the very least this will be a superb delaying tactic until DOJ files a superseding.
-
-
Certainly a delaying tactic. Not sure DOJ needs to expand jurisdiction to cover it rather than construct argument this arises directly from the investigation, even if it predates it.
-
In "constructing argument" they will be pushed to do other things Mueller may not want to do. It's utterly a fair point.
-
Maybe. I think he can get away with as little as "during SCO's investigation we became interested in Manafort's finances, and that led to the discovery of evidence in FBI and SCO is using that evidence to now pursue charges"
-
I agree he can. (Also suspect a superseding will moot.) But any defense attorney would be idiotic not to force Mueller to make argument.
-
Ok 100% agree there.
-
There actually a legal mechanism for challenging based on mandate? That seems like an internal DOJ issue not one for the court to decide.
-
No. It'll get challenged in court, laying groundwork for appeal. Happens almost all the time w/SC investigations.
-
That said, precedents are very strong to cover what Mueller has done, and by time it is litigated the larger case will be made or pardon.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.