Booby has decided that the 13 dastardly RUSSIAN! telemarketers charged with ‘upsetting’ the 2016 presidential election cannot see the ‘evidence’ being used against them.
First I would like to point out that Bob in Portland has an essay up that is the definitive OP on Booby’s history of manipulating the legal system in order to ensure that no matter who got caught with their fingers in the cookie jar, he made damn sure that the ‘right’ suspects always ended up being prosecuted. (Or not prosecuted, depending upon where the best interests of our PTB lie.) He’s always been our PTB’s go-to guy whenever they needed evidence buried or the facts fudged around. His entire history of ‘public service’ has been dedicated to ensuring that no one EVER upsets our ‘betters’ apple cart. I think Bob in Portland’s OP should be required reading for anyone who really wants to understand how we got to where we are today and how horrifyingly corrupt this country has become.
What Mueller won't find
Considering how amazingly deceptive and dishonest the guy was, is, and always will be, it’s almost silly of me to be appalled at his latest ploy to jerk the legal system around. But I am. Go figure.
One would assume that one of the most basic and inviolable rights of our legal system is that anyone charged with a ‘criminal’ offense has the right to see all the ‘evidence’ being used against them to justify those charges. Regardless of who it is, everyone should have the right to avail themselves of the discovery process. But Booby has a problem with that provision and he’s latched on to a loophole that says otherwise. He’s decided that the current 13 RUSSIAN! diabolical desperados don’t have the right to see all tbe evidence he has to justify their prosecution.
Mueller dropped a hint that he's nowhere near finished charging people in the Russia probe
The special counsel Robert Mueller's office filed a protective order Tuesday to limit evidence sharing in the case against the 13 Russian nationals and three Russian entities indicted in February as part of the Russia investigation.
They were charged with conspiring to interfere in the 2016 US election by mounting a social-media disinformation campaign to sway voter opinions during the presidential campaign.
In its motion on Tuesday, Mueller's office cited the risk of revealing to Russian intelligence the identities of "uncharged individuals and entities" believed to be "continuing to engage in interference operations" in the US.
"The evidence in this case will also include numerous reports and affidavits filed in connection with this investigation that describe investigative steps, identify uncharged co-conspirators, and disclose various law enforcement and intelligence collection techniques," the document said.
https://amp.businessinsider.com/mueller-motion-to-limit-evidence-sharing...
GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER UNDER FEDERAL RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 16(d)(1)
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4502355/6-12-18-US-Motion-Pro...
How does this work? And where does it end. Booby can drag this process out forever. All he has to do is keep finding people to charge and declaring he’s still on the hunt and he’ll NEVER have to produce that ‘evidence’. Recently the attorneys for the Russian Dirty Baker’s Dozen called Booby’s bluff and demanded to see what cards Booby was holding. He choked and couldn’t or wouldn’t produce.
Special counsel hits snag in bringing a criminal case against Russians
*
Prosecutors also said US-based defense attorneys for Concord Management and Consulting, from the law firm Reed Smith in Washington, DC, have sought details about evidence Mueller's office collected in the case.
The Russian company's attorneys asked for information about other employees who Mueller considered to be co-conspirators or who weren't charged in the case, the US people who communicated with the Russians, and recordings and other electronic surveillance of the company's employees.
The company's attorneys also asked for information about the past seven decades of US policy toward other countries' elections, especially regarding " 'each and every instance' from '1945 to present' where the US government 'engaged in operations to interfere with elections and political processes in any foreign country,' " according to the prosecutors' court filing.
The Russian company's attorneys sent the summons from Mueller's office back to prosecutors, saying they hadn't complied with court procedures.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/04/politics/mueller-russia-case-indictments/...
Booby’s loophole covers the exact ‘evidence’ the defense wants to see. Funny how that works out.
Personally I think that this is just one big circle jerk. First, this whole mess started with illegal wire taps based on the phony Clinton Dossier. Like this:
Dark Side
Secret Origins of Evidence in US Criminal CasesJudge: [I]f, you know, there was an illegal search … followed by a legal search, but that was only obtained because now that you had the illegal search, you knew something about [the case], that would be a concern to the Court.… And that is the fruit of the poisonous tree, potentially.
Prosecutor: I respectfully dispute that point.… [I]n fact, I don’t have any concern about that.
—Hearing transcript, United States v. Lara (Northern District of California), December 2013
https://www.hrw.org/report/2018/01/09/dark-side/secret-origins-evidence-...
The Clinton Dossier was the ‘evidence’ they used for their illegal searches. That is why Booby is so desperate. There was no ‘crime’ in the first place. At least, not by the Trump campaign and those dastardly RUSSIANS! ‘Collusion’ sounds good but doesn’t mean shit. Using that fake dossier for wire taps (IMO) was certainly a crime. The wire taps themselves were illegal. And inserting a spy (or spies) in an opponents election campaign and siccing the intelligence community on it to find all the ‘dirt’ it could find (or invent) can’t be kosher either. And it should go without saying that finding out that the (thankfully) outgoing President of the United States helped further and finance all this should scare the Hell out of every citizen in this country. Now THAT is the kind of scenario that screams out loud for a Special Prosecutor.
Booby is intentionally dragging this out. Obviously he wants to keep beating this dead and decomposing horse past the November mid-term election. I wouldn’t be a damn bit surprised if he doesn’t plan to keep it rolling into the next presidential election. Forget about the millions of dollars we’re spending on Booby’s witch hunt that we could be using to feed and shelter the poor, provide all citizens with the opportunity to see a doctor when they’re sick or mentally ill, rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, provide a decent education in decent schools at the kindergarten through college levels to name a few of our most important needs. Those things benefit the plebs. We certainly can’t have that!
So on with the Investigation!

Comments
Ugh. Just want to scream at them at this point...
Bobby, just explain to me, what it is we pay you for?
Throw me a bone, seriously.
[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m4OvQIGDg4I]
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
Calling his bluff is right.
Even before this latest chapter of Adventures in Kafka's Criminal Procedure, Mueller tried to prevent attorneys for the defense from even filing an appearance.
In an earlier motion, Meuller argued (with a straight face apparently) that the notice of the indictment that he sent to the defendants was not proper, and that therefore the defendants, not being properly notified of the court proceeding, were not entitled to appear.
Now, challenging notice is SOP for defense attorneys whose clients don't want to be indicted, but for a prosecutor to challenge his own notice indicting the defendant is pretty much unheard of. The prosecutor is basically admitting his own malpractice.
The bench judge took one look at the defendants' attorneys standing right there in front of him, wondered aloud about how someone who files an appearance cannot have been notified of the proceeding, and laughed Mueller out of the courtroom.
Let's hope the judge rules in a similar manner on the discovery motion.
The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?
I am willing to bet
that you are right on with this shit going right into 2020. What an utter WASTE. And really, most of us plebes who've watched an old "Law and Order" or two know that fruit of the poisoned tree thingy but hey, too many of us can't even make that lame ass connection to this "investigation" I guess. Idiot America!
Only a fool lets someone else tell him who his enemy is. Assata Shakur
I couldn't agree more
Or as Lily once said ...
The message echoes from Gaza back to the US. “Starving people is fine.”
Good for them
It's about time that someone called out this country's hypocrisy on election interference!
Look what we did to get Yeltsin elected and then what we did to the Russian economy afterwards. It took a while for Putin to clean out the oligarchs. The Russian economy just keeps growing, even with our petty sanctions.
The same thing can be said about Russian aggression! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black! Same thing goes for you May of the U.K. with all of your recent accusations against Russia.
BTW, Putin kicked out all of the US's aid groups before the last election because they stirred up too much crap during the elections. The last one was the most peaceful one in generations.
The message echoes from Gaza back to the US. “Starving people is fine.”
I want this lawyer
Back in the day the head lawyer for a computer manufacturer, who voraciously defended patents, told me it cost us $75 to file a motion for discovery that will cause the opponent to expend potentially millions in document and communications search expenses to comply. Needless to say, he achieved a lot of settlements without going to trial.
Never hire a lawyer that does not have moussed slicked back hair, noticeable gold jewelry, designer suit and very shiny black shoes. "When the shark bites...."
Prof: Nancy! I’m going to Greece!
Nancy: And swim the English Channel?
Prof: No. No. To ancient Greece where burning Sapho stood beside the wine dark sea. Wa de do da! Nancy, I’ve invented a time machine!
Firesign Theater
Stop the War!
victim or the crime?
With the incestuous relationship between Mueller and "our" government, this whole thing is beginning to leave me more than a little confused..... am I a victim, or the crime? Or both?
[video:https://youtu.be/45jf-DHtZqA]
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides
I spent the entire afternoon helping indigent clients fill out
divorce papers and giving an assist to an elderly lady in a wheelchair on her will.
My hair is not greasy, EdMass.
One more comment lumping me and my lawyer colleagues who devote our lives to the poor but get slammed by the commenters here is gonna cost JcT my monthly donation.
I am sick of the lawyer smears.
I have nothing in common with Bob other than a fucking license.
Enough with the smears.
One more, and fucking fare thee all fucking well.
I take cases that put my goddamn life in danger, not because I am a thrill seeker, but because I am trying to help my clients.
You all here don't like that?
Really? Lawyers are all slick haired crooks?
Then kiss my ass.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
/\ /\ /\ Who I want for my lawyer, right there /\ /\ /\
I like a courageous lawyer. And one with some soul. And a heart. OTC, you can represent me any day.
Ditto
You can represent me too. I like people who have compassion for people who are down on their luck.
The message echoes from Gaza back to the US. “Starving people is fine.”
smearing lawyers is a trick of the elite
...to prevent law suits against their dirty little activities. Papantonio had a good piece on it but I can't find it. The idea is by smearing lawyers people are less likely to use the law to protect themselves.
otc keep fighting the good fight and understand it is by design your profession being smeared.
Ralph Nader also had a piece about it which I can't find.
wishing you the best.
“Until justice rolls down like water and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Since you are here a question sorta unrelated
But my theory as to why the prosecutors resort to bullshit is not so much because they are assholes, but because they never had to face good defense lawyers. Prosecutors are so used to plea bargaining and having the advantage over defendants, that over time, they end up with very little trial experience. And then along comes a good defense lawyer with experience who starts from the git-go to get kice the legal ass of the prosecutors. The prosecutors panic and start illegal and un-ethical shit. It seems like in this case, they never expected the Russians to offer up a legal defense, and the prosecutors initially looked like idiots.
occupational hazards
I admire your tenacity in standing up for yourself and those who do what you do. And I'd be happy to have you on my side of a legal dispute. Fortunately for me, I do not dwell in Texas. (Given the choice between snow and 100 degree+ heat, I unhesitatingly choose snow, as you should know by now.)
If you recall, the one and only time I made a disparaging remark about lawyers to you, resulted in a quite decent and educational discussion about the differences between the impacts of code and common law. So most of us, myself included, are well-meaning to you and what you do. I hope I can give you some understanding of that, as I feel very much that it is the truth.
But every occupation has its hazards.
I was originally trained as an electronics technician at the transition point between vacuum-tube and transistor technology at consumer level, in the 1970s. The hazards of my chosen occupation included electric shock at the high voltages all vacuum tubes require. Typical plate supply voltages in consumer receiving equipment run from 175 to 300 volts DC (VDC). The smallest B+ voltage I've ever seen serve tubes is 90. The Zener voltage of dry human skin -- the point at which it abruptly switches from highly resistive to full-blown conductor -- is roughly 75 volts DC. So the 250 VDC at the plate supply of a typical table radio of the day, much less the 19,000 VDC at the high-voltage anode of a color television's cathode-ray picture tube (CRT), will get a technician, sooner or later.
We called it "getting bit", and, of course, we did everything we could to avoid it happening, and to minimize the harms inflicted when it did.
As an honest, hard-working lawyer, your occupational hazards are the low-lifes who share nothing with you but the license, as you yourself point out. They are to you what that high voltage was to me, with the exception that high-voltage DC (HVDC) still acts exclusively according to the rules of physics; whereas the aforementioned low-lifes can also be capricious, acting according to no rules at all.
Given the choice between the two, I'll take 19,000 VDC any day of the week and twice on Sundays! And in the snow!
But now I must ask something of you.
I ask that you please stop trying to wear shoes that do not and CAN not fit you! We know that you are an honest, hard-working lawyer who has dedicated a working life to sticking up for common working-class folks. We have shown our respect for your expertise by making sure you were heard when questions about the law arose here on c99. You should be able to rest easy in the knowledge that you are loved and respected here. We know you're not some slick-haired crook abusing the license and the law itself for unearned money and power over your neighbors.
I think your life would be much easier, and ours as well, if you'd realize once and for all that when we make rude remarks about the likes of the lawyers who sold out to and for the big money players out there, we are NOT -- repeat, NOT -- talking about you or any of your colleagues like you! We know the difference, and the distinction is critical.
And we know whose side you're on, OTC: the side of us 99%ers, the folks this blog is about.
So I say: Ride easy there, OTC. We love you and all who do as you do. We may tell lawyer jokes about the obvious sell-outs, but these aren't about you! They're about those who -- in your very own words -- have nothing in common with you but the license. So please don't take personally what we have no intention of relating to your person, at all!
Peace be upon you!
Sean
"US govt/military = bad. Russian govt/military = bad. Any politician wanting power = bad. Anyone wielding power = bad." --Shahryar
"All power corrupts absolutely!" -- thanatokephaloides