• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

There are dozens of sealed criminal indictments on the DC docket. Are they from Mueller?

Atomic Kid

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 17, 2018
Messages
21,019
Reaction score
10,193
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dozens-sealed-criminal-indictments-dc-docket-mueller/story?id=59249030

More than three dozen sealed criminal indictments have been added to the federal court docket in Washington, D.C. since the start of 2018.

Sealed criminal court files are assigned a case number, but do not indicate the identity of the parties or the nature of the charges, so it is impossible for the public to discern what those sealed cases contain.

But several legal experts told ABC News the number of sealed cases awaiting action right now is unusual. Fourteen were added to the docket since late August alone, a review by ABC News has found, just as the midterm elections were drawing near and longstanding Justice Department policy precluded prosecutors from taking any public action that could appear to be aimed at influencing political outcomes.

And the inadvertent discovery on Thursday night of what appear to be secret charges pending against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has drawn fresh attention to the mystery. Legal experts told ABC News that the sealed cases could be tied to Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and possibly part of a quiet effort to protect his investigation from any premature effort to shut it down.

“I assume that Mueller knew that once the election was over, there could be an existential threat to his investigation,” said Matthew Miller, a former senior Justice official under former Attorney General Eric Holder. “He knew the best thing to do was act before that.”

A spokesperson for the special counsel’s office declined to comment on the investigation or the uptick in sealed indictments.

Is Mueller about to become the Oprah Winfrey of federal indictments?

1yhqu4.jpg
 
This news is promising. Let us hope it is correct.
 
I don't know whether any are from Mueller's team, but I know that we'll find out.

One thing's all but certain, any that are withdrawn are most likely from Mueller and ordered withdrawn by Whittaker.
 
I don't know whether any are from Mueller's team, but I know that we'll find out.

One thing's all but certain, any that are withdrawn are most likely from Mueller and ordered withdrawn by Whittaker.

I don't think it's clear that Whitaker can have them withdrawn if they have been already filed.
 
I don't think it's clear that Whitaker can have them withdrawn if they have been already filed.

You may be correct, but I don't think so. That said, I don't know the details of what an acting AG can and can't do. But there's more than one way to obtain the same effect of withdrawing the indictment:
  • Drop the charges -- Whittaker would have to inform Congress of his doing so and, theoretically, members could refer the matter to the FBI for criminal investigation on obstruction of justice charges.
  • Order that no prosecutor appear in court -- Same notification process and referral risk as noted above.
That notwithstanding, seeing as he's Trump's patsy, a pardon would be all but ensured. That nefarious sequence of events is why the DOJ's internal policy of not indicting a sitting POTUS is highly problematic. (It's not problematic when the POTUS isn't corrupt and conniving to the core, but the current one is.)
 
I've noticed that even the Trumpsters realize that Trump is going down.
It's only a matter of when, and Robert Mueller answers to no one.

Red:
In a professional sense as the special prosecutor, that's not at all the case. Mueller answers to the (acting/deputy) Attorney General. That special prosecutors do answer to someone in the DOJ is among the most material differences between the special prosecutor statue and the now-defunct independent prosecutor statute.
 
There are dozens of sealed indictment in Utah could it be Huber?
 
Red:
In a professional sense as the special prosecutor, that's not at all the case. Mueller answers to the (acting/deputy) Attorney General. That special prosecutors do answer to someone in the DOJ is among the most material differences between the special prosecutor statue and the now-defunct independent prosecutor statute.

I think Mueller could then challenge the constitutional validity, in addition to other constitutional challenges already underway of such an order by arguing that Whitaker is an inferior officer occupying a principal office. There are other issues surrounding Whitaker such as his involvement with a company charged with fraud and other questionable business ventures. His appointment could well die of embarrassment before a court rules on his appointment.
 
Last edited:
I think Mueller could then challenge the constitutional validity, in addition to other constitutional challenges already underway of such an order by arguing that Whitaker is an inferior officer occupying a principal office. There are other issues surrounding Whitaker such as his involvement with a company charged with fraud and other questionable business ventures. His appointment could well die of embarrassment before a court rules on his appointment.

Red:
That line probably wouldn't prevail because attorneys general are political appointees, and there's no requirement that an AG even have a law degree.

The non-confirmation by the Senate is a puissant line.
 
Red:
In a professional sense as the special prosecutor, that's not at all the case. Mueller answers to the (acting/deputy) Attorney General. That special prosecutors do answer to someone in the DOJ is among the most material differences between the special prosecutor statue and the now-defunct independent prosecutor statute.

Mueller doesn't answer to the twitter peer pressure and the media/public perception of what he should and should not be doing. However. Whitaker is an idiot and Mueller likely doesn't care about him/knows how to play him.
 
He and the IG are investigating the FBI and the Clinton investigation.

Yeah well maybe you should send out a search party then Mr Huber has been MIA. None of the alleged witnesses have heard anything from him or have talked with him and no one Congress has any idea what it is he's been up to since they haven't heard from anything. So my advice would be not to hold your breath.
 
I've noticed that even the Trumpsters realize that Trump is going down.
It's only a matter of when, and Robert Mueller answers to no one.

???? Outside of the voices in your head, who are these mythical 'Trumpsters' of whom you speak?
 
Mueller doesn't answer to the twitter peer pressure and the media/public perception of what he should and should not be doing. However. Whitaker is an idiot and Mueller likely doesn't care about him/knows how to play him.

Red:

He won't be happy until he's banging the next big thing. And while he'd prefer a female, I think he'd **** anything that moves if he thinks it'll ease his climb to the top. Male, female, or small farm animal.​
-- J. Kenner, Claim Me
 
I don't know whether any are from Mueller's team, but I know that we'll find out.

One thing's all but certain, any that are withdrawn are most likely from Mueller and ordered withdrawn by Whittaker.

Once they have been okayed and they are done, is that even possible? Why would they have to go back to square one when they already have been approved by the proper person in charge?
 
Once they have been okayed and they are done, is that even possible? Why would they have to go back to square one when they already have been approved by the proper person in charge?

....Because their boss tells them to withdraw the charges.....The judge isn't going to object to a prosecutor's motion to dismiss, and a defendant damn sure isn't going to. AFAIK, the state is never required to bring charges; it's only expected to bring charges when it thinks it can win a conviction.
 
I don't know whether any are from Mueller's team, but I know that we'll find out.

One thing's all but certain, any that are withdrawn are most likely from Mueller and ordered withdrawn by Whittaker.

What we do know is the 1) Mueller and his team were in the court quite frequently in September and October (behind closed doors) and 2) Judge Katsas, who worked in the white house before he become judge in the D.C. circuit, and promised to recluse himself on anything he worked on for the White house recused himself on those issues.

What those issues are is unknown. They are sealed, and the proceeding are behind closed doors.

People can make assumptions and conclusions based on those facts.
 
Red:
That line probably wouldn't prevail because attorneys general are political appointees, and there's no requirement that an AG even have a law degree.

The non-confirmation by the Senate is a puissant line.

I don't agree. I think he would have a strong constitutional argument to make and he's just waiting for Whitaker to go ahead and try something as I'm sure Mueller already has a plan in mind for dealing with any such an eventuality.
 
Don't want to be a party pooper...I know how much you love your "get Trump" speculation. I'll just say this: Let me know when/if you finally find out what those sealed indictments are for.

Okay?


Oh I'm quite certain that you will know the minute they are out.

You can only hope you are sitting on a toilet when you do hear about them...
 
....Because their boss tells them to withdraw the charges.....The judge isn't going to object to a prosecutor's motion to dismiss, and a defendant damn sure isn't going to. AFAIK, the state is never required to bring charges; it's only expected to bring charges when it thinks it can win a conviction.

That would be political suicide and bring on a far worse crisis than the Nixon Saturday Night Massacre.
 
Oh I'm quite certain that you will know the minute they are out.

I won't hold my breath...and I won't be devastated, as so many others will, if they don't turn out to be what you speculate they are.
 
Back
Top Bottom