Rosenstein says 12 Russian intel officers indicted in special counsel's probe

[Steeleballz 7,550]

8 hours ago, jg121783 said:

Why didn't that happen last time he took some Russians to court and they actually showed up to defend themselves to his surprise? When they demanded discovery Mueller denied them their due process right and claimed national securiry.

 

     When and where exactly did any of the indicted Russians appear in US court?

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

11 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

     When and where exactly did any of the indicted Russians appear in US court?

Last time is the key phrase.  

[Steeleballz 7,550]

33 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Last time is the key phrase.  

 

  Did the Russians show up last time or did their attorneys?

[jg121783 3,915]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Did the Russians show up last time or did their attorneys?

Under the law their attorneys can show up in their place and they still have a right to due process. I fail to see how your question is relevant.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

29 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

Under the law their attorneys can show up in their place and they still have a right to due process. I fail to see how your question is relevant.

 

  You said the Russians did show up for court. They did not, and they had no intention of doing so. 

 

  

[Rob and Cheryl 56]

8 hours ago, jg121783 said:

The Russians I am talking about did show up for court and were denied their due process right of discovery. There was no allegation of espionage and even if there was they still have due process rights. 

I don't think so, you say Russian citizens showed up? When?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency

 

The indicted individuals are Mikhail Ivanovich Bystrov, Mikhail Leonidovich Burchik, Aleksandra Yuryevna Krylova, Anna Vladislavovna Bogacheva, Sergey Pavlovich Polozov, Maria Anatolyevna Bovda, Robert Sergeyevich Bovda, Dzheykhun Nasimi Ogly Aslanov, Vadim Vladimirovich Podkopaev, Gleb Igorevitch Vasilchenko, Irina Viktorovna Kaverzina, Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin and Vladimir Venkov.^[80] None of the defendants is in custody.^[81]

On March 15, President Trump imposed financial sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Acton the 13 Russian and organizations indicted by Mueller,^[82] preventing them from entering the United States to answer the charges should they wish to.

 

Edited July 15, 2018 by Rob and Cheryl

[jg121783 3,915]

5 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  You said the Russians did show up for court. They did not, and they had no intention of doing so. 

 

  

 

22 minutes ago, Rob and Cheryl said:

I don't think so, you say Russian citizens showed up? When?

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Research_Agency

 

The indicted individuals are Mikhail Ivanovich Bystrov, Mikhail Leonidovich Burchik, Aleksandra Yuryevna Krylova, Anna Vladislavovna Bogacheva, Sergey Pavlovich Polozov, Maria Anatolyevna Bovda, Robert Sergeyevich Bovda, Dzheykhun Nasimi Ogly Aslanov, Vadim Vladimirovich Podkopaev, Gleb Igorevitch Vasilchenko, Irina Viktorovna Kaverzina, Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin and Vladimir Venkov.^[80] None of the defendants is in custody.^[81]

On March 15, President Trump imposed financial sanctions under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Acton the 13 Russian and organizations indicted by Mueller,^[82] preventing them from entering the United States to answer the charges should they wish to.

 

So how do you justify the violation of their due process rights considering they had representation present demanding discovery on their behalf?

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

 

conservatives defending Russian spies....

*eats popcorn*

Very entering. 

 

 

[jg121783 3,915]

Just now, Keith & Arileidi said:

 

conservatives defending Russian spies....

*eats popcorn*

Very entering. 

 

 

Not defending anyone. Simply pointing out that Mueller doesn't have a case and/or he is hiding something because he refused discovery.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

12 minutes ago, jg121783 said:

 

So how do you justify the violation of their due process rights considering they had representation present demanding discovery on their behalf?

 

     Are you sure a violation of due process rights occurred?  You may want to brush up on the extradition process.

 

   Although the extraditee does not have a right to discovery from the government or the requesting country, the court has the discretion to grant a discovery request. 65 The request for discovery must be tailored to the limited issue of undermining the government’s showing of probable cause.66 This rule is consistent with the narrow scope of extradition proceedings.

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

2 hours ago, jg121783 said:

Not defending anyone. Simply pointing out that Mueller doesn't have a case and/or he is hiding something because he refused discovery.

Sounds a lot like you are trying to defend the Russians. 

Mueller is doing his job, and clearly he has enough evidence to indict. 

 

The rest is just kind of nonsensical partisan speculation. 

[jg121783 3,915]

7 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

     Are you sure a violation of due process rights occurred?  You may want to brush up on the extradition process.

 

   Although the extraditee does not have a right to discovery from the government or the requesting country, the court has the discretion to grant a discovery request. 65 The request for discovery must be tailored to the limited issue of undermining the government’s showing of probable cause.66 This rule is consistent with the narrow scope of extradition proceedings.

That is for extradition proceedings. Were not talking about extradition proceedings here. This does not apply to the criminal case Mueller has brought against them. Everyone being criminally charged has a due process right to see the evidence being used against them.

4 hours ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

Sounds a lot like you are trying to defend the Russians. 

Mueller is doing his job, and clearly he has enough evidence to indict. 

 

The rest is just kind of nonsensical partisan speculation. 

One of the reasons Mueller cited for denying discovery is that the investigation is ongoing and they are still collecting evidence so apparently there isn't enough evidence. Which is kind of backwards because usually there isn't an indictment until the investigation is over.

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

12 hours ago, Keith & Arileidi said:

 

conservatives defending Russian spies....

*eats popcorn*

Very entering. 

 

 

Doesn’t exactly seem like defending Russian spies as much as defending American law.

 

What I find interesting is the number of assumed liberals arguing the LETTER of this law but ignoring any immigration law, voting law, employment law that does not meet their litmus test for diversity and/or inclusion.

 

can I assume from this that liberals support violating the legal process from certain criminals? Of I cant, but that is the logical conclusion from your statement

Edited July 15, 2018 by Randyandyuni

[jg121783 3,915]

3 hours ago, Randyandyuni said:

Doesn’t exactly seem like defending Russian spies as much as defending American law.

 

What I find interesting is the number of assumed liberals arguing the LETTER of this law but ignoring any immigration law, voting law, employment law that does not meet their litmus test for diversity and/or inclusion.

 

can I assume from this that liberals support violating the legal process from certain criminals? Of I cant, but that is the logical conclusion from your statement

The left only cares about the law and due process when it suits their agenda.

[Rob and Cheryl 56]