Koko78 Posted August 6, 2019 Posted August 6, 2019 11 minutes ago, keepthefaith said: Yes but that works both ways, right? Yes. However, what is the government going to get from him that they don't already have? Discovery isn't unlimited. It has to be relevant to the proceeding.
Foxx Posted August 7, 2019 Posted August 7, 2019 (edited) 21 hours ago, Koko78 said: Yes. However, what is the government going to get from him that they don't already have? Discovery isn't unlimited. It has to be relevant to the proceeding. yes but won't relevant portions be redacted (black out) due to an ongoing investigation, thereby making discovery irrelevant at this point? or perhaps his suit gets delayed until said investigation is over? Edited August 7, 2019 by Foxx
Nanker Posted August 7, 2019 Posted August 7, 2019 On 7/26/2019 at 6:02 PM, 4merper4mer said: If the defense gets to enter Inspector Clousseau highlights then it's all good. Film of Mueller on the job digging for evidence... 1
Buffalo_Gal Posted August 7, 2019 Posted August 7, 2019 23 hours ago, Koko78 said: Not irony, good legal strategy. They're going to get a preview of the evidence regarding the case for any potential criminal charges through the civil discovery process. How's a guy with no job and looking at a long term prison sentence going to pay these attorneys? Cigarettes? Stamps? 2
Koko78 Posted August 7, 2019 Posted August 7, 2019 1 hour ago, Foxx said: yes but won't relevant portions be redacted (black out) due to an ongoing investigation, thereby making discovery irrelevant at this point? or perhaps his suit gets delayed until said investigation is over? There are ways around that. As a last resort, he can get always seek a court order to disclose the information. There are time frames that will be imposed for discovery. 52 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: How's a guy with no job and looking at a long term prison sentence going to pay these attorneys? Cigarettes? Stamps? Eh, if you can buy a B word for half a pack of cigarettes, I'm sure he can come up with some arrangement for his legal team. (Or, more likely, a nervous someone else is footing the bill.)
Deranged Rhino Posted August 8, 2019 Posted August 8, 2019 Now McCabe is joining in... Man, they must know how bad it's going to be for them. https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/08/politics/andrew-mccabe-lawsuit/index.html 1 1
OldTimeAFLGuy Posted August 8, 2019 Posted August 8, 2019 16 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: Now McCabe is joining in... Man, they must know how bad it's going to be for them. https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/08/politics/andrew-mccabe-lawsuit/index.html ..gonna be a MAJOR popcorn shortage.......
3rdnlng Posted August 8, 2019 Posted August 8, 2019 McCabe is hoping to win the criminal case against himself by making this political.
Koko78 Posted August 8, 2019 Posted August 8, 2019 9 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: McCabe is hoping to win the criminal case against himself by making this political. Exactly. People are mistaking these civil suits as something that the McCabe and Strzok are actually expecting to win, rather than, in my opinion, a strategic choice to prepare for the real battle in criminal court.
Deranged Rhino Posted August 9, 2019 Posted August 9, 2019 (edited) Here's Ohr's 302 Edited August 9, 2019 by Deranged Rhino 1 1
Deranged Rhino Posted August 9, 2019 Posted August 9, 2019 One of the biggest reveals (though we knew already) was just how involved the State Department (Nuland specifically -- who was a key player in many 44 clandestine operations, in the Ukraine, has big Clinton ties) was in the frame-up. It's important to remember the close relationship which exists between State and Langley. They are intertwined in a symbiotic way, especially at the executive levels where Nuland operated. Which ultimately leads us back to John Brennan once again. Brennan had his fingers in both departments -- DOJ/FBI through Strzok, and State through ... well, a lot of people but Nuland among them. I've said numerous times over the past two years that the DOJ part of the investigation was going to lead to an investigation of State. That one will bring bigger names which no one is really talking about in the media (cough-Kerry-cough) into legal peril. 2 1
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2019 Posted August 9, 2019 24 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: One of the biggest reveals (though we knew already) was just how involved the State Department (Nuland specifically -- who was a key player in many 44 clandestine operations, in the Ukraine, has big Clinton ties) was in the frame-up. It's important to remember the close relationship which exists between State and Langley. They are intertwined in a symbiotic way, especially at the executive levels where Nuland operated. Which ultimately leads us back to John Brennan once again. Brennan had his fingers in both departments -- DOJ/FBI through Strzok, and State through ... well, a lot of people but Nuland among them. I've said numerous times over the past two years that the DOJ part of the investigation was going to lead to an investigation of State. That one will bring bigger names which no one is really talking about in the media (cough-Kerry-cough) into legal peril. Would not surprise me in the least, after yesterday's news about Soros' close working relationship with his department. 1
DC Tom Posted August 9, 2019 Posted August 9, 2019 47 minutes ago, Deranged Rhino said: That little weasel is arguing that his misuse of government property wasn't grounds for firing him because his misuse was illegally released publicly? He's a steaming pile of dung. 4
Deranged Rhino Posted August 13, 2019 Posted August 13, 2019 (edited) Hint: he was Edited August 13, 2019 by Deranged Rhino 2 1
Recommended Posts