- Cool Stuff You Can Borrow
- Research Tools
- Legal Databases
- Academic and Historical Research
- Business and Corporations Research
- California and State-Specific Law
- Empirical Legal Research
- Foreign & Comparative Resources
- Low Cost—No Cost Guide To Online American Research
- LSN Subscriptions
- Table of Contents Alerts
- U.S. Law and Legislative History
- Other Resources
- Research Projects
- Campaign Finance
- Diary of a Contraband
- Don’t Ask. Don’t Tell.
- Election 2000
- Global Class Actions Exchange
- Lawyers of Latin America
- Libor Litigation
- Library Publications
- Proposition 8
- Recess Appointments
- United States v. Windsor
- University Women
- Women in the Legal Profession
- Women’s Legal History
Continuing Follow-up Regarding POTUS 45: Indictment of 13 Russian Individuals and 3 Russian Entities by the Head of the Special Counsel Investigation of Russian Interference in the 2016 United States Elections, Etc.
Following, again, on an earlier post — here — please see the 16 February 2018, 37-page indictment (in United States of America v. Internet Research Agency LLC, et al.) of the Special Counsel for the United States Department of Justice (DoJ), Robert S. Mueller III [Per this DoJ webpage: “On May 17, 2017, Robert S. Mueller III was appointed by acting Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein to serve as Special Counsel by the order below. Order 3915-2017 “APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS “].
And, here (“The Contours of a Potential Collusion Case Are Beginning to Emerge”), here (“What We Know About How Russia’s Internet Research Agency Meddled in the 2016 Election”), here (“Mueller Indictment Documents Russian Effort to Suppress Turnout of Nonwhite Voters”) and here (“What Good Is an Indictment for Online Election Meddling?: The U.S. keeps filing indictments for cyberconflicts, even though nothing ever comes from them”), are 4 articles on various aspects of the subject matter of this post.
Please see also “Mueller Charges Lawyer [Alex Van der Zwaan] With False Statements In Russia Probe: He’s also accused of deleting or otherwise not producing emails sought by the Special Counsel’s office” here, as well as these reports here and here; and that indictment is here.
Please see here as well for:
“U.S. Special Counsel Files New Charges Against Trump Former Campaign Aides [Paul J. Manafort, Jr. and Richard W. (“Rick”) Gates III]: The latest indictment includes allegations of wrongdoing as recently as January 2017.”The Huffington Post – Politics, by Sarah N. Lynch, February 22, 2018
Please see, as well, here for:
And see here too.
In addition, please see here (“Let Me Do My Job: Mueller’s response to Manafort is a clear, powerful argument for why the special counsel’s work must continue” [by Jeremy Stahl, Slate.com, 3-Apr-2018]) and here (Government’s Response to Motion to Dismiss [2-Apr-2018]); plus this (“The Report that Trump Is Not a Target of the Mueller Probe Is Actually Terrible News for the President” [by Jeremy Stahl, Slate.com, 4-Apr-2018]) and this (“New Filing Indicates Robert Mueller May Have New Collusion Evidence” [by Jeremy Stahl, Slate.com, 6-Apr-2018]).
And Manafort’s civil action challenging Mueller’s appointment has been dismissed — please see here for the 27-Apr-2018 Memorandum Opinion of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (no. 18-00011) and here for some reporting (“A Judge Just Dismissed Paul Manafort’s Lawsuit Challenging Mueller’s Appointment: The judge concluded Manafort couldn’t bring a lawsuit to try to stop the special counsel’s office from taking action against him in the future. By Zoe Tillman, BuzzFeed News Reporter Reporting From Washington, DC Originally posted on April 27, 2018, at 9:27 a.m. Updated on April 27, 2018, at 10:40 a.m.).
PLEASE SEE ALSO:
The latest [15 May 2018] Memorandum Opinion and Order of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge Amy Berman Jackson [in no. 17-00201] here.
From that ruling please note [emphasis added]:
“[T]he Acting Attorney General … exercised his statutory authority to authorize the Special Counsel to investigate not only “links and/or coordination,” but also, ‘any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.'”
Judge [T.S. Ellis III] Praised by Trump for Questioning Robert Mueller’s Authority Rules That Mueller Does, in Fact, Have Authority
At page 14:
“[T]he May 17 Appointment Order plainly authorizes the investigation of indirect links between Trump campaign officials and the Russian government in addition to more direct connections. In this regard, the May 17 Appointment Order authorizes the Special Counsel to investigate defendant’s ties with individuals financially and politically supported by the Russian government, even where, as here, those individuals are not themselves members of the Russian government.”