Sounds like she’s got a high-priced team of lawyers. Who’s paying for them? She’s not independently wealthy.
It’s weird. I have a halfway decent legal education and significant legal experience. And yet, though I have searched and searched my Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, nowhere do I find this thing called a “Motion to Have Case Thrown Out of Court” journalists are constantly reporting some litigant or defendant has filed.
I think it’s in Blackstone.
Butina Lawyers Move To Throw Out ‘Unconstitutional’ Case
Frivolous.
But I’d love a link. Looks like entertaining reading.
I think that journalists are just trying to make things easier for the rest of us.
Go for it!
Dirty Russian pig trying to claim Constitutional protections? That’s rich since her and her evil Russian cabal of literal scum of the Earth don’t believe in our Constitution.
Hang this spy and do it on live TV. And anyone funding her defense or a party to her spying needs to pay the price too.
You seem like you may be an “Autumn”, Maria, so an orange jumpsuit should look just FABULOUS on you, darling!
Did you ever watch “Master of None” on Netflix?
Did you see that great “Thanksgiving” episode with Angela Bassett?
Remember the hilarious kitchen scene where the aunt uses the term “T.H.O.T”?
Yeah, me too.
"… the boy’s grandmother — a foreign official — “thoughtfully directs him to go to prayer groups and same-interest meetups,” thereby rendering the grandson a “foreign agent,” per Butina’s attorneys.
These legal arguments would carry more weight if defense counsel had Facebooked everyone photos of their lunch, and let us in on Cindy's second semester grades.
Oh, does the grandson have a switchblade that opens from the front of his boot, like Jethro? That would be cool.Very interesting reading! The defense is betting it all on the claim that Butina is just a student and contact with Russian officials was basically coincidental and not of any relevance to intelligence gathering or “direction”. They give a whole bunch of analogies with innocent behavior they claim is substantively the same as what Butina did. “Registered foreign journalists who work in U.S. outlets based in nations with state-owned media violate the statute by being present at a newsworthy event to report the news if so directed by an officer from their foreign state-controlled news agency”, and the like. A bit of a stretch in my non-lawyerly opinion.
Basically they’re betting that the prosecution can’t back up their claims with any, y’know, evidence, and that the only thing they have on Butina is the fact she was sometimes in touch with a Russian official. That isn’t normally how Mueller’s team works. I’d be pretty surprised if they didn’t have an incriminating wiretap or something similar. We’ll see!
Butina Lawyers Move To Throw Out ‘Unconstitutional’ Case
Good luck with that.
If I had to guess, it would be the NRA sponsoring her in the US.
The SIGINT will be damaging.
That’s because it’s actually a “Motion to Have ‘Everybody Does It Even People I’ve Made Up’” defense recognized.
Well, it’s not a Mueller prosecution, but your point stands.
Plus here, from the indictment, is something about their avuncular “Russian official”:
The RUSSIAN OFFICIAL, whose identity is known to the grand jury, was a Russian citizen and a high-level official in the Russian government. The RUSSIAN OFFICIAL was previously a member of the legislature of the Russian Federation and later became a top official at the Russian Central Bank. In April 2018, pursuant to Executive Order 13661, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), in consultation with the U.S. Department of State, sanctioned the RUSSIAN OFFICIAL.
It’s Alexander Torshin, parliamentarian, banker, big shot. You may also recognize his name from the investigation into whether the NRA was used (or complicit) in Russia/Trump shenanigans.
Lol… I just finished reading the whole thing (thanks to @cervantes again for the link), and that’s literally exactly what they’re doing in their filing. Over and over and over. Plus a little “this is a lot of charges for one tiny offense” thrown in at the end.