Not a good couple days for Mueller. 

 to harangue a number of Russian companies

Poor Russian companies. Fuck all Russian bots here on NT.

Can you provide a list of these alleged Russian Bots' here on NT?  Can you provide proof?  I'm sure we'd all be entertained by your list.

There are no Russian bots on NT. Even accounts that are from Russia are removed. 

Last month a team of Washington lawyers reportedly appeared out of nowhere and notified the court that they represent Concord Management and Consulting, one of the companies targeted by Mueller.

 Oh, I'm LOVING THIS!!!  Mueller is now in panic mode.  Now the true outcome of the facade will be presented.

Just an update to the original Politico article

Mueller seeks delay in case alleging Russians interfered in U.S. presidential election

The Mueller team proposed that both sides file briefs in the coming weeks on the issues of whether Concord has been properly served.

In a blunt response Saturday morning, Concord's attorneys accused Mueller's team of ignoring the court's rules and suggesting a special procedure for the Russian firm without any supporting legal authority.

"Defendant voluntarily appeared through counsel as provided for in [federal rules], and further intends to enter a plea of not guilty. Defendant has not sought a limited appearance nor has it moved to quash the summons. As such, the briefing sought by the Special Counsel’s motion is pettifoggery," Dubelier and Seikaly wrote.

The Concord lawyers said Mueller's attorneys were seeking "to usurp the scheduling authority of the Court" by waiting until Friday afternoon to try to delay a proceeding scheduled for next Wednesday. Dubelier and Seikaly complained that the special counsel's office has not replied at all to Concord's discovery requests. The lawyers, who work for Pittsburgh-based law firm Reed Smith, also signaled Concord intends to assert its speedy trial rights, putting more pressure on the special counsel's office to turn over records related to the case.

U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, didn’t immediately rule on Mueller's to put off the arraignment, but did issue a brief order that told Concord’s attorneys to respond to the government’s filing by Monday.
The indictment, obtained by Mueller but announced by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, accused the defendants of mounting an “information warfare” operation in connection with the 2016 election.

The IRA, long suspected of ties to the Kremlin, allegedly used social media, email and other means to manipulate “unwitting” American citizens and Trump campaign officials into protests, demonstrations and the recirculation of media messages. Most of the interventions were intended to benefit Trump or demean his Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton, the indictment alleged.

politico

Mueller seeks delay in case alleging Russians interfered in U.S. presidential election

Between this and the McCabe case it's not looking good for Mueller.

Good point...

Yet there are those that will always believe the McCabe firing was due to the Russian / Trump collusion investigation .. which I am not sure is even being investigated (?)...

We must sit back and watch things unfold!

The last thing Mueller is is "frazzled", that's the author's wet dream, lol.

I smell fear, and it smells a lot like a delicious steak covered in onions, barbecue sauce and the tears of special counsel Robert Mueller.

No, Vivek, it's a nothing burger your smelling.

Although one Russian company indicted by Mueller in February, Concord Management and Consulting, has US attorneys and a court hearing scheduled, the special counsel's team hasn't been able to reach the company or its co-defendants.

The Russian government's top legal office wouldn't accept paperwork from US law enforcement in the case, and the company has already hit back at Mueller by demanding more evidence and information.

.

The prosecutors said in Friday's filing that they don't know whether one of the companies indicted alongside the Russians was served with a summons in the case.

Mueller's team has tried to reach the Russians, first with the summons delivered to the office of the prosecutor general of Russia on March 20. They have also tried to reach the Russians through the power of international treaties. The Russian law enforcement office declined to accept the summonses, US prosecutors said.

.

In US courts, defendants, even those in other countries, must receive formal notice of the charges against them before a case can proceed, unless a judge steps in.

.

The Russian company's attorneys sent the summons from Mueller's office back to prosecutors, saying they hadn't complied with court procedures.

Mueller's team is asking the Washington judge who oversees the case to weigh arguments about whether Concord properly received notice that it faced an indictment.

The company's attorneys have not responded to multiple CNN requests for comment since the Russians' indictments. The judge ordered them to reply to Mueller's office in court by Monday at 5 p.m.

Link

Yes.  The MAGA crowd must protect their own.

Seeing as how ( he ) is incapable of protecting himself.

It is a sad day when people are cheering for a Russian company over their own government.

Then they have the nerve to call themselves patriotic.

The KGB spymaster runs circles around Trump. Obama could keep him in check, but Trump is way out of his league.

That's funny, how did Putin get away with all this BEFORE President Trump was elected, you know, when President Obama was in charge?  And as is common knowledge, President Obama had full knowledge of the Russians actions well before the election?

I hear you, that must be President Trump's fault also.

LOL

Mueller and his overpaid team of Obamabots and Clintonites should have expected this and had been prepared to go to trial.  The fact these hacks were caught flat footed tells everyone what they need to know about the investigation- it is about show, and trying to rack up public opinion points.

It is funny that the Democrats are claiming this to be all about the rule of law; and yet are making excuses for this embarrassment.  A foreign company using an American law firm is nothing knew, it happens all of the time.  Guess what, the companies almost never show up in person.  Seems that they knew what date the trial was, despite Mueller's pleas of ignorance. (Nothing new there)

Now Mueller is begging for more time to prepare legal briefs that have already been prepared for the trial date.

The Russians and the rest of the world aren't just laughing at Trump anymore.  They are laughing at the Establishment's failed attempts in trying to bring down someone that isn't one of them.

You want Trump gone? So do I.  We will all have to wait for the elections.  Next time the Democrats need to run a better candidate than Hillary Clinton.  Who doesn't seem to understand how our election process works, and that she needs to campaign and appeal to fly over country- not just the leftist coasts.  Not to mention she is more toxic than Trump.  

Mueller isn't begging for time. The Judge gave the Russian company a deadline of 5 pm Monday to comply.

Then I gather, after that point there will be no more excuses and everything will move forward.

A not guilty plea I heard.

Could it be that 'requests' from the Concord legal team has anything to do with the reason that Mueller's team desires to have the hearing postponed?  It would appear as 'someone' received the paperwork .. why else would lawyers show up last month requesting information?

This from the article you linked:

Prosecutors also said US-based defense attorneys for Concord Management and Consulting, from the law firm Reed Smith in Washington, DC, have sought details about evidence Mueller's office collected in the case.

The Russian company's attorneys asked for information about other employees who Mueller considered to be co-conspirators or who weren't charged in the case, the US people who communicated with the Russians, and recordings and other electronic surveillance of the company's employees.

The company's attorneys also asked for information about the past seven decades of US policy toward other countries' elections, especially regarding " 'each and every instance' from '1945 to present' where the US government 'engaged in operations to interfere with elections and political processes in any foreign country,' " according to the prosecutors' court filing.

..

Are 'they' not entitled to this information in order to build their defense?  after all 'they' have been indicted by the Special Prosecutor and his team for election interference and information warfare... last time I checked the US possesses no Halo regarding the subject matter

U.S. District Court Judge Dabney Friedrich, a Trump appointee, didn’t immediately rule on Mueller's to put off the arraignment, but did issue a brief order that told Concord’s attorneys to respond to the government’s filing by Monday.
The indictment, obtained by Mueller but announced by Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, accused the defendants of mounting an “information warfare” operation in connection with the 2016 election.

From link provided in comment #4

..

I do not desire to see Mueller 'fail' .. yet I would like to see this investigation reined to comply with some form of 'legal' Special Prosecutor's investigation ... there are those cheering for the overreach of the Mueller investigation, so many seem to think that a special prosecutor has NO limits within their mandate - yet they do, and now it appears that Rosenstein's feet will be held to the fire in explaining the scope of the investigation he assigned Mueller...

Did the special counsel not start out investigating Russian collusion with the Trump campaign along with possible obstruction charges?  Outside of Flynn, what does the Mueller team have?  even with Flynn, he pled to charges that have nothing to do with collusion - there is speculation that Flynn pled in order to stop the financial bleeding (his funds were exhausted) and to save his son (which he may not have accomplished)

Manafort, no charges related to collusion, 70 open subpoenas requested, at the same time a judge is asking for the paperwork defining the scope of Mueller's investigation ... Papadopoulos?  who knows, he was/is such a low level fish in the frying pan .. 

Have to wait and see the outcome .. everything is on a holding pattern ....  Trump is certainly not my choice for President of the United States ..!  yet, I personally think the opportunity to 'get' Trump has been missed .. if that opportunity ever existed, I do not think there was collusion ... obstruction, yeah perhaps

Are 'they' not entitled to this information in order to build their defense?

Why do they need to know what was found out about people that were not charged with anything? Why do they need to know about US activities over 70 years? It seems to me they are trying to turn the tables and get information, even though they have no intention of complying. If I am accused of meddling in an election, can I ask the prosecutors to give me information on anyone that has ever meddled in an election over the last 50 or so years? Do you think I would get it?

How is indicting a Russian company out of the scope of the investigation?

Mueller was named special counsel in May after the firing of FBI Director James Comey by the President. Mueller was given a broad mandate to continue the investigation started by the FBI into any links, coordination or both between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign and "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation."

Link

So you want Mueller restrained to a very narrow scope that he could not leave? You want things that he finds to go un-prosecuted because some think they do not fall within his scope? That they should just be looked over?

The scope of his investigation was not just collusion by trump. None of us know what he has and some would like to keep it that way.

Edit: I have seen nowhere that Mueller himself has postponed anything. The judge ordered the Russian company to comply by Monday, 5pm.

Are 'they' not entitled to this information in order to build their defense?

I'm going to give you the benefit of doubt that you really didn't consider that question before posting it rather than something much less charitable. Of course, defendants are not entitled to have access to everything the prosecution has collected as evidence.  With one exception, the only thing the prosecution has to divulge is in the indictment.  That exception is that if the prosecution uncovers any evidence that might be exculpatory in the course of its investigation it is required to turn that over.  Of course, we've learned over the generations of criminal prosecutions of certain types of accused individuals that this frequently does not happen.  

Money laundering will likely be what brings Trump down.

You might want to study the rules of 'Discovery'.  The prosecution IS required to turn over all evidence to the Defense.  Part of the whole 'Innocent unitl proven guilty' thing.

So you want Mueller restrained to a very narrow scope that he could not leave? You want things that he finds to go un-prosecuted because some think they do not fall within his scope? That they should just be looked over?

Poetic interpretation of what I typed? 

There are guidelines in place for Special Prosecutor investigations ... a federal judge is asking the scope of the investigation to be defined.  Charges should be deferred to other jurisdiction - no one need go  unpunished   / unprosecuted .. the investigation has overreached, especially with Manafort.

Hand Manafort off to the proper authorities and continue on with the 'collusion investigation'

This is an interesting read if you are interested,,

Counterintelligence Investigations and the Special Counsel’s Mandate: Part I

..

But does this regulatory apparatus govern the Mueller investigation? I am not so sure. The order appointing Mueller (what I’ll call the “Rosenstein Order”) invokes—and commentators have naturally focused on—the regulations contained in 28 C.F.R. Part 600 (what I’ll call the “Part 600 regulations”), because they expressly authorize the appointment of a Special Counsel. But as I explain below, these regulations do not contemplate the delegation of a counterintelligence investigation to a Special Counsel; they focus on criminal investigations. The two kinds of investigations are significantly different in scope and function and rely on different investigative tools. The Rosenstein Order, however, appears to delegate a counterintelligence investigation to the Special Counsel under the criminal-prosecution-focused Part 600 regulations, thereby creating some confusion on the appropriate scope and type of investigation. By seemingly directing Mueller to conduct a counterintelligence investigation while at the same time limiting his authority to the criminal investigations authorized by the Part 600 regulations, the Rosenstein Order points in different directions on the scope of the Special Counsel’s mandate.

In this post, I will explain why the counterintelligence investigation that Rosenstein appears to have intended to delegate to the Special Counsel is inconsistent with the criminal focus of the Part 600 regulations. The delegated investigation, in short, does not comply with the limits on the Special Counsel’s authority imposed by the regulations. In a subsequent post, I will explain that Rosenstein may delegate a counterintelligence investigation to the Special Counsel under his general statutory authority, 28 U.S.C. § 510. But if he intends to do so, he should clarify that the Part 600 regulations are inapplicable.

lawfareblog

First of all, Manafort’s charge that Mueller acted outside of his authority by indicting him is an extremely unusual move. If an indictment can be challenged legally, typically the defendant files a motion to dismiss that indictment as part of the criminal case.

It’s hard to see why Manafort chose to file this as a civil lawsuit instead of filing a motion in the criminal case. My initial reaction is that Manafort, an expert in the dark arts of manipulating public opinion, wants to gain additional media exposure without putting this in front of the judge who would ultimately sentence him if convicted.

This suit has almost no chance of success. Even if it succeeded, another federal prosecutor could indict Manafort for the same crimes, so it’s a pointless suit.

He’s counting on the public (or conservative allies) to take this publicity stunt seriously. Don’t.

I already tweeted about why, on the merits, there’s very little to Manafort’s substantive claim until and unless the Supreme Court actually wants to revisit Morrison v. Olson —and perhaps not even then:

The only way that this complaint has a chance is if there really is a majority of the current #SCOTUS that wants to, and will, overrule Morrison v. Olson. And as Eric Posner and I testified before the Senate in September, we just don't see that happening.

Link

Morrison v. Olson,  
487 U.S. 654 (1988)

 Ultimately, pursuant to the Act's provisions, the Special Division (a special court created by the Act) appointed appellant as independent counsel with respect to Olson only, and gave her jurisdiction to investigate whether Olson's testimony, or any other matter related thereto, violated federal law, and to prosecute any violations. When a dispute arose between independent counsel and the Attorney General, who refused to furnish as "related matters" the Judiciary Committee's allegations against Schmults and Dinkins, the Special Division ruled that its grant of jurisdiction to counsel was broad enough to permit inquiry into whether Olson had conspired with others, including Schmults and Dinkins, to obstruct the EPA investigation. Appellant then caused a grand jury to issue subpoenas on appellees, who moved in Federal District Court to quash the subpoenas, claiming that the Act's independent counsel provisions were unconstitutional and that appellant accordingly had no authority to proceed. The court upheld the Act's constitutionality, denied the motions, and later ordered that appellees be held in contempt for continuing to refuse to comply with the subpoenas.

 After consulting with other Department officials, however, the Attorney General chose to apply to the Special Division for the appointment of an independent counsel solely with respect to appellee Olson.

The court ruled, however, that its original grant of jurisdiction to appellant was broad enough to permit inquiry into whether Olson may have conspired with others, including Schmults and Dinkins, to obstruct the Committee's investigation

An independent counsel's role is restricted primarily to investigation and, if appropriate, prosecution for certain federal crimes. Admittedly, the Act delegates to appellant "full power and independent authority to exercise all investigative and prosecutorial functions and powers of the Department of Justice

Our conclusion that the power to define the counsel's jurisdiction is incidental to the power to appoint also applies to the Division's authority to expand the Jurisdiction of the counsel upon request of the Attorney General under § 593(c)(2).

supreme.justia

The closer Mueller's investigation gets to Trumpty Dumpty and his web of criminal activities and associates the more hysterical he and  his toadies get. 

The trumpers are a special breed. Attack anyone and anything that dares defy them. Attack the FBI, attack the DOJ, attack Mueller and his team, try to change the narrative and say Clinton is the criminal and totally ignore aspects that go against the narrative they are pushing.

Why are righties siding with Putin's Russian trolls against the US Justice Department?

If one were to actually read the whole article at the link, and not just the snippet that was posted here, they would see some fine evidence of just how low "journalism" in this country has sunk.  This article is 100% heavily biased opinion masquerading around as legit reporting.  How embarrassing that anyone would post this garbage - and just look at how the NT rightwing fringe flocks to it like stink on shit.