Quote Originally Posted by time4fun View Post
Yeah the entire exchange was incredibly strange. Absent corrupt intent or a violation of DoJ policy, the Judiciary doesn't get to determine the staffing plan of investigations and prosecutions if the Executive has signed off on it. And, at least to my knowledge, there's nothing that says you can't use charges to flip a witness. It's pretty standard practice. Does anyone know of any case law that suggests otherwise?
I think the judge is letting them know that they have both weak ass cases, they possibly go past their mandate, they also may be null due to statue of limitations. Since intent supposedly plays a part in guilt or prosecution (see Comey inappropriately exonerating Hillary) then the intent of the prosecution in making up charges and so on to try and flip someone could come into play. Also, there are some rules about false and intentionally malicious petty prosecutions.

What I really don't understand is why the Judge is asking for an unredacted version of the memo. The parts of it that are redacted aren't related to Manafort, and the parts that are already unredacted clearly indicate that Manafort's Ukraine work is under the purview of Mueller's investigation.
Ummm, since they were redacted, unless you have some mythical connection to someone that has read the unredacted memo, are in illegally in possession of classified data or are some kind of psychic/mentat/full of shit you have no idea what the redacted parts are.