Comments by "Killed The Cat" (@killedthecat1034) on "Prosecutors want to move Paul Manafort to Rikers Island" video.

Trump 2020 You know it's a little asinine to ask a question and then answer it yourself, especially when you get the answer wrong. After two separate trials, a plea deal, then breaking that plea deal and finally being sentenced by both courts, Manafort was found guilty on eight counts on his first trial. Filing false tax returns, bank fraud and failing to disclose a foreign bank account. He negotiated a plea deal with Mueller on his second trial and then broke it, so was ultimately sentenced to conspiracy to defraud the United States, witness tampering, bank fraud and bank fraud conspiracy. Now how is that supporting Trump again? Unless your suggesting that Trump was some how a party to all those crimes?
12
@paulettebrrw Well, originally his bail was revoked and he was eventually sent to solitary confinement during his trial because he was caught multiple times trying to obstruct justice by influencing people who where going to testify against him at both of his trials. However, solitary on Rikers Island is standard.
8
@potsmokingatheist9290 please quote the area in the Mueller report that says there was no collusion? Well I'll be waiting, forever
8
@potsmokingatheist9290 you mean if right? Unless your psychic... you also know know he was convicted right? As in found guilty? Two separate trials and multiple convictions. Didn't even get sent away for half the s*** he did. But I guess whatever you have to tell yourself right
7
@bidensworstnightmare7342 what if I were to tell you there was a purple magic rubber ducky stuck up your ass? It would have the same relevance to anything as your comment Just did.
7
@johnpatrick1647 SoOoOo... Your saying those crimes should not matter? Also... Your skipping a few details. Like how they declined to prosecute 10 years before that because they did not have enough evidence to make a case. Except after his business partner flipped on him and they searched his residence during the Russia investigation they, found enough to convicted him. Which is exactly why they declined to prosecute him 10 years ago. The defense only gets one bite of the Apple. Also... They only convicted him of the crimes from years ago. This was part of a plea in the second trial, and part and a lone juror in the first. They originally charged him and his partner, Gates, with conspiracy against the United States, making false statements, Monday laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent for Ukraine. He was later ( in the second trial ) charged but not convicted with perjury for lying about Russian contacts. Among other things in the second trial. Which is also what broke his deal with Muller but those where eventually dropped because they knew he would get more time in jail on the other charges. Which is a common practice.
6
texas thunder sure... Ya know... If ya wanna live your life making baseless assumptions and peddling wild conspiracies that you have no proof of. Why not. 🙃
6
@potsmokingatheist9290 👆👆👆 When your attempt at logical political discourse has lost any semblance of rationale. 👆👆👆
6
news now hampton roads wow! So that point just completely flew over your head, didn't it...
5
@paulettebrrw You do know they sent Al Capone to ▶Alcatraz◀ ( equivalent to if not worse than Rikers Island ) for tax evasion, right?
5
@Kemit2050 You know that's what happened at first, right? Actually, first, second, third and forth. He kept getting caught trying to influince the trial through the people who where testifying in it. The judge have to finally revoke his bail after the forth time. Look it up.
5
@satanas6740 that's the dumbest thing I've heard all day
5
@satanas6740 that's cool. None of us can take someone who presents that stupid ass argument seriously either.
5
@raycabana5286 he lied about more than that. That's why he lost his deal with Mueller.
4
@hodaka1000 hey hater Aid! Come back for more? I see your level of political debate and discourse hasn't risen at all. Funny enough I'm not shocked by that LOL
4
news now hampton roads I like when people pretend that the justice system we have is a slanted to benefit the rich and Powerful.
3
@monkayspunker4123 okay so you want to show any proof of that? Because you do understand just telling me it's not true doesn't quite cut it right? They moved him to a state prison because they are filing state charges on him. Which was in the video. Also they aren't going to give him bail with an ankle monitor for a couple of reasons. One he's already been convicted of other crimes and is serving the sentence for that. As you claimed yourself. 2 judges tend to be really reluctant in issuing bail and Ankle monitors to people who have had their bail revoked before for witness tampering. Which happened in his first and second trial. To the point where the judge just had to revoke his bail because he wouldn't stop doing it. maybe if you saw the whole board and stop cherry-picking facts things would make a little more sense to you.
3
@potsmokingatheist9290 Soooo... Let's go bit by bit then.... "Where is it?" I have the feeling that the best way to start is to give you the definition of Obstruction of Justice. Just to move things along. Obstruction of Justice : obstruction of justice in the United States jurisdictions is a process crime consisting of obstructing prosecutors or other officials. Obstruction of Justice : the crime or act of willfully interfering with the process of justice and law especially by influencing, threatening, harming or impeding a witness, potential witness, juror or judicial or legal officer or by Furnishing false information in or otherwise impeding an investigation or legal process. 1. Trump fired Comey. In May of 2017 Trump fired FBI director James Comey, who was overseeing the investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia Nationals to interfere in the 2016 election. Shortly before he's fired the director, Trump reportedly asked him to drop the investigation into his National Security adviser Michael Flynn, which Trump denies. Following comey's firing, Trump even told a reporter that he had been thinking about "the Russia thing" when he made the decision to fire Comey. 2. Trump's role in creating misleading statements on the Trump Tower meeting. At Trump Tower in June of 2016 Donald Trump jr. Met with Natalie Veselnitskaya, an attorney from Russia, who supposedly had "dirt" on Hillary Clinton. The meeting quickly went downhill when it became clear that the attorney did not have any incriminating evidence on Clinton. A report published by The Washington Post stated that Trump "personally dictated" a public statement about the meeting that misrepresented the meetings content as being "primarily" an about adoption program. 3. Trump leveraged pardon power to influence Witnesses. Trump's lawyer, John Dowd, reportedly told lawyers representing Paul manafort and Michael Flynn that Trump might be willing to Pardon them if they were charged in the Russia investigation. 4. Trump pressure Jeff sessions over his recusal from the Russia investigation. Trump told White House counsel Don mcgahn to convince attorney general Jeff sessions to not recuse himself from the Russia investigation, which he oversaw as Attorney General. Sessions recused himself from the inquiry in March of 2017. A week after Comey was fired, Deputy attorney-general Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller as special counsel to head the investigation. 5. Trump channels FBI director James Comey, " I need loyalty. I expect loyalty." 6. Trump asked Director of National Intelligence Dan coats and director of the National Security Agency Michael Rogers to publicly deny there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russians. 7. Trump also tried to fire special counsel Robert Mueller. 8. Recently, Trump in the Democrats had a meeting about infrastructure. In which he stated to them, and directly after to a lawn full of reporters and cameras, (with pre-made signs at the ready) that he was not willing to do an infrastructure deal unless they dropped the investigation on him. Basically blackmailing or rather trying to Blackmail the Democrats into dropping an investigation.
3
@potsmokingatheist9290 "He could have fired Muller if he wanted because he was conflicted." First... How was he conflicted? Second.... Lets say he was for shits and giggles. Barr was also conflicted but he hired and has yet to fire him. Which kinda mutes your point. Third... Trump could not have easily fired Mueller for the following reasons. .. - under DOJ regulations, only the Attorney General can fire the special counsel, -the special counsel may only be fired for good cause and there is none, -the president does not have inherent authority to fire the special counsel ( hence why he had to make Jeff sessions resign ), -there are significant procedural obstacles to effectuating a firing by rescinding the DOJ special counsel regulations and the risks to ending the special counsel's Russia and investigation are prohibited Not to mention, Mueller siren could be challenged by the special counsel, his staff, and possibly other interested parties.
3
@potsmokingatheist9290 " He also had full authority to fire corrupt Comey." I'm not disputing this, other than to say that, you probably shouldn't think that its a good that someone under criminal investigation has the powet to fire his investigator. The fact that you do... Speaks volumes to you being the actual brainwashed 🐑. I mean... Unless you want to explain why you think its a good thing that anyone has that kind of power???
3
@potsmokingatheist9290 " Trump is the best president we've had in your lifetime. " Lets take the economy first, sense that is what he is always on about. Now I could do this with just about every POTUS in the last 50 years but sense he was the last one, lets take President Obama. This last year Trumps GDP was at 3%. Last year it was 2%. In 2 out of Presdent Obama's 8 years he also got 3% GDP. He also did so without having to dangerously deregulate many things that sould not of been deregulated. The same can not be said for Trump. 3 out of 8 of President Obama's years he beat Trump's first year of 2% As I said before, Trump dangerously deregulated every sector. For example... -Streamlining medical Appeals - commercial and Industrial Solid Waste incineration standards and emissions -training requirements for entry-level commercial motor vehicle operators -VA claims and appeals modernization -affordable housing program amendments methane and waste prevention rule -disclosure exemptions to certain nonprofits -Public Transportation safety certification -pre-shift mining examinations rule -expanding State flexibility to the find essential health benefits and qualified health plans -Electrical shock prevention rule Global politics He alienation often insults long-time friendly global leaders and yet seems to Buddy up to dictators and take their word over the word of our own intelligence agency. He only has one card to play when it comes to negotiations and it rarely works. He has to try and be a strong man. Even if that means getting us into a trade War or lying about starving desperate men women and children and calling them gang members and terrorists and suggesting that they're invading Brakes almost every deal we have with other countries, including global warming initiatives and nucular disarmament treaties without provocation and seaming only because they where what Obama did. There is also an endless list of racism, bully tactics, disrespectful behavor involving our troops, tax cuts for the rich, goverment shutdowns that amounted to nothing, idiotic and childish shuffling of air craft carriers in order to not see a decieced political rivals name, defense of white supremacy, putting children in cages and then loosing them in the system, disapearing tax returns ... I could go on. In the end, I have given you facts, provable hard data and you have given me speculation, personal attacks and assumptions you need to tell yourself in order to continue believing your already decided conclusion.
3
@potsmokingatheist9290 So here is how claims work. You make a claim and then the onus is on you to prove that claim. You cannot then ask someone to disprove a claim that you have yet to prove. Its simply asinine. Also... If it really does say that then it's gonna be super simple to quote the actual findings, right? Yet this is your second opportunity to do so and you have yet to do it. Isn't that funny. On my side however, all I have to do is have you look up Mullers recient press conference, where he clarified things. Also, it's not true that noone was indicted. Manafort was indicted in his second trial for failure to expose him being a Russian asset. " Collusion is not actually a thing in the law. That description falls under many previews. And there you go again with the speculation. Here is the logical fallacy in your argument. How do you know they are "lies"? Do you have proof or just more speculation? And why do the have to be their "Masters"? How do you know they are? Do you know all of them personally? How do you know I watch Meadow? Have you seen me do it? Did you ask? Why do you assume Fox "News" is actually right? Have you done your research on each and every subject? Why does it seam like you haven't sense you have demonstrated in this conversation alone that you do not hold enough of the facts to come to a logical and fact based conclusion?
3
@potsmokingatheist9290 1. Muller is a Republican 2. He has an unquestionable record for nonpartisan fact based investigations. 3. I will say agin, you seam to not have a problem with Barr's conflict of interest. Does that standard only apply when it's for the other side of the isle? 4. Former white house chief strategist Steve Bannon told investigators that contrary to Trump's repeated claims that he interviewed Mueller to be FBI director but turned him down, it was the White House that invited Mueller to the Oval Office to offer it a perspective on the institution of the FBI. Mueller did not come in looking for the job. 5. The president's advisors, including Den white house chief of staff reince priebus, then White House counsel Don mcgahn and and Bannon pushed back on his assertion of conflicts, telling the president they did not count as true conflicts. Bannon told investigators that he recalled telling the president that the proposed conflicts were ridiculous and that none of them we're real or could come close to justifying precluding Mueller from serving as special counsel. 5. On May 23rd 2017 shortly after Mueller was appointed special counsel, justice department ethics officials concluded it was appropriate for Mueller to lead the investigation.
3
@Tucker Carlson is it possible that the reason you don't see any evidence for that, is that you're a partisan hack who doesn't bother with things like evidence or facts?
2
@monkayspunker4123 know what is not? The rest just sounds like some baseless assumptions to me. So I don't know why you bothered
2
@liner011f7 except all those years ago they didn't have what they needed to convect and the defense only gets one bite at the Apple. They decided to pursue them after his partner flipped on him and after they searched his place during the Mueller investigation and found evidence of those prior crimes. At that point they have plenty to convect.
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 " He could of told Comey to stop an investigation into Michael Flynn. " No he could not. All the evidence you need for that is the fact that he had to fire Comey in order to get him to stop. He is not a king. You should not want him to be either.
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 I think a lot of people on both sides of the aisle where are responsible for the Russian dossier. Mostly because those people on both sides of the aisle admitted it and funded it. Which you guys seem to forget. I don't see it that double standard because... 1. Hillary didn't get elected 2. Claiming somebody else did it to does not excuse your own actions. We learned that in third grade. 3. You're making assumptions about my beliefs again and speculating wildly, considering the fact that it wasn't even the subject at hand and therefore that could be why I haven't mentioned it. 4. If you want to talk hypocrisy then you need to address your own by minimizing Trump's actions and dismissing or not recognizing some all together
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 you do realize you're not doing a very good job at making your point when all you do is hurl rampant wild accusations, make assumptions and don't bother to have any factual based data? Or do you?
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 Ya know what's funny... You keep making shit up. You keep lying. You keep making wild accusations and when asked for any kind of evidence twards it, you don't give it. You make excuses, try to divert by making new or similar accusations against everyone, including me.... The funniest part though... Is when you claim others are lying or that I am somehow willfully blind or brainwashed in some way, when your the one who has been.... - claiming you " take information from all sides so we can make Intelligent Decisions ", but I have given you hard fact, information that you can easily verify, and you choose to ignore it. -instead everytime your proven wrong or backed into a corner, you just start claiming how "brain washed" I am. -or you start making assumptions about me and what I do in my day to day. Even though you have never met me in your life. In tern, these can ONLY be lies and assumptions. -you have not once considered that, maybe if you can't prove what your saying that, maybe you should not say it. You ignore or simply dismiss factual information that goes against your belief. You believe - then when asked for proof of your own claims, you provide nothing. Not one time have you provided 1 shread of evidence about anything you have said.
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 So instead of continuing to give you factual evidence to refute your baseless accusations, I'm just going to show how infact you are the one brainwashed, using your own words and beliefs.
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 First a definition.... What is brainwashing? The term brainwashing was first coined in the 1950s during the Korean War. It was used to explain how to italic Terry Unruh jeans were able to completely indoctrinate American soldiers to a process of torture and propaganda. Brainwashing is the theory that a person's core beliefs, ideas, affiliations and values can be replaced, so much so that they have no autonomy over themselves and can't think critically or independently. You, yourself have presented at least 3 out of the 5 markers for brainwashing. I suspect more but am not willing to say so because there is nkt enough evidence to do so and I choose not to speculate or assume like you do. Us V Them Which can be demonstrated by your insistence that Fox is somehow more factual and relivent then CNN and MSNBC ( which is something you assumed that I watch ). The following is information that you will probably ignore but what the hell. Did you know that Gallup has polled the Most and least trusted news sources once every 3 months for the past 6 years? Here are the results ( which again, you can easily verify ). - Americans believe that 62% of the news they consume on TV, and newspapers and on the radio is biased. - they believe that 44% of news reporting and 66% of news on social media is inaccurate - 80% of them are upset about it - perception of bias in an accuracy differ based on the respondents political Persuasions, particularly with regard to Fox News, Breitbart, CNN and MSNBC - the only two media organizations Republican surveyed said weren't biased were Fox News and the Wall Street Journal - Democrats said they believe that just 44% of news on TV, and newspapers and on the radio is biased, while Republicans said they believed 77% of it is biased - presented with a host of major news outlets, respondents ranked PBS news and the Associated Press as the least biased Outlets, while Fox News and Breitbart News tied for being perceived as most biased. Calculating all the different respondents this is what they came up with from most to least bias. 1. Fox news and Breitbart News 87% bias by democrats and 3% bias Republicans for Fox. 73% bias by democrats and 19% by Republicans for Breitbart News 2. MSNBC 1% bias by democrats and 85% bias by Republicans 3. Huffington Post 61% bias rating from Republicans and 9% bias rating from Democrats 4. CNN 87% bias rating from Republicans and 29% bias rating from Democrats 5. Mother Jones 29% bias rating from Republicans and 16% bias rating from Democrats 6. Vox 5% bias rating from Democrats and 16% bias rating from Republicans 7. The New York Times 44% bias rating from democrats' 74% bias rating from Republicans 8. NBC News 42% bias rating from Democrats and 64% bias rating from Republicans 9. Washington Post 40% bias rating from Democrats and 65% bias rating from Republicans 10. ABC News 56% bias rating from Democrats and 60% bias rating from Republicans It goes on but you get the picture. You will notice I did not spare CNN or MSNBC. Country wide concencus shows your Them V Me bias is incorrect.
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 Then next sign is BLIND obedience. You have presented this in many ways. - the obvious way you choose to lie to yourself and others, about yourself and other in order to maintain your believe structure. "Stay away from Rachel Maddow because she is an anti-American conspiracy Nut Job" Noone has once said anything about Rachel Madow, for or against. You are the only one talking about her. You are the one bringing her up. So where are you getting that obvious assumption from? " you have been brainwashed to believe Donald Trump was a sleeper Russian agent " No evidence that I ever said that or claimed that at any point. - the obvious way you choose to reject, ignore or dismiss all factually verifiable evidence to the contrary of your claims. " regarding obstruction, where is it?" I presented you with at least 8 different examples which you chose to completely ignore. " he was turned down for a job the day before he took on the new role. " You have rejected him being cleared by an ethics bored and that the administration was trying to get him to take that job. He did not come in asking for it. " he could have told Comey to stop the investigation into Michael Flynn " Crickets when I pointed out that he could not, evident by the fact that he had to fire him to get him to stop the investigation. - the multitude of affirmative statements you make about your beliefs and then when asked to present evidence to the "facts" you fail to do so. " The Mueller report turned up no collusion because the investigation was a fraud from the start " You have had several oppertunities to present evidence to both the no collusion claim and the fraud claim. You have yet to do so. Blind obedience as a sign of brainwashing ☑
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 Testing.... As a sign of brainwashing. Well thats just all over the place. Your assertion about the Mueller report that you can't provide evidence for, your insistence that everybody who doesn't agree with you must watch Rachel Maddow (which is super weird btw), your insistence that everybody who doesn't agree with you things that Donald Trump is some kind of Sleeper Agent ( also weird ), your obvious ignorance over appointing special counsel and in turn making that into some kind of conspiracy theory, you're down play of the Trump family's connections with Russia despite evidence to the contrary I could go on...
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 In short, you have no evidence to back up your wild accusations about anyone, you insist that they must be true and to this end have made-up baseless accusations about the people, who you don't know, who are telling you differently in order to keep believing what you already believe. It can otherwise be referenced as an acute case of confirmation bias.
2
@potsmokingatheist9290 I forgot one thing. I forgot to mention your tendency to set up paper tigers in order to be able to tear them down. all because that's the only argument you have. Cuz watch this I will be more than happy to apologize if you can only quote me where I claimed that you said the show's on fox where all not bias. I'll be waiting... This is the second time you've claimed that you search out all sides of the argument. Except you've proven that not to be true. You willfully ignore facts. You also keep making asinine statements. Like the implication in this one that you have to be anti-American to be anti Trump. " do you seriously not realize that CNN and MSNBC have been spewing anti-American Trump hating propaganda every day since he decided to run for office?" You claim that you seek out both sides but you just dismissed the entirety of CNN and MSNBC news reporting. You are contradicting yourself from sentence 2 sentence. What I see about people spewing conspiracy theories is the several you have tried to do here and then when asked for evidence to this you failed to provide it. For yet another example, please provide me a link or a quote from any Democratic politician that has an anyway ever advocated for open borders??? And then there is your persistent claims that there's something wrong with me is I don't agree with all your baseless accusations. It is super simple. If you would like me to consider any of your accusations then please provide any modicum of evidence or proof that what you were saying is not complete b*******. if you do so I will consider it but until you do logic dictates that I don't take what you say seriously.
2
@scottdd2 ( out of the fingers of an atheist ) PREACH! 😉
1
@paulettebrrw Except when you look at all the facts of the case, your theory doesn't make sense. 1. When going through his 2 trials, not only did the judge have to revoke his bail but eventually hand to put him in solitary. All because he would not stop trying to influince the outcome of the trial in a lot of ways. He tampered with Witnesses four separate times before the judge revoke his bail finally. How many times do you think you would get? He's still did not stop even after he was in prison, which is why they had to put them in solitary. 2. They are now filing state charges against him, which you seem to know. So that's why they have to transfer him to a state prison. 3. NY is doing what it should. Trying to make sure a convicted Criminal served his time for his crime without pardon and Oval Office interference.
1
@monkayspunker4123 really? Do you want to give me some cases where you're getting brought up on state charges but they leave you in federal prison or maybe quote that in the law and Link it? Here's another question for you if you have the time... Since when are you guys so soft on crime? And it is crime by the way. Several in fact. You can tell by during two separate Trials of a jury of his peers they convicted him of multiple crimes. Beyond A Reasonable Doubt. Which there is tons of evidence for.
1
@monkayspunker4123 or was he not convicted of those crimes by a jury of his peers? Do they not have enough evidence now to bring him up on state charges like they are?
1
@monkayspunker4123 Okay... So let's do this... Lets say for a second you are correct... ( FYI I would like to see some evidence that your claim about this being unprecedented is true, laws or previous examples, something) lets say though.... That it is right on the money, what do you think that proves?
1
@monkayspunker4123 monkay spunker This shows that a criminal, who is being brought up on charges for yet another crime is getting ready to go to trial, this time with the state. When you commit crimes, you lose the right to hang out in whatever place you would like. I'm curious if you would appose this kind of "treatment" if it was anyone else? If you would vocalize it then? And if I have not said it before, sense when are reps all the sudden so soft on crime? The Russian investigation is not a hoax and has been proven not to be. Unless you would like to give some examples as to why you think so? What laws did Comey break? This is special Council investigating crimes of their current president committing against the democracy of our coutry with a powerful foreign advisary. If you think the people do not deserve a clear and full accounting of the findings of that investigation, then you have simply lost perspective. Also, as I have tried to make clear. . an investigation of this magnatude is not like a regular trial. You also simply proven wrong by the actions of Robert Muller coming up and saying that he would have if he could have exonerated the president. He could not and that should be of concern to all americans. At least to anyone with any sense of objectivity. I would suggest you base your opinion on facts and not propaganda from a person that has ample reason to attempt discrediting an investigation on himself breaking the law. You have not presented facts for your claims. You should start doing that. Even you final statment is not based on all the facts. You leave some out to bolster your case. If your case is valid, you should not need to manipulate the data. It's that simple.
1
Look at all these Republican Trump supporters right now, being all soft on crime all the sudden! 🙃
1
@potsmokingatheist9290 It's funny how I don't see the quote anywhere... Could it be because it harder to spin that particular web when the word for word isnright there in front of you? My theory is only further proved by you, directly after making up assumptions about me and what I think. If you have to make so much up off the top of your head just to have your thought make sense... Then maybe consider that its not worth amking in the first place. I mean... Unless you can also quote where I got anywhere close to saying that "Trump was a sleeper Russian agent". Then you claim I " don't see how ignorant the idea is." Why, yes. I do see how ignorant the paper tiger you just made up about me is. Then there goes another one. " for some reason, you don't care if the DOJ attempts to select our president for us. " Asking you to quote where I said any of that seams a little redundent at this point. How about instead you should any evidence of that little gonverment conspiracy you just spun? We will all be waiting... Ya know... Again... Forever.
1
@potsmokingatheist9290 having the Senate appoint Mueller has nothing to do with anything. Nine times out of ten that's not even how they're appointed. Examples of special counsel not appointed by Senate... John Henderson, James Broadhead and the whiskey ring 1875 William Cook the star route scandal 1881 Frances Henne Oregon land fraud Scandal 1905 Atlee Pomerence and Owen Roberts Teapot Dome scandal Newbold Morris corruption at the Bureau of internal revenue 1952 Archibald Cox Watergate 1973 Inspired by Watergate in 1978 Congress passed the Ethics in Government Act. Title V of this act was known as the special prosecutor act and later renamed the independent counsel act, which established formal rules for appointment of a special prosecutor. The appointment of special prosecutor has varied in important ways from appointments made before and since. Majorities of either party within the house or Senate Judiciary Committee could formally request the Attorney General to appoint a special prosecutor on a particular matter, but the decision of whether or not to appoint the independent counsel remained with the attorney general and was not reviewable in court. In order to select Which special prosecutor a three-judge panel would be called.
1