|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 3, 2018 14:02:46 GMT -5
Former FBI counterintelligence official Clint Watts explains how Bump's graphic works in practice: "Typically, the Kremlin deploys layers of surrogates and proxies offering business inducements, information or threatened reprisals that can individually be explained away by coincidence while masking the strings and guiding hands of the Kremlin’s puppet masters and their objectives. When called upon by the Kremlin, oligarchs, contractors, criminals and spies (current or former) all provide levers for advancing President Vladimir Putin’s assault on democracies. In Trump and his campaign, Mr. Putin spotted a golden opportunity — an easily ingratiated celebrity motivated by fame and fortune, a foreign policy novice surrounded by unscreened opportunists open to manipulation and unaware of Russia’s long run game of subversion. Mr. Putin has succeeded where his Soviet forefathers failed by leveraging money and cyberspace to subtly infiltrate and influence Americans while maintaining plausible deniability of their efforts. And the Kremlin’s ground game “cut outs” — intermediaries who facilitate communication between agents — conducted a more complex game." linkIn other words, Trump was not a Manchurian Candidate so much as a Useful Idiot (using these as technical terms rather than pejoratives). As for the people around him, that's a bit less clear: "Trump campaign members certainly colluded with Russian influence efforts, some willingly, some possibly knowingly. The president denies the Kremlin’s hand, either still unaware or in denial of being manipulated by Mr. Putin’s minions. For Mr. Putin, it’s likely everything he hoped for — America riddled with political infighting and mired in investigations, a weakened NATO alliance vulnerable to aggression and a United States president seeking his adoration, obstinate and ignorant of the great caper the Kremlin just orchestrated. The problem for the president is that ignorance is not immunity. The problem for America is that ignorance of Russian interference is vulnerability." And therein the problem. By seeing claims of Russian interference as attacks on him and his legitimacy, Trump is resisting taking effective actions both to understand what the Russians have been doing to our internal politics since at least 2014, and to immunize us as much as possible from their continuing attacks on democracy here and abroad. This is irresponsible.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 3, 2018 15:16:49 GMT -5
"Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III was authorized by a top Justice Department official to investigate whether Paul Manafort, the onetime chairman of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, illegally coordinated with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, new court filings show. Manafort, who was indicted last year on felony charges related to his work in Ukraine before joining Trump’s campaign, has not been charged with any crimes connected to the presidential race. But a partly redacted memo included in court filings late Monday night revealed that Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein authorized Mueller to pursue allegations that Manafort colluded with Russia in 2016. The new filings show that Rosenstein specifically approved lines of investigation for the special counsel in an August 2017 memo. A version of the memo filed in court showed that Rosenstein signed off on an investigation of whether Manafort 'committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials' and of Manafort’s work as an international political consultant in Ukraine before joining Trump’s campaign." linkYou may wonder why this is important. Well, the court filing came in response to Manafort's motion to dismiss the charges against him as falling outside Muller's remit to look into Russian influence on the Trump campaign. But the response shows that Rosenstein actually has given Mueller a broad mandate to investigate Manafort, including “crimes arising out of payments he received from the Ukrainian government before and during the tenure of President Viktor Yanukovych.” And Mueller's submission further quotes the Code of Federal Regulations provision that says a Special Counsel also has "the authority of investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses." That last part, included in a footnote, is a clear warning, not so much to Manafort as to Trump, that Mueller has a legal basis for charging anyone who tries to obstruct his investigation. This is a very big shot across the bow.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 3, 2018 22:18:15 GMT -5
"Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III informed President Trump’s attorneys last month that he is continuing to investigate the president but does not consider him a criminal target at this point, according to three people familiar with the discussions. In private negotiations in early March about a possible presidential interview, Mueller described Trump as a subject of his investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election...The special counsel also told Trump’s lawyers that he is preparing a report about the president’s actions while in office and potential obstruction of justice, according to two people with knowledge of the conversations. Mueller reiterated the need to interview Trump — both to understand whether he had any corrupt intent to thwart the Russia investigation and to complete this portion of his probe, the people said." linkExactly what this means seems to be a matter of debate among Trump's lawyers. That's because "Prosecutors view someone as a subject when that person has engaged in conduct that is under investigation but there is not sufficient evidence to bring charges...The president and some of his allies seized on the special counsel’s words as an assurance that Trump’s risk of criminal jeopardy is low. Other advisers, however, noted that subjects of investigations can easily become indicted targets — and expressed concern that the special prosecutor was baiting Trump into an interview that could put the president in legal peril." This may explain why Trump apparently is anxious to have an interview with Mueller, even though some of his advisors think that's, well, unadvisable because, "Under Justice Department guidelines, a subject of an investigation is a person whose conduct falls within the scope of a grand jury’s investigation. A target is a person for which there is substantial evidence linking him or her to a crime. A subject could become a target with his or her own testimony, legal experts warn." Or it could be that "Mueller may conclude he does not have the authority to charge a sitting president with a crime under an opinion written by the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel in 1973 and reaffirmed in 2000. If Mueller finds Trump engaged in criminal conduct, he could detail it in a report, experts argue, and let Congress to decide whether to launch impeachment proceedings based on Mueller’s findings." In other words, he may not be a "target" only because Mueller does not think he can be indicted, not because Mueller has no criminal information to report. All this is murky water, which seems to suit Mueller just fine.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 4, 2018 17:38:42 GMT -5
"Special counsel Robert Mueller's team has taken the unusual step of questioning Russian oligarchs who traveled into the US, stopping at least one and searching his electronic devices when his private jet landed at a New York area airport, according to multiple sources familiar with the inquiry. A second Russian oligarch was stopped during a recent trip to the US, although it is not clear if he was searched, according to a person briefed on the matter. Mueller's team has also made an informal voluntary document and interview request to a third Russian oligarch who has not traveled to the US recently.The situations have one thing in common: Investigators are asking whether wealthy Russians illegally funneled cash donations directly or indirectly into Donald Trump's presidential campaign and inauguration. "Investigators' interest in Russian oligarchs has not been previously reported. It reveals that Mueller's team has intensified its focus into the potential flow of money from Russia into the US election as part of its wide-ranging investigation into whether the Trump team colluded with Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election. The approach to Russian oligarchs in recent weeks may reflect that Mueller's team has already obtained records or documents that it has legal jurisdiction over and can get easily, one source said, and now it's a "wish list" to see what other information they can obtain from Russians entering the US or through their voluntary cooperation." linkWelcome to the United States of America. I'm Special Agent Hardy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Please hand all your electronic devices to Special Agent Hermosa, if you will, and step into this room where we'd like to ask you a few questions about your political contributions to and/or contacts of any kind with Donald J. Trump, any members of his family, the Trump Organization, the Trump Campaign, or one of the Five Families of New York at any time between 2014 and today. Also, we'll be asking you to supply any documents, files, recordings, videos, photographs or other objects that relate to any such contributions or contacts; if you do not have them with you we will provide accommodation at public expense while your designated attorney, friend, family member, bordello operator, or other person secures them and transmits them to us. You are not under arrest at this time, so do not have the right to have an attorney present; however, if you do become the subject of this or any subsequent investigatory actions you will have that right. If you are unable to secure proper legal representation at that time the Government of the United States will provide you with an attorney. Although you are not under arrest, be advised that anything you say that proves to be untrue could constitute the basis for a subsequent criminal charge. Please sign this document indicating that you have been advised of your rights and understand them. Also, please remove your clothes and place them in the bag Special Agent Hermosa is handing you while she averts her eyes, then put on this paper robe and slippers in preparation for a body-cavity search by Doctor Smith. You will get a receipt for everything impounded from you today, and these objects will be returned to you if and when they no longer are needed by the Office of Special Counsel or other law enforcement organizations of the United States. Thank you for your voluntary assistance in the conduct of our inquiries, and have a nice day.
|
|
|
Post by goldenbucky on Apr 4, 2018 22:30:18 GMT -5
All part and parcel of the counterintelligence investigation into the President of the United States over a foreign adversary’s attack on our institutions.
Can't shake the impression that Putin has more on this guy than we've seen to date.
Sweet dreams!
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 6, 2018 9:25:11 GMT -5
Trump lawyer Michael Cohen not only stepped into legal trouble over the Stormy Daniels case this week, but he also got caught up in the Trump-Russia investigation: "Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators this week questioned an associate of the Trump Organization who was involved in overseas deals with President Donald Trump’s company in recent years. Armed with subpoenas compelling electronic records and sworn testimony, Mueller’s team showed up unannounced at the home of the business associate, who was a party to multiple transactions connected to Trump’s effort to expand his brand abroad, according to persons familiar with the proceedings. Investigators were particularly interested in interactions involving Michael D. Cohen, Trump’s longtime personal attorney and a former Trump Organization employee. Among other things, Cohen was involved in business deals secured or sought by the Trump Organization in Georgia, Kazakhstan and Russia. The move to question business associates of the president adds a significant new element to the Mueller investigation, which began by probing whether the Trump campaign and Russia colluded in an effort to get Trump elected but has branched far beyond that." linkThe surprise raid on this business associate may be related to a real estate deal in Moscow: "The New York Times reported on March 15 that Mueller had subpoenaed unspecified records from the Trump Organization. Days before that, the Washington Post reported that Mueller’s team was looking into a Moscow hotel deal for which Cohen brought to Donald Trump a letter of intent from a Moscow developer during the 2016 presidential campaign...Cohen was headline fodder because of revelations that he pursued a hotel deal for Trump during the 2016 presidential campaign. His partner in that effort was Russian émigré and former Trump Organization associate Felix Sater, whose involvement in the pursuit of a Moscow-area hotel became public last year at a time when n ow-President Trump was insisting that he had no business interests in Russia. The two men have said they teamed with a Russian group called I.C. Expert Consulting, and Cohen last year provided a detailed letter to congressional investigators about the deal and why it did not come to fruition. Appearing on MSNBC last month, Sater said that the local developer had sought financing from the Russian bank VTB, a big lender in Russia but one sanctioned by the U.S. Treasury Department in September 2014, with its subsidiaries added to the list the following year. " In other words, this part of the investigation seems to be looking into whether Trump was trying to evade US sanctions on Russia during (and after?) the 2016 campaign, a violation of federal law. It's possible that such a backdoor, illegal effort is behind Trump's reticence to say anything negative about Putin throughout his time in office, even as he tweets complaints about totally minor characters. And once more Cohen is going to be asked to take the fall, I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 6, 2018 11:01:37 GMT -5
Another bad day in court for Manafort this week: "A federal judge expressed doubts Wednesday about a lawsuit brought by Paul Manafort challenging special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s criminal probe of Russian interference in 2016 U.S. elections. During a 90-minute hearing in Washington, Manafort’s defense team retreated from requests that the court void Mueller’s appointment and dismiss criminal charges already brought in the District and Virginia against President Trump’s former presidential campaign chairman. But Manafort’s lawyers asked the court to bar Mueller from bringing future charges, saying a provision authorizing the special counsel to investigate “any matters that arose or may arise directly from” its probe of possible collusion between Trump officials and the Russian government is an abuse of the Justice Department’s legal authority. Manafort’s attorneys argue the provision in the May order appointing Mueller is so broad that it violates the department regulation governing the special counsel, which they argued required a “specific factual description” of the matter to be investigated. "U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson of Washington made clear her skepticism as she questioned Manafort attorney Kevin M. Downing. How, she asked, did he expect a court to act against charges that have not yet been brought, and how could he know that Manafort would be prosecuted lawfully or unlawfully? 'You have to wait until the harm is crystallized,' Jackson said at one point. 'You’re saying, "Stop something" that I don’t even know is going to happen. I don’t understand what’s left to your case.' She added, 'Do you have a single legal case that says that a subject of an ongoing [criminal] investigation' can sue under the law cited by Manafort that governs how federal agencies issue regulations, the Administrative Procedure Act? Downing said that he did not, and also said that he expected Jackson to ignore a provision in the special counsel regulation that bars private parties from going to court to seek to enforce internal management rules." linkYou don't have to be an attorney to understand that when a judge says, "I don’t understand what’s left to your case" you are not going to win the argument. She's not asking for further explanation to improve her understanding, after all. While Manafort's lawyers try, and fail, to use the courts to protect him, Mueller is digging deeper: "Special Counsel Robert Mueller revealed to lawyers for Paul Manafort, the former Trump campaign chairman, that they obtained a search warrant for information about five telephone numbers, suggesting the sprawling investigation may be headed in a new direction. The warrant involved a search of 'information associated with’' five AT&T telephone numbers, according to a filing by prosecutors in federal court in Washington. Mueller declined to provide information about the search to defense lawyers because it involves 'ongoing investigations that are not the subject of current prosecutions involving Manafort,’ according to the filing." link
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 6, 2018 22:28:11 GMT -5
On Friday, Manafort's lawyers, facing a deadline to submit motions to the court, tossed the whole kitchen sink, or to mix metaphors, tossed a Hail Mary: "Lawyers for Paul Manafort, the onetime chairman of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, asked a federal judge Friday to order special counsel Robert S. Mueller III to release the names of alleged accomplices accused of helping Manafort commit crimes. Manafort’s legal team also asked the court to direct Mueller to specify each allegedly false and misleading statement their client is accused of making, including to his tax preparers about his control of foreign bank accounts and to the Justice Department about his alleged lobbying work in 2016. Without that information, Manafort’s lawyers said, he cannot adequately prepare for trial. Among other details that Manfort’s lawyers want Mueller to disclose are the identities of people said to have helped him and his business partner engage in an alleged multimillion-dollar lobbying campaign in the United States. Mueller’s team says the alleged lobbying campaign was carried out at the direction of Ukraine’s former president Viktor Yanukovych, his pro-Russian Party of Regions and the government of Ukraine." linkAll this activity it in support of a legal strategy that seeks to have any Mueller investigation beyond the connection between the Trump campaign and the Russian government declared outside the scope of the Special Counsel, even though he has been given explicit authority to look into “any matters that arose or may arise directly from” that investigation. This is not at all unusual for a grand jury investigation, which is why the judge told them they have no real case going down this path. What they should be worried about is that Mueller told the court that they have subpoenaed records on five phone numbers for an additional “ongoing investigations that are not the subject of either of the current prosecutions involving Manafort.” This guy is 69 years old. As a practical matter he's going to spend all or most of the rest of his life in court and/or prison.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 7, 2018 8:59:48 GMT -5
CNN is reporting that Trump has begun preparing for an interview with Mueller, though the sessions have been described as "short and informal" (how else does the attention-limited Trump do anything). At this point they're just going over topics that might come up. But there are two takeaways here: (1) Trump remains open to such an interview, even though some legal beagles think it's a bad idea; and (2) he apparently is not about to fire Mueller, else he wouldn't be doing this prep work, minimal as it is. Frankly, I think GOP leaders on Capitol Hill have advised the WH that if he fires Mueller they won't be able to prevent an impeachment inquiry, and that actual impeachment is a real possibility, especially after the coming election.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 10, 2018 8:15:26 GMT -5
"Search warrant documents used by special counsel Robert Mueller's investigators reveal how agents zeroed in on potential criminal activity related to Paul Manafort's time as Donald Trump's campaign chairman. The documents, used to obtain a search warrant in building the case against Manafort, were revealed in a court filing late Monday night. Manafort has pleaded not guilty in two federal cases, and the charges he faces do not include allegations about his time on the campaign. The search warrant makes clear that Mueller is also focused on Manafort's actions connected to the campaign. The White House and others have repeatedly said that the investigation into Manafort concerns his activities before he joined Trump's team in 2016...Specifically, the investigators sought from Manafort's apartment records 'involving any of the attendees of the June 9, 2016, meeting at Trump Tower' and anything involving Aras and Emin Agalarov, an Azerbaijani-Russian billionaire and his son tied to the meeting, the 2013 Miss Universe pageant in Moscow and to a possible earlier unsuccessful attempt to build a Trump Tower in Moscow." linkThe writing there is somewhat mangled, but the point is that Trump's repeated assertions that Manafort is being investigated for matters that took place before he joined the campaign were inaccurate. Mueller clearly is investigating what happened during Manafort's time as campaign chair. It's just another sign of how much legal jeopardy there is around Trump and his associates.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 10, 2018 17:28:36 GMT -5
GOP cowardice is on full display in the aftermath of Trump's insane show yesterday: "Senate Republican leaders sharply warned President Trump not to fire Robert S. Mueller III on Tuesday — but they once again stopped short of embracing legislation to protect the special counsel...Senate GOP leaders were not budging from their position against taking preventive action, underscoring the downside they have long seen in being too confrontational toward the leader of their party. Even at moments of great uncertainty about what Trump will do next, congressional Republican leaders have opted not to further agitate him." linkMitch McConnell: “I haven’t seen clear indication yet that we needed to pass something to keep him from being removed, because I don’t think that’s going to happen.” [McConnell did not elaborate on why he believed that.] Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.): [Said he also didn’t believe Mueller would be removed because] “I think the consequences of doing so are some that not even the president can anticipate. And I think it would be a mistake.” Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa): [It would be] “suicide for the president to want, to talk about firing Mueller.” [Grassley has refused to consider a pair of bills released last year to protect the special counsel.] Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who proposed one of the bills: “But I’m not worried about Mueller being fired.” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), who co-sponsored the other bill: “I want to separate me continuing to have the dialogue and get to a bill from, like, ‘It’s got to be passed by midnight tomorrow, or all is lost.’ I don’t buy that.” Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine): “If the president were to fire the deputy attorney general, that would be an extraordinary crisis and a real problem. And I just don’t think he’s going to do it.” Profiles in...what? Certainly not courage. They know Trump wants to fire Mueller, they know there's nothing that can prevent that at the moment, they've got a bill to at least slow down that process long enough to preserve his files, yet they refuse to act, and instead parrot platitudes and make empty threats. Meanwhile, there's a constituency in their caucus that is bluntly honest about what they're up to: Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.): “It’s time to get this investigation over. This thing is spiraling out of control.” Euphemism for "it's getting to close to Trump." These guys would have been right at home in the Roman Senate that welcomed Caligula's horse to its membership without neighing a complaint.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 11, 2018 16:47:59 GMT -5
"The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee wants his panel to vote as soon as next week on a bipartisan bill to prevent the undue firing of special counsels like Robert S. Mueller III, according to aides familiar with his plans. Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) has asked for ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein’s sign-off to make a last-minute addition of the bill to the committee’s Thursday agenda, a move that would set up an April 19 vote on the legislation. A spokesman for Feinstein (D-Calif.) said that the senator needs to review the bill before making a decision. "The release of the bill and the fresh momentum behind it are a watershed for lawmakers who struggled to agree upon a middle ground between two separate special counsel protection bills they filed last summer in the wake of President Trump hinting that he might replace Attorney General Jeff Sessions. The bill further stipulates that during the 10-day period, no documents or materials related to the counsel’s investigation could be destroyed or staffing changes made. Grassley’s move comes the same morning as Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.), Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) and Cory Booker (D-N.J.) announced that they had completed legislation that would delay any order to fire a special counsel by 10 days, giving that counsel a window to appeal the decision to a panel of three federal judges...But Republicans backing the special counsel protection bill insist that their efforts are not inspired by the president’s latest tirade." linkThat last sentence is a pretty weak denial of what is patently obvious: Trump's rants over the past few days have Members of Congress scared he's about to provoke the biggest constitutional crisis since Richard Nixon's final year. And none of them really wants to go through that. They know he's out of control, so after ducking the issue for more than a year they're finally being moved to action. Well, some of them, at least. Frankly, I can't imagine the House even taking up such a bill, and it's probably true that many Members have been reluctant to act because they're concerned that if this goes to a vote and loses Trump will feel even more empowered to ignore the usual rules and do whatever he pleases. But it's a sign of just how worried they are now that they're willing to take the chance, knowing that they not only need to pass a bill if they bring it up, but have enough votes to override a Trump veto. I'm dubious they can pull that off, or even come close. Perhaps the court overseeing this case will intervene to keep the prosecution going, or we'll just have to hope all the evidence isn't shredded before the Dems re-start it next year.
|
|
|
Post by buckybasser on Apr 11, 2018 19:22:56 GMT -5
I realize this is of little concern to a party whose radical extremist hero was a freakish man who threatened the high court in order to begin our descent into Socialism...
But hey, you might want to check out Article II Section 1. DOJ is an executive agency if I recall... Just saying...
Oh don't bother! Just ignore it like you have for the past 100 years!
Yeah liberalism! When is the next rally! I got my Birks all cheesed up! Skipping the deodorant today!
>O
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 11, 2018 23:18:07 GMT -5
But hey, you might want to check out Article II Section 1. DOJ is an executive agency if I recall... Just saying... Yes, it is, which is the source of the difficulty here. For decades the DOJ following Watergate the DOJ has had a higher degree of functional independence from the WH than other departments precisely to allow it to have room for investigating wrong-doing in the Executive Branch without running afoul of Article II. This generally has worked pretty well, but it's not effective when dealing with the President personally, for obvious reasons. That's how we wound up with special prosecutors for Watergate and later Whitewater. And with legislation that set out conditions that would "trigger" a request by the A-G to a three-judge panel to appoint a special prosecutor, who was supervised by the courts not the DOJ (much as in Europe). Alas, Ken Starr's run-amok investigation, which found no evidence of any of the crimes he was investigating, wound up leading to a farcical impeachment over a lie about getting a blowjob in the Oval Office (still not a crime in the USC (and for which Starr subsequently apologized to Clinton). The problem with any legislation of this kind is that either it seats the special prosecutor under the President who's being investigated, or under the courts, which do not have investigative capacity. For sure Congress cannot run any such operation itself (perpetual political investigations would be guaranteed, as happens in some other countries where parliaments have prosecutors on staff. But, for the moment only a legislative framework that signals to Trump that Congress takes seriously his deprecation of the institutions of law enforcement he so recklessly denigrates is on offer. The reality is that Republicans in Congress largely have come to accept Trump as their lord and master, and simply given up on defending democratic institutions, norms, and values. This is how democracies usually, so perhaps ours has run its course.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 12, 2018 21:53:58 GMT -5
NBC is reporting that Mueller is drafting his first report to Rosenstein with four major findings on whether Trump tried to obstruct justice in the Russia investigation. Apparently, the final piece would be an interview with Trump, though that may now be in jeopardy, which could speed up the report, ironically.
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on Apr 15, 2018 9:16:16 GMT -5
Well, it has been just about two years now of the Constitution-deniers trying to get something----anything--- on Trump & Russia. Big fat nothing so far, but that does nor kill the forelorn hope in the heart of OB, media hacks, & other dems who still can't accept having lost an election to a bona fide political revolution of the American people. Nor does it stop the corrupt prosecutors Mueller & his band of above-the-law partisan witch hunters. Who knows----maybe in another year or two they will prosecute Melania for obstruction of justice because she failed to report a cousin dodging a parking ticket in 2006. Meantime there are some pretty strong indicators that Comey. Mueller,Rosenstein, Lynch. Brennan, Clapper et al might be exposed for the treasonous, corrupt, partisan, political hacks they have long been. Maybe at some point the swamp might be held accountable for their systematic obstruction of justice in stonewalling Constitutional Congressional demands fot the proof of their corruption. Though it requires more faith than I have to expect swamp rats in Congress (both parties) to uphold the Constitution and the will of the American people in their panicced determination to prevent someone outside their aristocracy from enforcing the ill of the people. The wheels of justice grind slowly----especially in the DOJ so totaly politicized by the Obama adminstration. It is very complicated. America has never had a scandal this big nor a government so corrupt as under Obama. For anyone actually interested in the truth, as opposed to the dem media propaganda, this: theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/04/14/inspector-general-first-release-chris-farrell-i-dont-think-the-fbi-recovers-from-this/#more-148072 is a very good source of info. never covered by network news, CNN. NPR, et al. Good reading, as is the American Constitution. Amazing that any reasonably intelligent ( and even a tiny bit honest) adult can defend the blatant FBI/DOJ lying & covering up crimes.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 15, 2018 10:57:20 GMT -5
Well, it has been just about two years now of the Constitution-deniers trying to get something----anything--- on Trump & Russia. Big fat nothing so far, but that does nor kill the forelorn hope in the heart of OB, media hacks, & other dems who still can't accept having lost an election to a bona fide political revolution of the American people. Nor does it stop the corrupt prosecutors Mueller & his band of above-the-law partisan witch hunters. Who knows----maybe in another year or two they will prosecute Melania for obstruction of justice because she failed to report a cousin dodging a parking ticket in 2006. Meantime there are some pretty strong indicators that Comey. Mueller,Rosenstein, Lynch. Brennan, Clapper et al might be exposed for the treasonous, corrupt, partisan, political hacks they have long been. Maybe at some point the swamp might be held accountable for their systematic obstruction of justice in stonewalling Constitutional Congressional demands fot the proof of their corruption. Though it requires more faith than I have to expect swamp rats in Congress (both parties) to uphold the Constitution and the will of the American people in their panicced determination to prevent someone outside their aristocracy from enforcing the ill of the people. The wheels of justice grind slowly----especially in the DOJ so totaly politicized by the Obama adminstration. It is very complicated. America has never had a scandal this big nor a government so corrupt as under Obama. For anyone actually interested in the truth, as opposed to the dem media propaganda, this: theconservativetreehouse.com/2018/04/14/inspector-general-first-release-chris-farrell-i-dont-think-the-fbi-recovers-from-this/#more-148072 is a very good source of info. never covered by network news, CNN. NPR, et al. Good reading, as is the American Constitution. Amazing that any reasonably intelligent ( and even a tiny bit honest) adult can defend the blatant FBI/DOJ lying & covering up crimes. This is pure fantasy craziness on your part, jon. No surprise there, lol! The big "nothing" includes a number of indictments and guilty pleas, but I suppose Fox doesn't report on those so how would you even know? Trump clearly tried to obstruct justice, and it turns out he's petrified that the Golden Shower video will come out because he's afraid Melania will see it--and that comes from him. And while Trump sells out America to Putin, you are a good little sheep and accuse everyone else of "treasonous" behavior. You Chickenhawks are all the same: having hidden under desks during your war-fighting days you accuse everyone who doesn't kowtow to your extremist politics of "treason". It's laughable.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 15, 2018 14:30:12 GMT -5
DOJ Alumni Statement Regarding Rod Rosenstein, Robert Mueller, and the Rule of Law
We, the undersigned, are proud alumni of the United States Department of Justice. We served this institution out of a commitment to the founding American principles that our democratic republic depends upon the rule of law, that the law must be applied equally, and that no one is above the law. Many of us served with Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein. Those of us who served with these men know them to be dedicated public servants committed to these principles. All of us served with thousands of their peers at the Department, who also swear an oath to serve, defend, and protect the United States, the Constitution and the American people. We know that there are thousands of public servants at the Department today who serve these principles and all of us. We are therefore deeply disturbed by the attacks that have been levied against the good men and women of the Department. Not only is it an insult to their public service, but any attempt to corrupt or undermine the even-handed application of the rule of law threatens the foundation of our Republic. We know the people who serve at the Department will bravely weather these attacks and continue to uphold their oaths by doing only what the law dictates. But it is up to the rest of us, and especially our elected representatives, to come to their defense and oppose any attempt by the President or others to improperly interfere in the Department’s work, including by firing either Mr. Mueller, Mr. Rosenstein or other Department leadership or officials for the purpose of interfering in their investigations. Should the President take such a step, we call on Congress to swiftly and forcefully respond to protect the founding principles of our Republic and the rule of law. medium.com/@dojalumni/doj-alumni-statement-regarding-rod-rosenstein-robert-mueller-and-the-rule-of-law-dcf12d7bb3a6There were about 250 signatures last night, but now the number is up to 416 and rising.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 15, 2018 14:42:58 GMT -5
Why Trump and the Hannity Gang can't shine Robert Mueller's shoes: Mueller: "Led a Marine rifle platoon in Vietnam, has been awarded a Bronze Star, two Navy commendations, a Purple Heart and the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry. After being shot through the leg, the young Princeton grad continued leading his troops in battle. Later he would continue his service in Vietnam even after he was given the opportunity to go home." Trump: "Despite playing tennis, golf and football during his college days, Trump took five deferments, four for college and one for bone spurs in his feet. On the day Trump graduated from college, 40 Americans were killed in Vietnam." DiGenova: "took student deferments, even admitting in 2003 that anyone who did the same should seriously consider never seeking public office 'when you didn’t serve, when you had a chance to.'” [Shout out to jon, LL, and 'basser!] Gingrich: "went on Fox News and compared 'the American FBI' to Joseph Stalin and Nazis, also did not serve." www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trumps-miserable-crew-has-never-been-so-desperate/2018/04/13/23198a90-3f43-11e8-974f-aacd97698cef_story.html?utm_term=.c2a175198a70Chickenhawks, liars, moral degenerates all, attacking a genuine hero. They saw that this could succeed with the "swiftboating" of John Kerry in 2004, and since they've felt free to attack the most honorable public servants in their quest for power without restraint Shameful men.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 15, 2018 16:08:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by buckybasser on Apr 15, 2018 16:39:39 GMT -5
While you can say I did not enlist out of high school, the student deferment accusation for me is simply incorrect.
It was not even available for me in the form you speak of - it changed in the 1970s - and it only would have allowed me to wait one (current) semester.
Even that never occurred because there was no draft in my years. Please read up on your Selective Service rules & regulations - very basic stuff.
So just go ahead and say that everyone who did not enlist out of high school is a Chickenhawk.
I'll note that I offered (on my dime) an Everglades dump for us with no supplies to see skills in a survival-type situation.
I myself would be scared, but we will see who is a chicken. After all, you have the actual training, so it should be an easy few days for you, right Professor?
>O
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 15, 2018 17:23:38 GMT -5
While you can say I did not enlist out of high school, the student deferment accusation for me is simply incorrect. It was not even available for me in the form you speak of - it changed in the 1970s - and it only would have allowed me to wait one (current) semester. Even that never occurred because there was no draft in my years. Please read up on your Selective Service rules & regulations - very basic stuff. Nothing stopped you from enlisting, Chickenhawk.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 19, 2018 11:33:36 GMT -5
It's now clear that House GOP Members are setting the predicate for firing Rosenstein as a way to take the onus off Trump (of course, this is coordinated with the WH). Trey Gowdy and Devin Nunes are peppering Rosenstein with requests for documents, knowing full well that DOJ policy prohibits him from providing documents in an active investigation. His refusal to supply some or all of those documents will be used as an excuse to file impeachment charges against him, which would give Jeff Sessions an opportunity to remove him from the case, if not fire him outright. And then they'll put someone into that job who will undermine Mueller...or fire him. linkDuring Watergate Republican Members of Congress long defended Nixon, but they did not do it by besmirching the reputations of long-time civil servants doing their jobs. These days, when real news has been replaced almost everywhere by celebrity "news" and discourse has sunk to the lowest level in many decades, the restraints of the 1970s seem quaint. Now it's all about winning at all costs, even if it means destroying people to achieve that objective. In the end, Nixon and his gang have won: we're more like them now than when they ran the government. Alas.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 19, 2018 16:53:12 GMT -5
"Former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, a combative former prosecutor and longtime ally of President Trump, told The Washington Post on Thursday that he has joined the president’s legal team dealing with the ongoing special counsel probe...Trump counsel Jay Sekulow said Thursday in a statement that Giuliani is joining the team along with two former federal prosecutors, Jane Serene Raskin and Marty Raskin, a couple who jointly run a Florida-based law firm." linkIn a strange way, this could be good news. These are former federal prosecutors, not the hare-brained real estate lawyers Trump's been relying on to date. They understand the role of the FBI, DOJ, and Special Counsel, and how investigations such as this one are supposed to play out. Giuliani actually knows Mueller from earlier days in their careers. And his first comments have been constructive: “I’m doing it because I hope we can negotiate an end to this for the good of the country and because I have high regard for the president and for Bob Mueller...My advice on Mueller has been this: He should be allowed to do his job. He’s entitled to do his job.” Let's see if Rudy can persuade Trump to follow that advice. What I think this shows is that Trump has absorbed the fact that the bigger threat to him comes from the New York Federal Attorney's Office, not Mueller, and that firing Mueller would be both a political blunder and a recipe for an even more independent investigation (see Nixon, 1973-74). One would not normally think of Giuliani as the voice of reason (how can you have "high regard" for both Trump and Mueller, for example), but compared with Trump and many of the nitwits around him it may be the best chance yet for some sobriety.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 19, 2018 21:31:01 GMT -5
So, DOJ passed along to Congress seven memos Comey wrote to memorialize his meetings with Trump. They don't tell us much we didn't already know, except that Trump was obsessed with the Russian hookers story: "Trump also at least twice brought up the 'golden showers thing' and said he was concerned even if there was a small chance his wife had thought it was true. In the January 7 memo, Comey writes that Trump interjected, 'there were no prostitutes; there were never prostitutes' about his 2013 trip to Moscow. In his January 28 conversation with Trump, Comey also writes that Trump said 'the hookers thing is nonsense,' but then later said that 'Putin had told him, "we have some of the most beautiful hookers in the world".'" Yeah, there's nothing to that hookers stuff, but please don't let Melania find out about it! LOL! The guy's got the worst "tell" of any politician I've ever seen. He never should play poker. The other major topic is leaks: "Trump frequently brings up leaks to the media and they discuss trying to find the source of the leaks." You know why this is funny? Because after months of GOP badgering DOJ for these memos, which are part of a criminal investigation and not supposed to be public, within hours of their arrival on Capitol Hill someone leaked them to CNN, lol! You wonder why DOJ has a policy against sharing such materials with Congress?
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 19, 2018 21:43:50 GMT -5
Manafort has alleged in court that Mueller's office overstepped its authority by charging him with crimes related to his work before the 2016 campaign. His attorney also demanded they see records of Rosenstein and Mueller's discussions before August. 'We're all sitting here guessing what happened. There has to be a record,' Manafort's attorney, Kevin Downing, said Thursday...Downing said, 'We're in a worse place than we were with' previous special investigations that appeared to wander outside their initial purposes... "Justice Department attorney Michael Dreeben said Rosenstein discussed specific legs of the investigation with Mueller months before he wrote a classified memo in August that outlined Mueller's directive. Dreeben argued that the Justice Department shouldn't have to produce documentation of those early talks about the investigation's scope that occurred before Rosenstein's August 2 memo. 'We have an alive and awake acting attorney general who's looking at this investigation, [and] knows what's going on,' Dreeben said... "Judge Amy Berman Jackson of the US District Court for the District of Columbia, countered [Downing] that it's unlikely the Justice Department fully knew what Mueller should pursue when he was first appointed. 'As good as he is, I don't think the deputy attorney general could see into the future,' she said. Investigators shouldn't have to 'start with the conclusion' that crimes were committed, she added. Instead, prosecutors could follow the question of whether Manafort had links to Russians. That work, even if it didn't connect directly to Manafort's time on the campaign, would be essential to any criminal investigation, she said." linkManafort's legal team keeps tossing these Hail Mary passes out of bounds, presumably because they realize there's little merit to them but there's always hope the judge will decide to rule one a completion. Not likely, from what's happened to date. This trial could be fun.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 20, 2018 9:30:29 GMT -5
Jennifer Rubin explains:If you did not know better, you’d think House Republicans were trying to sink President Trump. We had the fake “unmasking” scandal, including a clandestine visit to the White House by Rep. Devin Nunes (R-Calif.). It turned out to be a dud, revealing that Nunes was a dull-witted cohort of the president. Then came the Nunes memos. Hey, we’ll create a scandal by pretending that the Justice Department and the FBI lied to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court about the origins of the Steele dossier! Democrats would never fill in the blanks to show that is false or that the Carter Page FISA warrant did not launch the Russia investigation! Wrong and wrong. Then came the dopiest idea of all — threaten to subpoena the James B. Comey memos and then charge Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein with contempt when he refuses. Did it dawn on them that he would hand them over and that they would match almost identically with everything Comey has said or written? Apparently not. This crowd has blown itself up more times than Wile E. Coyote. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) and House Intelligence Committee Chair Nunes, for reasons known only to them, thought the memos’ release would be helpful to Trump. Wrong. The Comey memos released to the House and immediately leaked contain, it is fair to say, not a single helpful fact for Trump. To the contrary, Comey’s attention to detail and perspicacity bolster his own credibility. It is all there — the president’s rambling monologues, obsession with the alleged “pee tape,” attempts to lean on Comey to let Michael Flynn off the hook, demands for loyalty and so on. The only “surprises” — the claim that Vladimir Putin told Trump personally that Russia has the most beautiful hookers, Trump’s frustration with Flynn for not making certain his first call to a foreign leader was …. drumroll, please … Putin — reinforce the image of a narcissistic, attention-challenged president who really has no clue how to conduct himself. Trump’s repeated denial that he used prostitutes, or denial that he even spent the night in Russia (an assertion contradicted by his former bodyguard Keith Schiller), suggests what worries him the most. Unrelated to the Russia investigation but equally interesting — and bracing — is Trump’s obsession with leakers and his expressed desire to lock up reporters. Comey quotes Trump as saying, “They spend a couple days in jail, make a new friend, they are ready to talk.” This is the man who took an oath to uphold the Constitution... The memos are damning for what they do not contain. Trump never expressed concern about Russian interference with the election. While he wanted to go after reporters, he never expressed any desire to pursue WikiLeaks, punish hackers, protect the U.S. election system or search for any American collaborators. Whatever the House Republicans thought they were doing, the release of the memos confirm (at least) four things: Trump tried to lean on Comey in inappropriate ways designed to interfere with the normal operation of the criminal-justice system; Trump is every bit as irrational and unhinged in private as we suspect; Trump is frightened that the salacious dossier allegations might be proved true; and Trump cares not at all about protecting American democracy. Great work there, congressmen.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 20, 2018 10:19:52 GMT -5
"The Democratic National Committee filed a multimillion-dollar lawsuit Friday against the Russian government, the Trump campaign and the WikiLeaks organization alleging a far-reaching conspiracy to disrupt the 2016 campaign and tilt the election to Donald Trump. The complaint, filed in federal district court in Manhattan, alleges that top Trump campaign officials conspired with the Russian government and its military spy agency to hurt Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton and help Trump by hacking the computer networks of the Democratic Party and disseminating stolen material found there...The case asserts that the Russian hacking campaign — combined with Trump associates’ contacts with Russia and the campaign’s public cheerleading of the hacks — amounted to an illegal conspiracy to interfere in the election that caused serious damage to the Democratic Party." linkThis is great! Now it makes little difference if Trump decides to fire Mueller. The DNC will use this suit to get access to all those records that have been hidden from view to date. Oh, this is going to be great fun, especially because a civil suit does not need to meet the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard. Congratulations to Tom Perez & Co.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 20, 2018 22:27:41 GMT -5
"Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently told the White House he might have to leave his job if President Trump fired his deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, who oversees the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, according to people familiar with the exchange. Sessions made his position known in a phone call to White House counsel Donald McGahn last weekend, as Trump’s fury at Rosenstein peaked after the deputy attorney general approved the FBI’s raid April 9 on the president’s personal attorney Michael Cohen. Sessions’s message to the White House, which has not previously been reported, underscores the political firestorm that Trump would invite should he attempt to remove the deputy attorney general. While Trump also has railed against Sessions at times, the protest resignation of an attorney general — which would be likely to incite other departures within the administration — would create a moment of profound crisis for the White House. "In the phone call with McGahn, Sessions wanted details of a meeting Trump and Rosenstein held at the White House on April 12, according to a person with knowledge of the call. Sessions expressed relief to learn that their meeting was largely cordial. Sessions said he would have had to consider leaving as the attorney general had Trump ousted Rosenstein, this person said. Another person familiar with the exchange said Sessions did not intend to threaten the White House but rather wanted to convey the untenable position that Rosenstein’s firing would put him in." linkSessions seems to have been reminding Trump that there's a real political danger to doing anything that looks like obstruction of justice, and firing Rosenstein in order to weaken or dismiss Mueller would look exactly like that. Trump would have to order Sessions to do the firing, and he'd pretty much have to resign himself at that point because he'd no longer have any credibility with Congress, not even Republicans. And GOP leaders made clear last year that if Trump forces out Sessions--one of their own--they will not confirm any new Attorney-General. So, as a practical matter, Sessions wound up with a lot of political leverage vis-à-vis his nominal boss. Welcome to the Government, Donny; it's not like your little family-run poster shop. There are rules and multiple power centers and, oh yes, you can't just say "You're fired!" and move on to the next thing.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 22, 2018 20:15:47 GMT -5
Much of what Mueller has found remains out of public view, but the NYT has a useful summary of what we already have learned. Only some of this is related to Trump or the 2016 election. Instead, we've learned a lot about the sleazy connections among law, politics, and business: The special counsel, Robert Mueller, has not yet presented evidence that the Trump campaign conspired with Russian agents to subvert the 2016 election. But he has already provided an instructive guide to the swampy world of corporations, law firms and Washington lobbying shops, and to how a tough prosecutor can bring some measure of justice to bear. The bank- and tax-fraud indictment of President Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, for instance, lifted a rock on manipulation that’s usually hidden. Alex van der Zwaan, a former lawyer with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, was sentenced to 30 days in jail for lying to Mr. Mueller’s investigators about his conversations with Mr. Manafort’s associate Rick Gates about a Ukrainian businessman believed to be a Russian intelligence operative. Wait, you say, Skadden Arps? One of the top law firms in the country? How did they get caught up in this? It turns out that the firm was among the beneficiaries of $4 million in largess that Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates distributed several years ago in their efforts as “lobbyists” to promote the Moscow-backed regime that then controlled Ukraine. No less a luminary than the Skadden Arps partner Gregory Craig — who had been White House counsel for President Barack Obama — oversaw a report the firm commissioned that called the government’s prosecution of a dissident flawed but appropriate. The Obama State Department called that report flawed and inappropriate. “Skadden Arps lawyers were obviously not going to find political motivation if they weren’t looking for it,” a department spokeswoman said. Last year the firm returned $567,000 to a new Ukrainian government, now unencumbered by Moscow ties. The indictment also revealed that Mr. Manafort enlisted the help of the Democratic superlobbyist Tony Podesta and his firm, the Podesta Group, to promote the corrupt former Ukrainian regime, even though Mr. Podesta did not register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act. The ensuing publicity helped destroy Mr. Podesta’s firm. One Washington lawyer told The Times that this scrutiny raised concerns about the registration law and “a new emphasis on enforcement that perhaps folks didn’t think was happening or would happen.” There’s a novel thought: enforcing laws on white collar crime. Take the extensive money laundering Mr. Manafort is accused of undertaking with shell companies that hide ownership. How could he have expected to get away with it? Perhaps he saw what happened when one of the world’s largest banks, HSBC, helped launder billions of dollars in drug proceeds for the Sinaloa cartel, for a financier for Al Qaeda and for others over nearly a decade. When they were caught, they only had to forfeit less than five weeks of profit. No bank employee was criminally charged. Now consider the potential big fish in the special counsel’s investigation. Three years ago, about three months before Mr. Trump announced his candidacy for president, the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network fined the Trump Taj Mahal casino in Atlantic City $10 million for “willful and repeated violations of the Bank Secrecy Act” for failing to report suspicious transactions and failing to properly file currency transaction reports and keep proper records. The officials noted that the casino had “a long history of prior, repeated B.S.A. violations cited by examiners dating back to 2003.” The casino had been fined $477,700 in 1998. In other words, Mr. Trump’s casino helped launder money and no one was charged with a crime. One-fifth of the condos owned by Mr. Trump in the United States were sold to shell companies like those Mr. Manafort used, BuzzFeed News found. Since Mr. Trump won the Republican nomination, 70 percent of domestic real estate sales by his companies were to shell companies, USA Today has reported. A Times investigation found that this sort of behavior is business as usual for many big developers, as shell companies with untraceable funds — not all with nefarious purposes — buy a disproportionate number of high-end condos in cities like New York. Nor is this simply a problem for global urban centers. A shell company obscured the purchase of a lobbyist’s luxurious home by the beleaguered administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, Scott Pruitt, when he was an Oklahoma state senator in 2003. The recent attention to Mr. Trump’s “personal attorney” Michael Cohen illuminated another not uncommon practice of the business world. One of Mr. Cohen’s specialties was keeping people quiet. He made hush money payments to the women in Mr. Trump’s life, including arranging for The National Enquirer to make “catch and kill” payments for the rights to salacious stories that were then never published. The Associated Press reported that after it found out that The Enquirer paid $30,000 to a doorman who said that Mr. Trump had fathered a child with one of his housekeepers, the paper’s parent company threatened The A.P. with legal action. Were those lawyers associates of the louche Mr. Cohen? Nope, they were from the firm of the legal paragon David Boies, who defended same-sex marriage before the Supreme Court and fought for Al Gore in the Florida recount debacle in 2000. Mr. Boies also worked to try to kill a New York Times report on women who accused Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault and, as counsel to the fraudulent blood-testing company Theranos, threatened to sue The Wall Street Journal to prevent a report that showed the company was a complete con. A “good guy” in a bad cause — business as usual. (Mr. Boies’ firm did work for the Times Company until The New Yorker reported that the firm had arranged what Times officials called “a secret spying operation aimed at our reporting and our reporters” on the Weinstein story.) Amid all the tawdry allegations in the Cohen affair, the president would have us believe he is holding high the banner of a sacred principle — attorney-client privilege. The United States attorney’s office in Manhattan was able to overcome the privilege and seize documents from Mr. Cohen after persuading a judge that evidence showed he had committed a crime, and was not just giving legal advice. In the world of white-collar crime, though, business as usual has meant that the attorney-client privilege has often been a means to keep the law at bay. Companies have long used the privilege to shield information about misconduct. For some years in the Bush administration federal prosecutors cut deals in which companies waived the privilege. After a lobbying campaign by businesses and an adverse court ruling, though, the Justice Department barred the practice. All this is an indictment of a criminal justice system that has fed the swamp in which Mr. Trump and his ilk thrive. Industrial-level fraud by America’s banks nearly brought the world economy to its knees in 2008, and no senior executive was even charged. This past week, with a billion dollars in new federal penalties for Wells Fargo, we were reminded that nobody has been hauled into court over a range of its sleazy practices one would expect from a boiler-room scam, not the nation’s third-largest bank. In his book “The Chickenshit Club” — named for how James Comey, then a United States attorney, referred to prosecutors who never lost a case because they avoided ones they might not win — Jesse Eisinger documents how the Department of Justice has “lost the will and indeed the ability to go after the highest-ranking corporate wrongdoers.” Mr. Mueller is showing prosecutors a better way to deal with white-collar crime.
|
|