|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 4, 2019 22:03:29 GMT -5
"Federal prosecutors in New York on Monday delivered a sweeping request for documents related to donations and spending by President Trump’s inaugural committee, a sign of a deepening criminal investigation. A wide-ranging subpoena served on the inaugural committee Monday seeks an array of documents, including all information related to inaugural donors, vendors, contractors, bank accounts of the inaugural committee and any information related to foreign contributors to the committee, according to a copy reviewed by The Washington Post. Only U.S. citizens and legal residents can legally donate to a committee established to finance presidential inaugural festivities...The document indicates that prosecutors are investigating crimes related to conspiracy to defraud the United States, mail fraud, false statements, wire fraud, and money laundering. The subpoena seeks information related to broad topics, including information about benefits provided to top donors, training documents for fundraisers, and information related to any payments made directly by donors to vendors." linkWho thought the investigations were coming to an end? As with any large-scale criminal enterprise, once you open one door you generally find several more than need opening. There's a new one nearly every week. Oh, and here's something else that happened today: the next hearing on Paul Manafort's sentencing was closed to the public and media--even the windows in the doors were covered--so the government could present to the judge the secret information supporting its claim that Manafort violated his plea agreement by continuing to lie to prosecutors. And speaking of lies, the House is going to be turning over classified testimony to Mueller as part of his investigation into possible lying to Congress by witnesses connected with Trump. Basically, this WH is a serio-comic version of the MAFIA.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 13, 2019 23:10:42 GMT -5
One of the most anti-climactic rulings in the whole Trump-Russia scandal came down today: "Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort lied to prosecutors with special counsel Robert S. Mueller III about matters close to the heart of their investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election, a federal judge ruled Wednesday. The judge’s finding that Manafort, 69, breached his cooperation deal with prosecutors by lying after his guilty plea could add years to his prison sentence and came after a set of sealed court hearings...Manafort’s actions mean Mueller’s office “is no longer bound” by the plea agreement including prosecutors’ promise to support a possible sentencing reduction for Manafort accepting responsibility for his crimes." linkThe judge found he lied about “'his interactions and communications with [Konstantin] Kilimnik,' a longtime aide whom the FBI assessed to have ties to Russian intelligence...Manafort also lied to the special counsel, the FBI and the grand jury about a payment from a company to a law firm — which he previously characterized as a loan repayment — and made false statements that were material to another Justice Department investigation whose focus has not been described in public filings in Manafort’s case." That last one is, of course, the most intriguing because we don't know what previously-unknown avenue it may be heading down. This case just gets more and more complicated, doesn't it? That seems to relate to this other teaser: "New revelations about Paul Manafort’s interactions with a Russian associate while he was leading President Trump’s campaign provide a window into how extensively the special counsel has mapped interactions between Trump associates and Russians in his 20-month-long investigation. When Manafort pleaded guilty in September to federal crimes related to his work advising Ukrainian politicians, Trump said the admissions by his former campaign chairman had 'nothing to do' with the special counsel’s main mission, which Trump described as 'looking for Russians involved in our campaign.' But new details inadvertently revealed in a court filing last week — including the fact that Manafort shared polling data about the 2016 race with an associate [Kalimnik] who allegedly has ties to Russian intelligence — indicate that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has also been scrutinizing interactions between Russians and Manafort while he led Trump’s presidential bid." Next time you hear Trump or one of his mouthpieces insist that there was "no collusion" with Russia just keep the following sentence in mind: "Manafort is among at least 14 Trump associates who interacted with Russians during the campaign and transition, according to public records and interviews." Have you ever read any sentence about any other US presidential campaign ever? And those Russians always track back to people our own intelligence agencies long have regarded as part of Russian intelligence operations. This isn't smoke; these are clearly visible flames.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 15, 2019 23:25:13 GMT -5
In all the hoopla over Trump's Phony Border War, let's not forget the latest Friday Update from Bob Mueller. Yes, he loves to drop stuff on Fridays, mostly because he's media-savvy enough to know that it gets less media attention over the weekend, and he's trying to keep this as low-key as possible. You know, highly professional, as opposed to that bombastic publicity-hound who had a similar job in the 1990s. In this week's installment: "Prosecutors said for the first time that they have evidence of Roger Stone communicating with WikiLeaks, according to a new court filing from special counsel prosecutors...'Several of those search warrants were executed on accounts that contained Stone's communications with Guccifer 2.0 and with Organization 1,' which is WikiLeaks... link And here's the good part: "the government obtained and executed dozens of search warrants on various accounts used to facilitate the transfer of stolen documents for release, as well as to discuss the timing and promotion of their release." Oh, my. So, here we have documentary evidence of direct links among the Trump campaign (Stone), WikiLeaks (Assange), and Russian intelligence (Guccifer 2.0). That triangle is precisely the "collusion" that Trump keeps saying never existed. "Special counsel Robert Mueller's team has interviewed White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, she told CNN on Friday...While the substance of the interview with Sanders is unclear, one likely area of interest was how Sanders composed statements she made on the podium defending the President regarding the Russia investigation...CNN reported last month that prosecutors appear to be examining Trump's public statements to determine whether anyone sought to influence other witnesses and cause other administration and former campaign officials to make false public statements." link You know, those efforts to intimidate witnesses who "rat" on Trump, and none-to-subtle hints at pardons for those who "hold out". That kind of obstruction. Then there's Manafort, again: "Paul Manafort defrauded banks, the IRS and other federal authorities out of greed, and thus should spend perhaps all his remaining years alive behind bars, special counsel Robert Mueller's office said Friday night. In a 26-page outline of his crimes and convictions for financial crimes, prosecutors make plain how high-flying Manafort believed he was, lifted for years by millions of dollars in secret income and a lifestyle of excessive spending. The penalty should be severe, they write...Manafort's age should not help him receive a reduced sentence, Mueller's office said." link Just how stupid was Manafort for continuing to work for Russo-Ukrainian clients while actually lying to Mueller even after his plea deal, which now has been revoked? Does he really think Trump's gonna give him that pardon? Cuz if that happened, the prosecutors would have him back on the stand without the protection of the Fifth Amendment, and his failure to answer would put him behind bars for contemp. That's the latest from Lake Woebegone. More next Friday, I'm sure.
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on Feb 19, 2019 11:13:50 GMT -5
Well, IIRC Mueller was supposedly put in place, with unlimited resources, to to find evidence of Trump "collusion" with Russians (not really even a crime)in the 2016 elections. Of course we all know he was put in place to harass the Trump Presidency and protect the highly criminal coup attempt of the Obama intelligence/LE community.
But now we have,maybe, an AG who believes in the rule of law and the Constitution (and has at least reasonable competence) and he has oversight on the Mueller hoax. Barr is an old swamp creature so it will be no surprise if he prioritizes protection of the swamp over the Constitution. We will just have to wait & watch.
But what if Barr does sit down with Mueller and his original letter of authorization and without fellow coup enabler Rosenstein(you have noticed he is leaving?)and ask why Mueller is still piddling around persecuting anyone associated with Trump after two years of unlimited "investigation" has revealed absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing by the President? Barr just might want to begin restoration of DOJ/FBI credibility by exposing at least some of the slime that spawned & maintained the hoax? One problem, even if he really wants to do that, will be doing it in a way that does not expose Hillary' s crimes and the clear path from this huge mess of corruption straight back to Obama. There appears to be a few tiny cracks in media protection of the coup but so far very few Americans understand what dems & media have done to overthrow the American government. Might be a cpl interesting months coming up, or maybe just more of the ruling class cover-up.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 19, 2019 15:20:56 GMT -5
Well, IIRC Mueller was supposedly put in place, with unlimited resources, to to find evidence of Trump "collusion" with Russians (not really even a crime)in the 2016 elections. Of course we all know he was put in place to harass the Trump Presidency and protect the highly criminal coup attempt of the Obama intelligence/LE community. Who put this guy in place, jon? Rod Rosenstein, a Republican and Trump appointee. Who recommended him for the job? Republicans on Capitol Hill. So, are you saying that the Republicans were behind an Obama "coup" that started after Obama left office? And "collusion" is just a popular term for "conspiracy", with which about half a dozen Trump officials have been charged. In fact, the "collusion" is no longer even hidden. The only question remaining is, "What did the President know and when did he know it?" Sound familiar?But now we have,maybe, an AG who believes in the rule of law and the Constitution (and has at least reasonable competence) and he has oversight on the Mueller hoax. Barr is an old swamp creature so it will be no surprise if he prioritizes protection of the swamp over the Constitution. We will just have to wait & watch. Great slight-of-hand, lol! Barr "maybe" believes in the rule of law and the Constitution, but then he's "an old swamp creature" so if he doesn't shut down the Mueller "hoax" it just proves he's part of the conspiracy. You're covered either way. Meanwhile, Trump has trashed two provisions of Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution and from you *crickets*.
But what if Barr does sit down with Mueller and his original letter of authorization and without fellow coup enabler Rosenstein(you have noticed he is leaving?)and ask why Mueller is still piddling around persecuting anyone associated with Trump after two years of unlimited "investigation" has revealed absolutely no evidence of any wrongdoing by the President? "Persecuting"? Having trouble with your spelling today, or did your computer select that word for you? And "no evidence of any wrongdoing"? LOL! Rosenstein announced weeks ago that he was leaving as soon as Barr was approved, presumably because he trusted Barr (unlike Whitaker) of not being Trump's toady. No reception of any news down there, then?Barr just might want to begin restoration of DOJ/FBI credibility by exposing at least some of the slime that spawned & maintained the hoax? One problem, even if he really wants to do that, will be doing it in a way that does not expose Hillary' s crimes and the clear path from this huge mess of corruption straight back to Obama. Every one of those "slime" turn out to be Republicans, most appointed to their jobs by Trump, including McCabe and Rosenstein, both of whom Trump just accused of being "treasonous" today (in Trumpspeak that means loyal to their oaths of office rather than to him). Also, Hillary's been under continuous investigation by Republicans since 1991, yet not one criminal charge ever has been filed. Are all those Republicans part of the left-wing plot to protect the Clintons? There appears to be a few tiny cracks in media protection of the coup but so far very few Americans understand what dems & media have done to overthrow the American government. Might be a cpl interesting months coming up, or maybe just more of the ruling class cover-up. Time to get back on your anti-hallucinogens, isn't it? ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 20, 2019 22:07:21 GMT -5
"Justice Department officials are preparing for the end of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s nearly two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and believe a confidential report could be issued in coming days, according to people familiar with the discussions...An adviser to President Trump said there is palpable concern among the president’s inner circle that the report might contain information about Trump and his team that is politically damaging, but not criminal conduct...CNN first reported Wednesday that Mueller could send a report to Barr as early as next week." linkIf true, this could indicate that Mueller was waiting for Barr to take office before submitting his report. It could be coincidental timing, but I suspect Mueller wasn't about to submit his report to a guy who was peddling the idea that Bigfoot is for real and selling toilets modified for "well-endowed men" before becoming Acting A-G. He worked in the same firm as Barr, they served in the Justice Department together, and reportedly are friends. Legally, Barr does not have to release the full report, or any part of it. He can write his own summary--sketchy or detailed--to submit to Congress, but that's it. Except that if he doesn't send it over he can guarantee a House subpoena, and in any case it absolutely will be leaked, whatever it says.
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on Feb 21, 2019 12:03:41 GMT -5
You are right that parts of the hoax report will be leaked, but only the parts that are useful in attacking Trump & the American people who elected him. You are also right that the most dangerous enemies of Trump & the American people are those members of the ruling class wearing the R label. Ryan Burr et al. Maybe some day you can expand your perspective enough to see beyond partisan labels a bit and come to understand who the ruling class is and how they manipulate people like yourself via phony party labels. Read 1984: do you ID with Oceana or Eastasia? Mueller (actually Wiseman & gang) have done pretty well limiting the gains sought for America & American people by Trump & his voters. They have done very well in protecting the Obama admin. corrupt coup people in DOJ, Congress, & the IC. Now they pass the baton to the dem House & we will see more of the same. Unless Barr really cares about the Constitution & does not care what ruling class tries to do to him. BTW I have been for many years registered as independent & never voted a straight ticket.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 21, 2019 14:27:17 GMT -5
You are right that parts of the hoax report will be leaked, but only the parts that are useful in attacking Trump & the American people who elected him. You are also right that the most dangerous enemies of Trump & the American people are those members of the ruling class wearing the R label. Ryan Burr et al. Maybe some day you can expand your perspective enough to see beyond partisan labels a bit and come to understand who the ruling class is and how they manipulate people like yourself via phony party labels. Read 1984: do you ID with Oceana or Eastasia? Mueller (actually Wiseman & gang) have done pretty well limiting the gains sought for America & American people by Trump & his voters. They have done very well in protecting the Obama admin. corrupt coup people in DOJ, Congress, & the IC. Now they pass the baton to the dem House & we will see more of the same. Unless Barr really cares about the Constitution & does not care what ruling class tries to do to him. BTW I have been for many years registered as independent & never voted a straight ticket. Wow, I had no idea you were a fan of these guys: "In The Ruling Class and the Ruling Ideas, Marx and Engels argue that the prevailing ideas of a particular society are formed by the ruling class to express and justify their position. The "American people who elected" Trump consisted of 306 Republicans in the Electoral College. The first choice of American voters was Hillary Clinton because 65,853,516 > 62,984,825. I'm sure you learned this form of arithmetic in grammar school. The rest of your post is fun reading, if one enjoys insight into the thinking of right-wing conspiracy theory fan-boys. By the way, is the "actually Wiseman & gang" a subtle way to blame the Jews for Trump's legal troubles?
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on Feb 21, 2019 23:29:29 GMT -5
I refer you to article II, section 1 of the US Constitution. Apparently, you are not familiar with it. Apparently you are also unfamiliar with the bill of rights, or simply "resist" it. I guess your hero, MS Clinton, was also unfamiliar with it, LOL. I believe she is truly not very bright. You? Anti-Semitism seems to have become an obsession with dems( and Nazis) these days, hasn't it? Sad. Probably Eastasia?
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 22, 2019 10:02:52 GMT -5
I refer you to article II, section 1 of the US Constitution. Apparently, you are not familiar with it. Apparently you are also unfamiliar with the bill of rights, or simply "resist" it. I guess your hero, MS Clinton, was also unfamiliar with it, LOL. I believe she is truly not very bright. You? Anti-Semitism seems to have become an obsession with dems( and Nazis) these days, hasn't it? Sad. Probably Eastasia? Oh, I know about Article II, Section 1. But what you said was, "Trump & the American people who elected him." That is factually incorrect, except insofar as those 306 Electors are concerned. Yes, anti-Semitism has been an "obsession" with Dems since at least the 1940s. What is "sad" about that, exactly? No idea what the "Eastasia" reference means in this context; can you elucidate? I note that you haven't responded to my comments on your lengthy post further up the thread. Nothing to say?
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 23, 2019 14:16:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 23, 2019 17:29:40 GMT -5
"Two AP reporters have written what amounts to the first public draft of the coming Mueller report to the A-G. And they did it using Mueller's own public documents: "Mueller has spoken loudly, if indirectly, in court — indictment by indictment, guilty plea by guilty plea. In doing so, he tracked an elaborate Russian operation that injected chaos into a U.S. presidential election and tried to help Trump win the White House. He followed a GOP campaign that embraced the Kremlin’s help and championed stolen material to hurt a political foe. And ultimately, he revealed layers of lies, deception, self-enrichment and hubris that followed. Woven through thousands of court papers, the special counsel has made his public report. This is what it says." apnews.com/2b8513d4a4224a559d7048edb396cdfdI'm not going to try to summarize or characterize it, nor am I going to copy-and-paste it because the AP site is free. I do urge that you read it, however, because it's the best walk-through of the entire scandal around.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Feb 27, 2019 13:44:21 GMT -5
Cohen not only testifies that Trump's a liar and that he suborned perjury, but brought documents to show it. It's funny listening to the GOP Members making personal attacks on Cohen while ignoring the documentary support for his testimony. They've become obsessed with whether Cohen has book or movie deals (not yet, but people have asked--how could you not make many movies about this mess?), yet incurious about "What the President knew and when he knew it" to quote an old refrain from Howard Baker. In his written testimony, Cohen is concise" I know what Mr. Trump is. He is a racist. He is a conman. He is a cheat. www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/02/27/michael-cohens-explosive-opening-statement-annotated/?utm_term=.7bfae76dfcc2
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 7, 2019 21:46:29 GMT -5
So Judge Ellis sentenced Manafort to less than 4 years in prison, although guidelines said 19-25. In justifying this leniency Ellis cited letters about what “a good friend” and “a generous person” Manafort is, and said--amazingly--that “He’s lived an otherwise blameless life.” Well, I guess, if you ignore the guilty pleas in the federal court right across the Potomac River in DC, perhaps too far for word to have reached Judge Ellis if he relies on messages delivered by carrier ants, but otherwise well-known to others. And if you ignore the judge's own observation that “I was surprised that I did not hear you express regret for engaging in wrong conduct.” And if you don't think too hard about the fact that he made much of his money working to promote a Russian agent for the Presidency of Ukraine, and dealt with many of the same people to affect the election of a US President. But otherwise, yeah an upstanding guy and a model citizen. linkDo you suppose some people will view this leniency in the light of the fact that Ellis was appointed to his judgeship in 1987 by Ronald W. Reagan? Nah, I'm sure no one will attribute partisan motives here.
|
|
|
Post by leftylarry on Mar 14, 2019 7:27:54 GMT -5
Manafort is no worse than Podesta and the rest of the swamp.
Because he was treated like a serial killing child moletser the past six month and kept in solitary torture to try to get anti Trump info out of him, I hope Trump pardons him, I really do but after the State case is adjudicated.
This Government has acted like a Banana Republic here, like Soviet Leftists and it’s horrible for our country but the disgusting Left, carries on , perverting justice when there is no There, there and everyone knows it.
In the end, white women and some,enough Hispanics will figure it out and Vote for the Republicans next time, I’m not in any way concerned.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 14, 2019 11:30:50 GMT -5
Manafort is no worse than Podesta and the rest of the swamp. Because he was treated like a serial killing child moletser the past six month and kept in solitary torture to try to get anti Trump info out of him, I hope Trump pardons him, I really do but after the State case is adjudicated. This Government has acted like a Banana Republic here, like Soviet Leftists and it’s horrible for our country but the disgusting Left, carries on , perverting justice when there is no There, there and everyone knows it. In the end, white women and some,enough Hispanics will figure it out and Vote for the Republicans next time, I’m not in any way concerned. [This was a double-post, so I retained the latest one and deleted the earlier. - Admin] This is one of the strangest interpretations of recent history I've seen yet. The argument that Manafort is no worse than Podesta is equivalent to saying that the government was wrong to convict Al Capone of tax evasion because other people also evaded taxes but never were convicted. That's an odd version of how the criminal justice system is supposed to work. Manafort actually was released from confinement not long after he was arrested. The reason why that release was revoked was that Manafort violated to terms of his release. I'll bet that you wouldn't be arguing it's "solitary torture" to re-arrest an inner-city robber who failed to live up to the terms of his release to which he had agreed. If the United States seems to be acting like a Banana Republic it's because of the clown in the White House, who's decided to behave like a Latin American caudillo rather than an American President, and actively supports the modern-day Stalin named Putin. Trump won't give anyone a pardon because if they accept it they won't be able to plead the Fifth Amendment when asked what they know about his own legal transgressions, so he'll dangle them but not give them.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 14, 2019 12:07:07 GMT -5
"The House voted overwhelmingly and in bipartisan fashion to urge the Justice Department to publicly release the entirety of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report into Russian interference in the 2016 election, once completed. The move is an attempt to “send a clear signal both to the American people and the Department of Justice” that lawmakers expect to see the full account of Mueller’s work, according to the House Judiciary Committee’s chairman, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.). The final vote count was 420 in favor, with no one voting no. Four lawmakers voted 'present.'” linkIn case anyone still thinks this report is going to be kept secret, that pretty much puts a nail into that.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 22, 2019 16:09:12 GMT -5
"Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III has submitted a confidential report to Attorney General William P. Barr, marking the end of his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible obstruction of justice by President Trump, a Justice Department spokeswoman said. The Justice Department notified Congress late Friday that it had received Mueller’s report but did not describe its contents. Barr is expected to summarize the findings for lawmakers in coming days." linkNo wonder Trump's been ratcheting up his attacks on Mueller. The pressure on Barr to release this is now going to be over the top.
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on Mar 23, 2019 19:25:34 GMT -5
Well OB, for almost two years now you have expressed supreme confidence that Herr Mueller , his band of merry dem political hacks, and their friends inside DOJ/FBI/IA etc. were well on their way to indicting our President and overturning the 2016 election. That does not seem to be working out very well for you. My sympathy---especially if you remain among those so deranged they still fervently believe that Trump colluded with Russia and 2-3 years of unlimited attempts to find/create evidence yields absolutely no evidence is meaningless.
So, what is the next scam? The President chewed gum in class , third grade?
BTW check SC law and DOJ procedures. SC report is private and can not be used as dirt to harass anyone not indicted. But then maybe Mueller has given an advance copy to his buddy Comey and the NYT leaks begin tomorrow? OTOH, wouldn't it be a nice surprise if we soon learn that Comey is being prosecuted for his prior criminal leaks? Now we find out whether we have an AG who respects the law. And we will find out how our President responds to those who have deviously sought to undermine him and the nation. History suggests that those who thin they can run over Donald Trump aften do not fare well. If the President begins a he is entitled to de-classify and release documentation re: the phony dossier and FISA Ct fraud, and other criminal activity within the Obama admin. A number of people might be concerned: Comey, Clapper, Brennan, Rice, Power, McCabe, Strozk, et al McCain may be safe, but revelation of the truth will sure change his reputation.
|
|
|
Post by goldenbucky on Mar 23, 2019 22:19:52 GMT -5
You sound nervous and defensive Jon.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 24, 2019 11:24:02 GMT -5
Well OB, for almost two years now you have expressed supreme confidence that Herr Mueller , his band of merry dem political hacks, and their friends inside DOJ/FBI/IA etc. were well on their way to indicting our President and overturning the 2016 election. That does not seem to be working out very well for you. My sympathy---especially if you remain among those so deranged they still fervently believe that Trump colluded with Russia and 2-3 years of unlimited attempts to find/create evidence yields absolutely no evidence is meaningless. Actually, I'm pretty sure I have not predicted any such thing. Indeed, I've mentioned once or twice that DOJ policy is not to indict a sitting President, and that Mueller's a by-the-book straight-arrow, although I did speculate that it was possible there could be a sealed indictment for any/all of the Trumps. I've also noted that the SDNY now is the locus for the most serious concerns for the Trumps focusing on their financial dealings, despite Trump's "red line" claim. The Mueller indictments already have shown that there was collusion among the Trump campaign, Russian intelligence, and Wikileaks, and Trump himself already has been named as an unindicted co-conspirator by Mueller. In short, my views have been completely vindicated. Trump never had the political standing to shut down the investigation, despite his clear efforts to do so. Even this weekend he's being unusually quiet, which means either that he's nervous, or that he's been advised the news is not good and he should keep a low profile. I will simply cite the observation by Rudy Giuliani that the real problem with the Mueller report would not be legal but political. Perhaps when the full text comes out--and it will--we'll see that Rudy was right about one thing, after all.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 24, 2019 15:36:27 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by goldenbucky on Mar 24, 2019 19:40:50 GMT -5
Any guesses on how long until we/congress gets to see the whole report, not just a Barr's summary of it?
There's a pretty big disconnect between Barr's summary and the indictments and plea deals we've seen to date. How does Robert Mueller reconcile this?
Given the lies (some of which were addressed in court) from Trump and company to date, it should be understandable why a Trump appointee's summary shouldn't be the only public face of the special counsel's report.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 24, 2019 20:38:21 GMT -5
Any guesses on how long until we/congress gets to see the whole report, not just a Barr's summary of it? There's a pretty big disconnect between Barr's summary and the indictments and plea deals we've seen to date. How does Robert Mueller reconcile this? Given the lies (some of which were addressed in court) from Trump and company to date, it should be understandable why a Trump appointee's summary shouldn't be the only public face of the special counsel's report. Depends on three things: *How long will Barr take to decide to release it, presumably with some redactions, as promised? *How will the SCOTUS decide the suit over the subpoena the Dems have promised if the Administration does not release it? *When does it get leaked? Inevitably, if it isn't released by the Administration or the courts it will be leaked. Indeed, that could happen first.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 25, 2019 13:08:35 GMT -5
Slate's William Saletan took a much closer look than I at Barr's letter: Special counsel Robert Mueller has submitted his report on the Russia investigation, and Republicans are gloating. They claim a four-page letter from Attorney General William Barr, purporting to summarize the report, exonerates President Donald Trump. They’re wrong. The letter says the Justice Department won’t prosecute Trump, but it reaches that conclusion by tailoring legal standards to protect the president. Here’s a list of Barr’s weasel words and what they’re hiding. “The Russian government.” The letter quotes a sentence from Mueller’s report. In that sentence, Mueller says his investigation didn’t prove that members of the Trump campaign “conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” The sentence specifies Russia’s government. It says nothing about coordination with other Russians. Trump’s campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, gave campaign polling data to Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian associate who has been linked to Russian intelligence. Manafort, Donald Trump Jr., and Jared Kushner met secretly in Trump Tower with Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Kremlin-connected lawyer. But neither Kilimnik nor Veselnitskaya is part of the Russian government. They seem to be excluded from Barr’s analysis. “In its election interference activities.” This phrase is included in the same excerpt. It reflects the structure of the investigation. Mueller started with a counterintelligence probe of two specific Russian government operations: the production of online propaganda to influence the 2016 U.S. election, and the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. These are the two operations Mueller targeted in his indictments of Russians last year. If Barr’s letter is accurate, Mueller seems to have decided to confine his examination of American complicity to those two operations. In fact, Barr’s letter specifically cites those operations as the contexts in which Mueller didn’t find conspiracy or coordination. Other contacts between Trump associates and Russians, such as Trump’s Moscow tower project and Michael Flynn’s secret talks about easing sanctions, have been set aside. “Agreement—tacit or express.” A footnote in Barr’s letter says the special counsel defined coordination as “agreement—tacit or express—between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.” The letter doesn’t clarify whether this definition originally came from Mueller or from the Justice Department. This, too, limits the range of prosecutable collusion. We know, for example, that in June 2016, Donald Trump Jr. was told in an email that “the Crown prosecutor of Russia” had “offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary … and would be very useful to your father.” The email said the offer was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump.” Trump Jr. wrote back: “If it’s what you say I love it.” Apparently, by the standards asserted in the letter, this doesn’t count as even “tacit agreement … on election interference.” “Rosenstein and I have concluded.” Barr’s letter mixes two different authors. On questions of conspiracy and coordination, Barr summarizes Mueller’s findings. But on the question of whether Trump obstructed justice, Barr draws his own conclusion: “Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel’s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.” That’s Barr’s opinion, not Mueller’s. As the letter concedes, Mueller “did not draw a conclusion one way or the other as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction.” That’s for the rest of us to decide. “Absence of such evidence.” One reason to be suspicious of Barr’s conclusions is that in the course of the letter, he tweaks Mueller’s opinion to look more like his own. Mueller’s report, as excerpted by Barr, says “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference.” Barr quotes that line and then, in the same sentence, concludes that “the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction.” But the excerpt from Mueller’s report doesn’t refer to an absence of evidence. It refers to a presence of evidence, and it says this evidence isn’t enough to prove a crime. Throughout the investigation, this has been a standard Republican maneuver: misrepresenting an absence of proof as an absence of evidence. Barr’s use of this maneuver in his letter is a red flag that he’s writing partisan spin. “Underlying crime.” When Barr concludes that Trump shouldn’t be charged with obstruction, he bases this on his prior decision not to charge Trump with conspiracy. Since “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” Barr argues, there was no “pending or contemplated proceeding” that Trump’s behavior could have obstructed. This argument has many problems, but let’s start with the simplest one: It bypasses examination of Trump’s obstructive acts. Barr simply defines whatever Trump did as nonobstructive, as long as an underlying conspiracy with Russia isn’t proved. If Trump asked then–FBI Director James Comey to drop his investigation of Flynn, that’s fine. “Related to Russian election interference.” Barr’s requirement of “an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” as a predicate for prosecuting obstruction of justice, exempts Trump from obstruction charges even if Trump is shown to have committed crimes—as long as those crimes aren’t specifically connected to the Russian hacking and propaganda campaigns. Flynn, for example, conferred secretly with Russia’s ambassador about lifting sanctions, but not until weeks after the 2016 election. Even if this were proved to be a criminal conspiracy on Flynn’s part, Barr’s legal standard would insulate Trump from prosecution for anything he did to thwart the FBI’s investigation of Flynn. “That the President was involved in.” In narrowing the permissible premises for an obstruction charge, Barr doesn’t just specify that the crime in question has to be related to the two Russian interference operations. He specifies that the crime has to involve Trump himself. This immunizes Trump against prosecution for anything he did to obstruct investigations, not only into Flynn, but also into the established crimes of Manafort and the alleged crimes of Roger Stone. “Pending or contemplated proceeding.” Barr says none of Trump’s acts against Comey or other investigators can be prosecuted as obstruction of justice, since they lack “a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding.” For example (this is my example, not Barr’s), when Trump fired Comey, Trump wasn’t facing trial and wasn’t officially a target of the Russia investigation. By this standard, the president can bury an investigation as long as he does so before it gets to him. You can’t walk out on Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, because that’s assault with a deadly weapon. But if somebody gets shot on Fifth Avenue, and your friend lies to police about it, you can order the cops to drop their investigation of your friend. “Each of which … beyond a reasonable doubt.” Barr says Mueller found “no actions that, in our judgment,” can simultaneously meet three tests: (1) “obstructive conduct,” (2) “corrupt intent,” and (3) “nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding.” The attorney general says prosecutors would have to prove “each” of these elements of the case “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Even if some of Trump’s acts are both obstructive and corrupt, Barr won’t bring charges unless the “nexus to a … proceeding” can also be proved by the highest legal standard. In a case like this one, that’s an almost impossible threshold for prosecution. When we get our hands on Mueller’s report—and ultimately, Mueller’s evidence—we’ll have a fuller picture of what he found. We know from Barr’s letter that in the report, Mueller “sets out evidence on both sides” of the obstruction question—and that Mueller says his report “does not exonerate” Trump. For now, all we have is the letter. And it doesn’t show that Trump is innocent of collusion or obstruction. It shows that collusion and obstruction were defined to exclude what he did. slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/03/mueller-report-barr-summary-obstruction-conspiracy-close-reading.htmlThis piece more than confirms my view that there are a lot of weasel words in Barr's, letter, especially how it limits the context to "the Russian government" as opposed to all those Russian operatives who are not formally part of the government but clearly work for Putin. Trump's enjoying his best day right now. After this, it's likely to go downhill as the details of the findings--and the evidence behind them--come out through formal release, congressional testimony, or leaks. We should expect Barr, Rosenshein, and Mueller all to be testifying before the House Judiciary Committee relatively soon, and the evasions noted above will not be lost on its members. The drip...drip...drip should take us up to Election Day 2020.
|
|
|
Post by badgerjon66 on Mar 27, 2019 8:39:10 GMT -5
"The drip...drip...drip should take us up to Election Day 2020"
Aha! Acknowlgement of the real goal of the Mueller hoax. Everyone knew from the start there was no "collusion". the hoax's primary goal was to keep a smoke screen over the Obama coup attempt.
The role of prosecutors, especially via G juries is to investigate a crime and, if evidence is sufficient, indict. Any evidence reviewed in an investigation that does not justify a charge is to be buried. Not used for propaganda to harass anyone investigated. No charge here so no valid reason to expose carefully selected/edited/ composed (?) inconsequential evidence. then of course this whole hoax is invalid because: 1. there was never a crime to investigate and 2.it was created by a fraudulent FISA warrant. Any evidence collected, charges filed, etc. are fruit of the poisonous tree. Mannafort convictions should be thrown out.
OTOH there is ample evidence of multiple crimes by numerous Obama admin. officials: Comey, Clapper ( he is on tape saying Obama is responsible for SC ), Brennan, Rice. Power, Lynch, McCabe.................. There is a credible argument for a SC to investigate all this---which would definitely go on til the election, but likely without leaks & lies by the media as in Mueller hoax. And of course the possibility that DOJ/swamp will prosecute itself---about as likely as snow in July. Still, a few more every day are , "Emperor's new Clothes" fahion making the point that none of the coup could have happened without Obama's direct involvement. Maybe the Clintons will throw the Obama' under the bus? LOL
We should have made bets two years ago.. I could probably have won some $$$ just betting Trump would still be in office today, much less that his approval ratings have risen. Maybe it is not too late?
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 27, 2019 10:03:07 GMT -5
"The drip...drip...drip should take us up to Election Day 2020" Aha! Acknowlgement of the real goal of the Mueller hoax. Everyone knew from the start there was no "collusion". the hoax's primary goal was to keep a smoke screen over the Obama coup attempt... We should have made bets two years ago.. I could probably have won some $$$ just betting Trump would still be in office today, much less that his approval ratings have risen. Maybe it is not too late? "Obama coup attempt"? *GUFFAW* Too much Hannity for you, jon. Be better. I don't bet, except for the occasional Powerball or MegaMillions ticket, if I happen to notice a dispensing machine. On the other hand, I can't wait to see the evidence that supported a charge of obstruction of justice against Trump. That should be quite interesting. Even the A-G--who auditioned for the job by claiming a President can't be charged with obstruction for doing something within his presidential powers--whatever his motive, conceded it was a close call, and that the report "does not exonerate" Trump. The GOP's high-fiving this week reminds me of another celebratory moment:
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 27, 2019 10:46:07 GMT -5
So, the public isn't buying Trump's story yet, according to an up-to-date IPSOS/Reuters poll: Do you agree or disagree with the following statements? I think that President Trump or someone from his campaign worked with Russia to influence the 2016 election:TOTAL AGREE 48% TOTAL DISAGREE 40% Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the way Donald Trump is handling his job as President?TOTAL APPROVE 43% TOTAL DISAPPROVE 54%
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Mar 27, 2019 11:09:01 GMT -5
A timely reminder from George W. Bush's Director of the Office of Government Ethics: "Dear media, state media, reporters, commentators, pundits, members of Congress, Sarah Sanders, Vlad's guys and others with big ideas about what the Mueller report says or whether we're in a post-Mueller world: " You have not seen the Mueller report." twitter.com/waltshaubAnd Barr is planning to make sure you never do. In lieu of releasing the report, he and Lindsey Graham have cooked up a deal for Barr to write his own summary, to be delivered in "weeks, not months" while Graham pursues a new investigation--of the FBI and DOJ. Trump's water-bearers in action. History will not be kind to them.
|
|
|
Post by Old Badger on Apr 1, 2019 23:13:07 GMT -5
|
|