Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

Quote

Special counsel Robert Mueller said Tuesday that election meddling operations like those conducted by Russia during the 2016 presidential election are still occurring.

"Uncharged individuals and entities" are still engaging in operations similar to those charged in a case involving 13 Russian nationals and three entities accused of illegally interfering in U.S. politics, Mueller said.

He made the claim in a court filing that asked a judge to grant the special counsel's request to protect evidence in that case.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/12/mueller-warns-that-election-politics-meddling-by-foreigners-is-still-happening.html

 

 

^^^ Uncharged individuals and entities never stopped

not done here

The realization that a respected soldier, leader, and truth teller confirms the revelation that illegal foreign operations similar to what was observed in the 2016 election remain ongoing and unfettered is shocking and chilling. We have a POTUS who declines to recognize it.  

Edited by triplehorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 34.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Hugo Stiglitz

    3238

  • Anastasis

    2088

  • David Dennison

    1559

  • triplehorn

    1384

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Goredho
Goredho

Just to make sure I have the alternative facts straight...  Our government -- but I'm guessing only the deep state part of it --- is now guilty of torturing a poor, naive Russian exchange student who

Incredulity
Incredulity

liberals suddenly being terrified of Russia and manic for election integrity is just pure comedy gold.

Chooky
Chooky

I don't believe for a moment that any of this is entertaining to you.  I think it gives you a bit of anxiety knowing that your best weapon against a group who you despise is a bumbling fraud as a busi

Posted Images

JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

 

 

 

^^^ Uncharged individuals and entities never stopped

not done here

The realization that a respected soldier, leader, and truth teller confirms the revelation that illegal foreign operations similar to what was observed in the 2016 election remain ongoing and unfettered is shocking and chilling. We have a POTUS who declines to recognize it.  

He doesn’t “decline to recognize it,” he wants it. He is the definition of a traitor. 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted

I bet if the Norks offered Trump free land and slave labor construction and free materials for a new hotel in their country he would order military drills with South Korea to stop. They won’t do it because they figure no way he is that corrupt and could actually get away with it. They are wrong about the first part, hopefully right about the second. 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted

The most powerful person in the world, the President of the United States, is a russian agent.  Whether its willing or not at this point is immaterial. He is compromised and he is owned, which of course means so is our formerly great Country that he wields considerable influence over. Sleep tight America. Are we still at war with Eurasia? Or something else.  

  • Like 5
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89409

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, triplehorn said:

The realization that a respected soldier, leader, and truth teller confirms the revelation that illegal foreign operations similar to what was observed in the 2016 election remain ongoing and unfettered is shocking and chilling. We have a POTUS who declines to recognize it.  

Marine.  Trust me. My brother-in-law was in the Marines.  He gets pissed if somebody calls him a soldier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nunes has been awfully quiet since that DoJ meeting, but separately, the intense conflagration with Rosenstein probably has more to do with it.  It's good Rosenstein is preemptively broadcasting his plans to investigate Nunes' staffers on HIC in the event someone has it in for the DAG to shut him down for corrupt purposes.

Edited by triplehorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted

^^^ 

"As attorneys for Michael Cohen rush to meet Judge Kimba Wood’s Friday deadline to complete a privilege review of over 3.7 million documents seized in the April 9 raids of Cohen’s New York properties and law office, a source representing this matter has disclosed to ABC News that the law firm handling the case for Cohen is not expected to represent him going forward. 

To date, Cohen has been represented by Stephen Ryan and Todd Harrison of the Washington and New York firm, McDermott, Will & Emery LLP. 

No replacement counsel has been identified as of this time. 

Cohen, now with no legal representation, is likely to cooperate with federal prosecutors in New York, sources said. This development, which is believed to be imminent, will likely hit the White House, family members, staffers and counsels hard."

latest?cb=20100901193823

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mapache

Mapache 1117

Posted
Posted (edited)

Robert Mueller files request for 150 blank subpoenas in Paul Manafort case

Source: The Washington Examiner

Special counsel Robert Mueller on Wednesday filed a request for 150 blank subpoenas in the Eastern District of Virginia, where former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort lives. 

The two-page filing reveals little, but says that that each subpoena recipient must appear in the Alexandria, Va., courthouse on July 25 to testify in the case. 

Judge T.S. Ellis III has now moved the trial date twice, first from July 10 to July 24, and then from that date to July 25. 

The 150 blank subpoenas amount to 75 total possible subpoenas — in each case, a subpoena is needed for the witness and another is needed for the defense. Court documents filed in April show that Mueller's team was pushing to subpoena 35 witnesses in the trial.
 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/robert-mueller-files-request-for-150-blank-subpoenas-in-paul-manafort-case

Edited by Mapache
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhatTheBuck

WhatTheBuck 28705

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, triplehorn said:

^^^ 

"As attorneys for Michael Cohen rush to meet Judge Kimba Wood’s Friday deadline to complete a privilege review of over 3.7 million documents seized in the April 9 raids of Cohen’s New York properties and law office, a source representing this matter has disclosed to ABC News that the law firm handling the case for Cohen is not expected to represent him going forward. 

To date, Cohen has been represented by Stephen Ryan and Todd Harrison of the Washington and New York firm, McDermott, Will & Emery LLP. 

No replacement counsel has been identified as of this time. 

Cohen, now with no legal representation, is likely to cooperate with federal prosecutors in New York, sources said. This development, which is believed to be imminent, will likely hit the White House, family members, staffers and counsels hard."

latest?cb=20100901193823

Isn't this separate from the Mueller investigation? If he's cooperating in this case, that doesn't mean they can ask him if he met with Russians in Prague as reported in the Steele dossier, does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GW Hayduke

GW Hayduke 1952

Posted
Posted
36 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Isn't this separate from the Mueller investigation? If he's cooperating in this case, that doesn't mean they can ask him if he met with Russians in Prague as reported in the Steele dossier, does it?

It is separate from the Mueller investigation; however, if Cohen is cooperating with federal prosecutors, he will be sharing everything about Prague.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31263

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, triplehorn said:

^^^ 

"As attorneys for Michael Cohen rush to meet Judge Kimba Wood’s Friday deadline to complete a privilege review of over 3.7 million documents seized in the April 9 raids of Cohen’s New York properties and law office, a source representing this matter has disclosed to ABC News that the law firm handling the case for Cohen is not expected to represent him going forward. 

To date, Cohen has been represented by Stephen Ryan and Todd Harrison of the Washington and New York firm, McDermott, Will & Emery LLP. 

No replacement counsel has been identified as of this time. 

Cohen, now with no legal representation, is likely to cooperate with federal prosecutors in New York, sources said. This development, which is believed to be imminent, will likely hit the White House, family members, staffers and counsels hard."

latest?cb=20100901193823

Could be, yes.  But, his case before Wood was a civil action, not a criminal prosecution.  Not sure either of those guys are the kind of criminal heavy hitters Cohen is going to need.  The counsel change itself does not seem to be of any particular moment.  The civil case is about over, the criminal hasn't started yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pods

Pods 7526

Posted
Posted (edited)

Manafort and Kilimnik's attempts to influence witness testimony.

4 attempts by Manafort to contact Alan Friedmen, then Manafort asks Kilimnik to coordinate getting them in contact. Kilimnik goes into clingy ex-girlfriend mode and confessed that they were trying to coordinate stories and influence testimony.

"My friend P is trying to reach Alan to brief him on what's going on"

"Basically P wants to give him a quick summary that he says to everybody (which is true) that our friends never lobbied in the US, and the purpose of the program was EU."

"If you have a chance to mention this to A - it would be great. It would be good to get them connected to discuss in person. P is his friend."

"Hi, this is K. My friend P is looking for ways to connect to you to pass you several messages. Can we arrange that"

 

 

Edited by Pods
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5076

Posted
Posted
Could be, yes.  But, his case before Wood was a civil action, not a criminal prosecution.  Not sure either of those guys are the kind of criminal heavy hitters Cohen is going to need.  The counsel change itself does not seem to be of any particular moment.  The civil case is about over, the criminal hasn't started yet.


Huh? I thought Wood was dealing with the search warrant material, which I assume would be inherently criminal. I thought she put the Stormy civil case on hold because Cohens response could interfere with his criminal defense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45546

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, conVINCEd said:

I’m not a lawyer and didn’t stay in a Holiday Inn last night.  Is there any significance to the subpoenas being blank?

My guess is that there is an accounting system for subpoenas and they use them like blank checks.  This way all of them remain in one block in the files, I would assume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)
30 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

LOL. Highly doubt that that was a mistake. 

How would it further Mueller's cause to publicly reveal that Manafort's co-conspirator in witness tampering is ex-Russian military Intelligence (GRU*)?

* there is no ex-GRU.

Edit: Kilimnik is already indicted with Manafort's superseding indictment, so it stands to reason it's something else.  I guess I fail to see why filing it unredacted then later resubmitting it with redactions would have been intentional or advantageous.

Edited by triplehorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PittsburghTiger

PittsburghTiger 6137

Posted
Posted

Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his team have been aggressively pursuing former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, even tacking on new charges of obstruction of justice due to alleged attempted witness tampering.

Although Mueller has been tight-lipped about evidence and witness identification up to this point, his team appears to have screwed up by outing journalists who “produced messages to the FBI” about Manafort’s alleged “coaching up” on lobbying practices. Manafort was indicted in D.C. back in October 2017 for alleged financial fraud and violating lobbying disclosure laws. There’s also a case against him in the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA).

“Special Counsel accidentally exposed names of former journalists and European politicians allegedly involved in Manafort’s secret Ukraine lobbying. Just filed a new version with redactions,” explained Washington Post reporter Rachel Weiner:

“Unredacted government exhibit showing alleged attempts by Manafort and Kilimnik to influence witness testimonies has been released. The witnesses, journalists […] produced the messages to the FBI,” the Atlantic‘s Natasha Bertrand added.

 

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/mueller-appears-to-have-screwed-up-by-accidentally-exposing-names-in-manafort-case/

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31263

Posted
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, conVINCEd said:

I’m not a lawyer and didn’t stay in a Holiday Inn last night.  Is there any significance to the subpoenas being blank?

In the olden days, a subpoena was requested from a judge and signed by the judge, sort of like a search warrant, but much more informal (no particular showing, but a judge could slow it down if something abusive was happening, or just ask "why").  That got to be a pain in the ass and unnecessary, so it changed to the clerk of court preparing, signing and issuing/serving at the request of attorneys (much like a "summons" attached to an original, service copy of a lawsuit).  But even that became unwieldy.

Now, in civil cases, subpoenas are blank forms (or fillied in with the court information) that are filled out, signed, and issued/served entirely by counsel.  Any objection to the subpoena is handled after it is served.  In criminal cases, it is still required to be signed by the clerk of court, but they are filled out and served by the lawyers (criminal subpoena).

So, no, there's no particular significance to them being blank.  That's standard.  I don't know why they even bother with the clerk signature nonsense anymore.  I think it's because, like most things criminal, they haven't changed hardly anything or rethought it in God knows how long.

Also, this stuff being reported about two subpoenas for each witness I believe is nonsense.  Yes, the subpoena must be served on the defendant, but not a blank one, just a copy of the one filled out, signed by the clerk and served.

Edit:  all of the above is federal, but most civil rules in the state courts are pretty similar.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31263

Posted
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, Tuco said:

 


Huh? I thought Wood was dealing with the search warrant material, which I assume would be inherently criminal. I thought she put the Stormy civil case on hold because Cohens response could interfere with his criminal defense.

i mean, I guess you can call it quasi criminal, but there was and still is no criminal case.  Cohen sued the gubmint, which is, by it's nature, civil.  It was given a civil docket number and is styled Cohen, Plaintiff, vs. USA, Defendant.  And Wood didn't stop anything.  A federal judge cannot stop, stay, or enjoin a state  case, it's agin the law in almost all circumstances.  Either Aveknothead or Cohen asked for a stay of the civil case in California pending some of the federal stuff.  It's actually fairly common to stay a civil case pending resolution of a related criminal investigation/case to avoid the defendant having to make difficult choices prematurely (e.g. waiver of 5th amendment, etc.).

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted

Even though no formal criminal charges have been made, rumors of Cohen planning to cooperate appear to be coming from Cohen, which would make sense.  He knows what he's done.  He knows what they've got.  He expects to be arrested and likely has been informed about something to that effect.  Most importantly, he knows that Trump doesn't have his back - to help with legal fees and other means.  And anyone putting their faith in Trump waving his pardon wand for them to secure their 'loyalty' is a sucker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31263

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Even though no formal criminal charges have been made, rumors of Cohen planning to cooperate appear to be coming from Cohen, which would make sense.  He knows what he's done.  He knows what they've got.  He expects to be arrested and likely has been informed about something to that effect.  Most importantly, he knows that Trump doesn't have his back - to help with legal fees and other means.  And anyone putting their faith in Trump waving his pardon wand for them to secure their 'loyalty' is a sucker.

Probably true. I just think too much significance has been attached to the discharge of his lawyers in the civil, search warrant case.  It could mean a lot of things.  One certainly does not want to embark on a course of cooperation without fairly heavy-duty criminal counsel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Cohen flipping might not be so bad for Trump in the short term, politically speaking.  

If Cohen didn’t flip, he would be indicted for a litany of god knows what and that filing would be more politically damaging than Cohen pulling a Michael Flynn and pleading to a lesser charge where the public is kept in the dark on the much more egregious crimes.

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89409

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, triplehorn said:

Even though no formal criminal charges have been made, rumors of Cohen planning to cooperate appear to be coming from Cohen, which would make sense.  He knows what he's done.  He knows what they've got.  He expects to be arrested and likely has been informed about something to that effect.  Most importantly, he knows that Trump doesn't have his back - to help with legal fees and other means.  And anyone putting their faith in Trump waving his pardon wand for them to secure their 'loyalty' is a sucker.

And Trump can’t rescue him from state charges anyways. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5076

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Probably true. I just think too much significance has been attached to the discharge of his lawyers in the civil, search warrant case.  It could mean a lot of things.  One certainly does not want to embark on a course of cooperation without fairly heavy-duty criminal counsel.

I assume the search warrant had to reference a crime for which there was probable crime.  Is that public?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31263

Posted
Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Tuco said:

I assume the search warrant had to reference a crime for which there was probable crime.  Is that public?

Of course.  I don't believe it is public.  In the motion briefing I saw, the particular crimes were redacted.  It is entirely possible that Cohen has criminal counsel that is not of record anywhere.  Just because he had certain lawyers on the civil suit, who are now leaving or gone for one reason or another, doesn't mean he didn't, doesn't, or won't retain other counsel for the actual criminal stage of things.  It strikes me that the reason the civil suit guys are leaving is because the civil thing is all but over and there's probably a billing/payment dispute in there somewhere because I am sure the cost of that was astronomical.

 

And people don't discharge counsel because they are cooperating.  They may change counsel (Rick Gates) for that reason, or other (cost) reasons, but no one wants to go into cooperation mode without counsel.

 

The most likely correlation is this.  The civil warrant case is over.  The government knows which documents it can use against Cohen, and also has a pretty good idea what's in those documents and therefore the charges to bring.  Thus, the criminal phase of it has begun in earnest.  Therefore, it is time to cooperate. Or defend.  Probably with new counsel.  But the operative event is the conclusion of the search warrant case, not the withdrawal of counsel.

 

Who knows though, this whole thing is kind of weird and Cohen seems like kind of a loon.

Edited by TwiceHorn
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...