The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Dahobbs 17420]

Just now, Buzzrock said:

First off, his job is not to find Trump guilty. That's an important distinction. And as much as I want Trump gone I am not in favor of setting precedent that a SC's job is to help support a particular position on guilt or innocence.

Yes I am impatient. This isn't Al Capone or some criminal mastermind. It's the biggest idiot to ever hold the office.

The job is to investigate and prosecute crimes. My point: the job does not include prosecuting a sitting President because I happen to think that under the Constitution that role is left to Congress and to voters. I obviously did not mean (and did not say) that a prosecutor must assume guilt no matter the evidence. So fuck you for that insulting bit of insinuation and complete red-herring to my post. 

[kevwun 15595]

Sorry, I just wanted to point out how concerned you are.

[Ted Lange 15991]

1 minute ago, Buzzrock said:

If the bodies keep piling up then you make the arrest.

And if they don’t?  You take the chance of trying to prosecute a murderer and losing and him going free or keep digging to build the strongest case possible?

[Brisketexan 104464]

3 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

To use the murder analogy.  There are 7 people dead, the investigation team has a high degree of certainty of who killed 3 of them, they also think it’s likely the same person with the help of other people killed the other 4.  Do they just stop investigating and hope they have enough evidence to convict the killer of the 3 people, or is it a better idea to keep digging and get all the facts?

Or....he killed those people to cover up something even bigger.  In other words, the story here isn't the murders....it's what the murders were supposed to hide.

Anyone who has ever been involved with a complex investigation into a multi-party series of crimes knows that it often ends up looking MUCH bigger than what you started with.  You keep investigating because the more important crime to expose takes time to fully uncover.  That's how these things go.  Experienced folks like Mueller's team know that, and are acting based on that experience.  At least, that's my bet, based on my knowledge and experience.

[Buzzrock 14867]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

The job is to investigate and prosecute crimes. My point: the job does not include prosecuting a sitting President because I happen to think that under the Constitution that role is left to Congress and to voters. I obviously did not mean (and did not say) that a prosecutor must assume guilt no matter the evidence. So fuck you for that insulting bit of insinuation and complete red-herring to my post. 

You got no cause to get snippy with me. You wrote it.

[Buzzrock 14867]

1 minute ago, Ted Lange said:

And if they don’t?  You take the chance of trying to prosecute a murderer and losing and him going free or keep digging to build the strongest case possible?

My opinion is that they are.

[Ted Lange 15991]

They are what?

[Chuckie Finster 22583]

2 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

This part I don't understand. Does he have to turn in his badge once he presents findings? Why wouldn't he be able to continue to prosecute.

And how does he know when he's done? Trump has been in (crooked) business for decades. The "any other crimes that may arise" part of his charter could have him investigating people connected to Trump for the rest of his natural life.

 

You know who our president is, right?  As soon as Mueller hits "print" on that initial report, Trump is going to strip Mueller of any and every sort of investigative power.  It's a miracle that he hasn't done it already.

[Brisketexan 104464]

4 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

This part I don't understand. Does he have to turn in his badge once he presents findings? Why wouldn't he be able to continue to prosecute.

And how does he know when he's done? Trump has been in (crooked) business for decades. The "any other crimes that may arise" part of his charter could have him investigating people connected to Trump for the rest of his natural life.

 

Because that's the political reality.  It takes a certain volume of facts and evidence to burst the dam so that the GOP Senate says "okay, we'll vote to convict."  Their vote is a POLITICAL one, not a legal one.  

Think of it this way: it takes a 20 ton TNT blast to break through the dam.  A 10 ton blast will hardly dent it; blasting it with 10 tons, then bringing another 10 tons a day later, will not get it done.  You need to blow 20 tons, all at once, to break the dam.  Don't touch off the fuse till you have enough explosives in place.

[Dahobbs 17420]

Just now, Buzzrock said:

You got no cause to get snippy with me. You wrote it.

I did not write that the job is "to find Trump guilty." Context is important. For purposes of that post I was assuming his guilt. It is the same thing as if I said "the policeman's job is to arrest murders." I'm not saying that everyone, no matter of guilt, should be arrested for murder. That would be stupid. And, just so you can actually quote me: you're an asshole. 

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3861]

In a trial setting, you have a trial, you put together the case, and whatever you have in your files when the Judge says go is what you go with.  You always want a little more time.  You always want a little more prep.  Mueller is used to working with USAs on that basis.  I wonder if working without a real deadline tends to make a SC want to have every fact proved 5x over just because you can.  No one is saying time's up.

[Buzzrock 14867]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Or....he killed those people to cover up something even bigger.  In other words, the story here isn't the murders....it's what the murders were supposed to hide.

Anyone who has ever been involved with a complex investigation into a multi-party series of crimes knows that it often ends up looking MUCH bigger than what you started with.  You keep investigating because the more important crime to expose takes time to fully uncover.  That's how these things go.  Experienced folks like Mueller's team know that, and are acting based on that experience.  At least, that's my bet, based on my knowledge and experience.

I get all that.

I guess maybe I've uncovered a contradiction in my own thinking. If Mueller is a crusader trying to find enough to prove a crime was committed (for instance, a President lying under oath about an affair or a gangster not paying his taxes) then maybe he would have stopped by now. But if he his principled, as I previously stated that I hope that he is, then he won't care if Trump has done anything wrong and he'll just keep digging until he hits bedrock and there's nothing else to dig. And that could take many more years indeed considering Trump's history.

So who knows how long we're stuck with President Fuckhead. Awesome.

[Buzzrock 14867]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

I did not write that the job is "to find Trump guilty." Context is important. For purposes of that post I was assuming his guilt. It is the same thing as if I said "the policeman's job is to arrest murders." I'm not saying that everyone, no matter of guilt, should be arrested for murder. That would be stupid. And, just so you can actually quote me: you're an asshole. 

Finally we are in agreement!

[Buzzrock 14867]

8 minutes ago, Ted Lange said:

They are what?

Piling up.

[Biff Tannen 45477]

I actually think Buzzrock is being sincere.  I'm frustrated as hell that we can all see with our own eyes how blatantly this buffoon of a criminal president is torching the world, but congress won't and hasn't done shit.  I understand the investigation takes time, due to all of the aforementioned reasons, but got damn, what does it matter if this asshat is allowed to finish out his term before anything comes out that would take him down?

This is why I think the midterms are the most important election in American history.  If the voters don't put people in place to get rid of him, I don't think he will be gotten rid of until it doesn't matter anymore.  I don't know if any of that made sense.

[Nolacycling 893]

Buzzrock is so concerned.

[Huckleberry 32685]

33 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

Somebody else already used that one, zero points.

 

Well you're still being vapid, so it still applies.

Edited September 5, 2018 by Huckleberry

[Brisketexan 104464]

25 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

I get all that.

I guess maybe I've uncovered a contradiction in my own thinking. If Mueller is a crusader trying to find enough to prove a crime was committed (for instance, a President lying under oath about an affair or a gangster not paying his taxes) then maybe he would have stopped by now. But if he his principled, as I previously stated that I hope that he is, then he won't care if Trump has done anything wrong and he'll just keep digging until he hits bedrock and there's nothing else to dig. And that could take many more years indeed considering Trump's history.

So who knows how long we're stuck with President Fuckhead. Awesome.

You have one shot at the king.  We suffer the whole time he's in office.

But if you miss your shot, he stays there the full 8 years, because to the gullible public, he will have been proven to be a bulletproof Godking.

Take your time.  Wait for the right shot.  Then take him out.

It's frustrating as hell.  But it's also the only plan that makes sense.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

[lemonlime 5503]

2 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

"Hang on Lou, we can't arrest the murderer yet, he might kill some more people. Then we'll REALLY nab him!"

I honestly can't believe you guys aren't more pissed about this.

It's more like, a mafia crime family has been going around killing lots of people. The police know who the hired hitman is and he's wired and providing them with more information, but they don't have a smoking gun as to the people who have been ordering the hits.  You don't take down just the hitman, and leave his bosses in place to hire new hitmen.  You keep investigating and using the hitman who turned until you can take down the entire crime family including the mob boss.

[RomaVicta 29756]

I had such high hopes when I saw that this thread was HOT!

But it's just two pages of worthlessness. I'll add some of my own.

Maybe Mueller needs the time to find something exculpatory. He'll indict all the evil folks around Trump but pronounce the president to be a fine fellow and best president ever. Anybody thought about that? Huh? Huh?

[Longhorn_Fan68 33825]

1 hour ago, Buzzrock said:

You got no cause to get snippy with me. You wrote it.

you know how I know you're old?

[Biff Tannen 45477]

1 hour ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

you know how I know you're old?

Know how I know you haven't seen Fargo?

[WhatTheBuck 28700]

3 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

Go back to page one and start reading.

Can't come up with an answer, huh? Big surprise.

[Buzzrock 14867]

Can't come up with an answer, huh? Big surprise.

The entire CR with the exception of one thread is dedicated to the answer. Get to readin’. Take your pick.

[Buzzrock 14867]

 
Well you're still being vapid, so it still applies.

Well I’m in good company. Zing!

[Mdhorn 5908]

5 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

Look I know you guys are all wound up. And I'm sure you think I fit into all the things you know you know about anyone who isn't in lockstep with you on Trump and Mueller. But I assure you I want Trump gone. I did not vote for him. I would have preferred Bernie over Hillary or Trump, but instead I did what I've been doing for many years and voted for the Libertarian. But you've already decided what you know about people like me so you won't believe that.

Everyone agrees there is a mountain of evidence.
Many agree that he has admitted to enough to take him down (emoluments, etc.).
This isn't Whitewater, Clinton wasn't spending every single day driving the country apart, cozying up to our enemies, campaigning and golfing instead of leading.

Every day Trump is in office is a bad day for the US. Get the fuck on with it already.

I totally understand this and feel like this often--everyday is a threat to Mueller's case as well as the country...if everything is accurate.  I think that every thing is calculated and right now they are trained on Manafort.  I think that the time that elapses with more circumstantial and solid evidence coming out from the trials (in regards to the people surrounding Trump), I think it does affect public perception of Trump and strengthens the argument to continue the investigation.  Case in point is the Trumpkin in the jury during the first Manafort trial that was overwhelmed with the evidence that convinced her beyond anything Fox could claim, that Manafort was guilty of tax and bank fraud.  I think this is what the prosecution has to prove with every case. And that's two fold--perception and evidence.  It took this long to fully flip Cohen.

Edited September 6, 2018 by Mdhorn

[Mdhorn 5908]

5 hours ago, Dahobbs said:

Your point? I would love it if this was something that can be wrapped up in a year or two. But I also have been practicing long enough to know that is crazy. This is too big and there is too much at stake to just rush through it because Buzzrock is impatient. And, ultimately, I don't think it is Mueller's job to remove the President (nor do I believe he has the authority to do so). That is the job of two groups: Congress and voters. Mueller's job is to cleanup everyone else associated with it. Mueller's job is to present a mountain of evidence, convictions, and pleas so that Congress and/or voters have no choice but to remove Trump from office.  He has done that job methodically and quickly so far. You don't take down the mob all at once. You do it piece by piece. And you don't do it in 6 months either. It takes years. That is reality.

 

This!

[Js1 85056]

5 hours ago, Chuckie Finster said:

You know who our president is, right?  As soon as Mueller hits "print" on that initial report, Trump is going to strip Mueller of any and every sort of investigative power.  It's a miracle that he hasn't done it already.

He’s holding out hope that Mueller uncovers the Ivanka nudes she sexted Jared. 

[Mdhorn 5908]

5 hours ago, David Dennison said:

They don't know who the targets are.

 

It's Russian interference which doesn't just involve Trump but Congressmen as well.  That's two branches of government which is kind of a big deal.  And it's still much bigger than this.  

[triplehorn 2664]

8 hours ago, triplehorn said:

On loop:  It's bigger than Trump.  

As bad as things look in the WH, the potential chaos when the big slab breaks loose could be very considerable.  I'd imagine there is some pretty intense contingency planning going on, bordering on war gaming, that spans areas well outside of actual court proceedings and is contributing to the timeline of events unfolding.  It certainly feels like something big is about to give.  I can't imagine things simmering down and returning to any semblance of a status quo.  We're in unsustainable territory now.

 

2 hours ago, Mdhorn said:

It's Russian interference which doesn't just involve Trump but Congressmen as well.  That's two branches of government which is kind of a big deal.  And it's still much bigger than this.  

When I mentioned that this process likely involves extra-judicial coordination bordering on war gaming, it's the Putin/Russian element I have in mind.

Similar to this VVVV

 

All that RUS hacking of our infrastructure, power grid, and who knows what else - keep all that in mind (as our own IC certainly is) moving forward.  The past reporting on this is an indication of what is being factored by those whose mission it is to protect the US and who are treating this with the seriousness of an ongoing foreign act of war on US soil.

[WhatTheBuck 28700]

10 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

 

The entire CR with the exception of one thread is dedicated to the answer. Get to readin’. Take your pick.

 

Oh noes! They're talking about it on the internets!

Are music and movies and college football dividing the country too?

Trump said it, you repeated it. That's as deep as it goes.

[TwiceHorn 31184]

16 hours ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

In a trial setting, you have a trial, you put together the case, and whatever you have in your files when the Judge says go is what you go with.  You always want a little more time.  You always want a little more prep.  Mueller is used to working with USAs on that basis.  I wonder if working without a real deadline tends to make a SC want to have every fact proved 5x over just because you can.  No one is saying time's up.

This raises excellent points.  Almost without exception, litigation lawyers (not necessarily trial lawyers), are OCD and perfectionist and won't want to "have done" with a case and go to trial or file and serve an indictment until every I is dotted and T crossed, and then some.  It's very difficult to impossible for those lawyers to know when to say when.  Of course, there are external factors governing when you must say when, the statute of limitations being a big one, client/public pressure being another.

So, yeah, I am quite sure Mueller is being very careful not to conclude prematurely because yes, it is pretty much a one-shot deal.  Once he delivers a report to Congress, he's donezo.

 

Quote

 

§ 600.8 Notification and reports by the Special Counsel.

* * *

(c)Closing documentation. At the conclusion of the Special Counsel's work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.

§ 600.9 Notification and reports by the Attorney General.

(a) The Attorney General will notify the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member of the Judiciary Committees of each House of Congress, with an explanation for each action -

(1) Upon appointing a Special Counsel;

(2) Upon removing any Special Counsel; and

(3) Upon conclusion of the Special Counsels investigation, including, to the extent consistent with applicable law, a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.

(b) The notification requirement in paragraph (a)(1) of this section may be tolled by the Attorney General upon a finding that legitimate investigative or privacy concerns require confidentiality. At such time as confidentiality is no longer needed, the notification will be provided.

(c) The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions. All other releases of information by any Department of Justice employee, including the Special Counsel and staff, concerning matters handled by Special Counsels shall be governed by the generally applicable Departmental guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal investigation, and relevant law.

 

One thing that does bother me a bit, and it extends beyond Mueller, but Mueller is subject to it like anyone else.  And that is, once an investigation is launched, there is an impetus to "wrap it up," to find an answer, to indict, try, and convict someone or someones.  Often accompanying this impetus is a righteousness that one is "righting the wrongs," or doing God's work.  This often leads to a resistance to "coming up empty" and leads to some grievously wrong results of its own.

 

So, no, I don't think Mueller set out, with his Special Counsel Order, to find anyone guilty.  But there are pressures on Mueller and those similarly positioned that start to make things tend that way.

Edited September 6, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[suddenly shaggy 929]

You are probably right that there is a natural tendency to want to find a result, once significant time has been invested in an investigation. However, there are a shitload of guilty people here, including Trump, so that isn't remotely a problem in this case. 

[Biff Tannen 45477]

Feels like we are due for a Felony Friday.

[TwiceHorn 31184]

1 minute ago, suddenly shaggy said:

You are probably right that there is a natural tendency to want to find a result, once significant time has been invested in an investigation. However, there are a shitload of guilty people here, including Trump, so that isn't remotely a problem in this case. 

It's more a problem with the criminal justice system generally.  And to be pedantic but fair, the only people that are actually guilty thus far are Georgie Porgie, Flynn, VanDerZwaan, Gates, and Manafort.  And only Manafort has been proven guilty.  And all of them of crimes that are very peripherally related to the central thrust of the Mueller investigation.  And Gerorgie Porgie, Flynn, and VanDerZwaan are only guilty, so far, of "process" offenses that never would have occurred but for the investigation.  Presumably their lies to investigators tended to cover up other crimes, but the fact remains that no one is, as yet, guilty of those crimes.

That is, of course, not to say that there isn't some major culpability here more directly tied to Trump, Russia, and the cooperation, collaboration, or conspiracy of the two to hijack the election or other aspects of the poltiical process.  But, to be completely fair, there's a lot of smoke, a shit-ton, but there's little proof of guilt, as yet.

This kind of also illustrates a point about why we should be cautious with Special Counsel, as a rule.  A part of the existing criminal justice apparatus is a sort of "filter" that operates to determine who gets investigated, indicted and tried.  It's kind of a haphazard filter, and currently operates to let in the browns and the poors and exclude the whites and the well-to-do.  The filter needs some calibration, for sure.  The appointment of a Special Counsel is a definite calibration or setting of the filter that is subject to manipulation, to a degree, by factors that don't operate on the conventional criminal justice apparatus.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

They are guilty of the crimes, but have not been found guilty by a court yet. They still committed them. Regardless of whether the GOP is successful in obstructing the investigations and covering it up and stopping them from being found guilty in a court of law, they still committed the offense and are guilty. 

Trump is guilty of repeated obstruction at a minimum. He will likely never be convicted of it, but he has still committed the offenses in a very public fashion and is guilty. 

[Junior Miller 1502]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's more a problem with the criminal justice system generally.  And to be pedantic but fair, the only people that are actually guilty thus far are Georgie Porgie, Flynn, VanDerZwaan, Gates, and Manafort.  And only Manafort has been proven guilty.  And all of them of crimes that are very peripherally related to the central thrust of the Mueller investigation.  And Gerorgie Porgie, 

Georgie Porgie pudding and pie

Georgie jizzed in his girl friend's eye

When that eye was dry and shut

Georgie fucked that one eyed slut!

Oooooooooohhhhhh

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

When the news broke earlier this summer that the elusive former British spy Christopher Steele had for the first time testified under oath and on camera in a deposition about his explosive and controversial dossier outlining the president’s alleged ties to Russia, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee wasted little time trying to obtain the videotape.

“Please produce to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary the transcript and video of Mr. Steele’s deposition, as well as any exhibits used during the deposition and all other discovery materials received from Mr. Steele,” the chairman, Chuck Grassley, wrote to Valentin Gurvits on July 25. Gurvits is the lead counsel representing a Russian technology executive, Aleksej Gubarev, who sued BuzzFeed and Steele in a Florida federal court in January for defamation following the news outlet’s publication of the dossier, which mentioned Gubarev and his company.

Grassley’s efforts, however, have been frustrated: Under the terms of the protective order that sealed the deposition in the first place, Gubarev’s lawyers could not hand over its contents unilaterally. And on Wednesday, a magistrate judge in the Southern District of Florida declined to require the deposition’s production to the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which had also expressed interest in obtaining a copy of Steele’s deposition.

“The Court will not issue an Order requiring the production of the depositions of Mr. Steele and Mr. Kramer,” wrote magistrate Judge John J. O’Sullivan. He was referring to David Kramer, a former confidant of Senator John McCain who met with Steele in 2016 to discuss the dossier’s allegations and was deposed as part of the same lawsuit earlier this year. O’Sullivan ruled that both committees would have to move forward in formal channels and “advise the court why it would be appropriate to require the production of these depositions….”

Gurvits and Grassley did not return requests for comment.

Trump’s relentless assault on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into a possible collusion between his 2016 campaign and the Russians begins with the Steele dossier, which the president and congressional Republicans consider the probe’s proximate cause.

In fact, the dossier did not trigger the probe.  The investigation began before the bureau obtained the document, when George Papadopoulous, a Trump campaign adviser, told an Australian diplomat in May of 2016 that Russia had dirt on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of emails, The New York Times has reported. The dossier concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin himself had directed a long-standing Russian intelligence operation aimed at compromising Trump and supporting his 2016 presidential campaign by hacking and dumping unflattering information about Hillary Clinton.

With Wednesday’s order in Florida, O’Sullivan introduced an additional check on the Republicans’ ability to pursue additional information about Steele and his sources.  Grassley, for his part, has made examining Steele and the firm that hired him to examine Trump’s Russia ties, Fusion GPS, a priority. In March 2017, the Iowa Republican and Trump ally accused Fusion of failing to register as a foreign agent due to work the firm did that benefited a Russian company. (The complaint ultimately went nowhere, since Fusion was technically working for an American law firm that represented a Russian client, and was therefore not required to register the work with the DOJ.)

Nearly a year later, Grassley and Republican Senator Lindsey Graham issued a criminal referral of Steele to the Justice Department, urging the DOJ to examine whether Steele made false statements to the FBI about his interactions with the press in late 2016. The referral was broadly perceived as a political stunt—Grassley and Graham were not giving the Justice Department, which oversees the FBI, information about Steele that it did not already have—and nothing came of it.

Just last month, Devin Nunes, chairman of the House intelligence committee, went to London seeking new information about Steele. But sources familiar with his trip told me that officials at MI6, MI5, and Government Communications Headquarters were wary and did not meet with him.

Now, Grassley’s committee could face another uphill battle if it chooses to intervene in the Gubarev case by arguing that Steele’s deposition is relevant to its investigations. In his letter to Gubarev’s attorney requesting a copy of the deposition, Grassley cited his committee’s probe of the FBI’s interactions with Steele in 2016 and Steele’s “post-election dossier work.” But Steele’s testimony, I’m told, focused only on a brief passage of the dossier, cited in court documents in Gubarev’s suit, that accuses Gubarev’s company, XBT Holdings, of “using botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and ‘conduct altering operations’ against the Democratic party leadership” in 2016. Steele also refused to elaborate on his sources and methods.

All said, it has been a fairly frustrating two weeks for Steele’s critics: Late last month, a judge in Washington, D.C., dismissed a defamation lawsuit brought against Steele’s firm by the co-founders of Russia’s largest private bank. In his decision to toss the case “with prejudice”—that is, permanently— Superior Court Judge Anthony C. Epstein concluded that Steele acted “in furtherance of the right of advocacy on issues of public interest” when he decided to brief reporters on the dossier’s findings in the summer of 2016. “The Steele dossier generated so much attention and interest in the United States,” Epstein wrote, “precisely because its content relates to active public debates here.”

[Buzzrock 14867]

5 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Oh noes! They're talking about it on the internets!

Are music and movies and college football dividing the country too?

Trump said it, you repeated it. That's as deep as it goes.

I kinda lost track of your initial question. If you think that Trump is not a negative disruption then good for you, these are your salad days.

[Buzzrock 14867]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

This raises excellent points.  Almost without exception, litigation lawyers (not necessarily trial lawyers), are OCD and perfectionist and won't want to "have done" with a case and go to trial or file and serve an indictment until every I is dotted and T crossed, and then some.  It's very difficult to impossible for those lawyers to know when to say when.  Of course, there are external factors governing when you must say when, the statute of limitations being a big one, client/public pressure being another.

So, yeah, I am quite sure Mueller is being very careful not to conclude prematurely because yes, it is pretty much a one-shot deal.  Once he delivers a report to Congress, he's donezo.

 

One thing that does bother me a bit, and it extends beyond Mueller, but Mueller is subject to it like anyone else.  And that is, once an investigation is launched, there is an impetus to "wrap it up," to find an answer, to indict, try, and convict someone or someones.  Often accompanying this impetus is a righteousness that one is "righting the wrongs," or doing God's work.  This often leads to a resistance to "coming up empty" and leads to some grievously wrong results of its own.

 

So, no, I don't think Mueller set out, with his Special Counsel Order, to find anyone guilty.  But there are pressures on Mueller and those similarly positioned that start to make things tend that way.

Helpful post is helpful.

[Buzzrock 14867]

4 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's more a problem with the criminal justice system generally.  And to be pedantic but fair, the only people that are actually guilty thus far are Georgie Porgie, Flynn, VanDerZwaan, Gates, and Manafort.  And only Manafort has been proven guilty.  And all of them of crimes that are very peripherally related to the central thrust of the Mueller investigation.  And Gerorgie Porgie, Flynn, and VanDerZwaan are only guilty, so far, of "process" offenses that never would have occurred but for the investigation.  Presumably their lies to investigators tended to cover up other crimes, but the fact remains that no one is, as yet, guilty of those crimes.

That is, of course, not to say that there isn't some major culpability here more directly tied to Trump, Russia, and the cooperation, collaboration, or conspiracy of the two to hijack the election or other aspects of the poltiical process.  But, to be completely fair, there's a lot of smoke, a shit-ton, but there's little proof of guilt, as yet.

This kind of also illustrates a point about why we should be cautious with Special Counsel, as a rule.  A part of the existing criminal justice apparatus is a sort of "filter" that operates to determine who gets investigated, indicted and tried.  It's kind of a haphazard filter, and currently operates to let in the browns and the poors and exclude the whites and the well-to-do.  The filter needs some calibration, for sure.  The appointment of a Special Counsel is a definite calibration or setting of the filter that is subject to manipulation, to a degree, by factors that don't operate on the conventional criminal justice apparatus.

Pedantic. Pedantic, but fair.

[Buzzrock 14867]

4 hours ago, suddenly shaggy said:

They are guilty of the crimes, but have not been found guilty by a court yet. They still committed them. Regardless of whether the GOP is successful in obstructing the investigations and covering it up and stopping them from being found guilty in a court of law, they still committed the offense and are guilty. 

Trump is guilty of repeated obstruction at a minimum. He will likely never be convicted of it, but he has still committed the offenses in a very public fashion and is guilty. 

The problem is that the court of public opinion is not monolithic. Somewhere on another message board someone is posting about how innocent Trump is and a bunch of other people (aggys) are agreeing with him.

Court of law is what matters.

[Brisketexan 104464]

4 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

The problem is that the court of public opinion is not monolithic. Somewhere on another message board someone is posting about how innocent Trump is and a bunch of other people (aggys) are agreeing with him.

Court of law is what matters.

Not as to Trump it doesn't.  Impeachment is a political process.  The only political body that can convict Trump is the Senate.  The Senate is controlled by the GOP.  The GOP is 100% loyal to Trump (self-declared as "the party of Trump").  Thus, there will never be a conviction of Trump, with expulsion from office.  It's not going to happen. 

Nobody is coming to save us.  We jumped out of the plane.  We're in the middle of the fall.  The impact will come soon enough.

[Chad Fuck 17503]

Not as to Trump it doesn't.  Impeachment is a political process.  The only political body that can convict Trump is the Senate.  The Senate is controlled by the GOP.  The GOP is 100% loyal to Trump (self-declared as "the party of Trump").  Thus, there will never be a conviction of Trump, with expulsion from office.  It's not going to happen. 
Nobody is coming to save us.  We jumped out of the plane.  We're in the middle of the fall.  The impact will come soon enough.

This, unfortunately.

[retread 2951]

The silence of the Rs in Congress is unlike anything I remember. There's something going on beyond wanting to get re-elected. Daddy Putin is probably involved with some of them. It would be a putrid mess if we were to peel back the layers on the Congressional onion.

[BurntOrange&White 39486]

The silence of the Rs in Congress is unlike anything I remember. There's something going on beyond wanting to get re-elected. Daddy Putin is probably involved with some of them. It would be a putrid mess if we were to peel back the layers on the Congressional onion.

Me thinks the whole party is complicit in some form. I would say not all individuals though.

[Brisketexan 104464]

3 minutes ago, retread said:

The silence of the Rs in Congress is unlike anything I remember. There's something going on beyond wanting to get re-elected. Daddy Putin is probably involved with some of them. It would be a putrid mess if we were to peel back the layers on the Congressional onion.

I can't rule it out.  But Occam's razor just tells me that 1) they're gutless cowardly selfish pussies concerned only about holding onto their piece of power, and 2) because the GOP has been completely taken over by Trumpism, they have to be super-loyal Trumpists to stay in the good graces of the folks who put them in their seat.  That's the entire calculus.  Just plain old human weakness and naked hunger for power.

Sure, there's surely some corruption in there, quite likely including foreign corruption, but not every GOP congressman or Senator was likely involved in that or even knows about it.  But they ALL kneel before Zod Trump.  It's spinelessness, and that's pretty much it.

[Buzzrock 14867]

17 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I can't rule it out.  But Occam's razor just tells me that 1) they're gutless cowardly selfish pussies concerned only about holding onto their piece of power, and 2) because the GOP has been completely taken over by Trumpism, they have to be super-loyal Trumpists to stay in the good graces of the folks who put them in their seat.  That's the entire calculus.  Just plain old human weakness and naked hunger for power.

Sure, there's surely some corruption in there, quite likely including foreign corruption, but not every GOP congressman or Senator was likely involved in that or even knows about it.  But they ALL kneel before Zod Trump.  It's spinelessness, and that's pretty much it.

That's my take. And lash me with righteous CR fury if you like, but the Dems would be doing the same thing if it was their guy. Team first. If they just keep their heads down long enough they can pipe up when it's all over and tell us their hands were tied, our long nightmare is over, look at the bird.

[Brisketexan 104464]

1 minute ago, Buzzrock said:

That's my take. And lash me with righteous CR fury if you like, but the Dems would be doing the same thing if it was their guy. Team first. If they just keep their heads down long enough they can pipe up when it's all over and tell us their hands were tied, our long nightmare is over, look at the bird.

Maybe.  But at this point, we can talk about speculative cowardice, or real-world cowardice of the highest order, happening right in front of us.

I say make 'em pay and suffer like hell.  That way, the next bunch of folks - I don't care if it's the goddamned Green party - won't pull the same shit.  There needs to be a price to pay for this shit.  As for me, I'm going to punish every Republic candidate for every office.  The name of the party is poison - associate with it, and be punished.