The Robert Mueller Investigation

[TwiceHorn 31188]

27 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Of course we could get jack shit from the Flynn documents but the way these filings have gone I wouldn’t be surprised.

Look at all the information in the other documents, especially with the Russians and Manafort’s 76 pages of criminal information.  That is a remarkable amount of detail and content that wasn’t required to be reported.

I’m just saying it’s possible.

Sure.  Just adjusting expectations a little.  And Manafort seems like a more typical prosecution/plea/cooperation agreement than GP, VDZ and Flynn.

[triplehorn 2664]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Thing is, though, they don't really need to rely on substantial cooperation, apparently, to justify the 0-6 month sentences they gave VDZ and GP.  It came up in GP because they pooped on his cooperation and he still got a slap on the hand, albeit a felony slap.  Again, I'm not sure this is going to be particularly revelatory.  In both of these cases, they seemed to be willing to take a plea on a low-level offense in advance of valuable cooperation.

Contrast with Manafort's plea where they are clearly working down from 10 years based on the quality and quantity of cooperation.  In that case, when it (sentencing) finally goes down, the government is going to have to detail some of the cooperation, but they are most likely to do it under seal.

 

I don't think GP has been served the last of his indictments in this affair.  It appears he had a chance at (more?) cooperation and passed.  14 days is the first small plate.  I think he's regretting it already.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

So sick of Papadopolous's bullshit.  I'm very close to unfollowing him on Twitter.  

I will however continue to follow his wife. 

[yaqdum 182]

38 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I will however continue to follow his wife. 

how . . . uh . . . close did you intend to follow?

[Chad Fuck 17504]

50 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

So sick of Papadopolous's bullshit.  I'm very close to unfollowing him on Twitter.  

I will however continue to follow his wife. 

If there's a way you can do this as pics only let me know.  Because seeing her speak or her stupid tweets takes all the fun out of it for me.

[triplehorn 2664]

Entropy factor just multiplied:

Per WaPo

 

"Memos written by Andrew McCabe, then the acting FBI director, say deputy attorney general Rod J. Rosenstein suggested he secretly record his talks with President Trump, and that Rosenstein discussed possibly trying to remove him from office, according to people familiar with the matter. 

The account, first reported by the New York Times, paints Rosenstein as so concerned in May 2017 in the wake of Trump’s firing of then-FBI director James B. Comey that he contemplated secretly recording conversations with the president. He also initiated discussions about invoking the 25th amendment, which details how the Cabinet can decide whether a president is no longer able to discharge the duties of the job, one of the McCabe memos said. 

McCabe was fired earlier this year, and a grand jury is weighing possible charges against him for allegedly misleading investigators in a leak probe. 

McCabe’s lawyer, Michael Bromwich, said in a statement that his client “drafted memos to memorialize significant discussions he had with high level officials and preserved them so he would have an accurate, contemporaneous record of those discussions. When he was interviewed by the special counsel more than a year ago, he gave all of his memos — classified and unclassified — to the special counsel’s office. A set of those memos remained at the FBI at the time of his departure in late January 2018. He has no knowledge of how any member of the media obtained those memos.”

 

 

Edited September 21, 2018 by triplehorn

[TwiceHorn 31188]

1 hour ago, triplehorn said:

 

I don't think GP has been served the last of his indictments in this affair.  It appears he had a chance at (more?) cooperation and passed.  14 days is the first small plate.  I think he's regretting it already.

 

Could possibly be true.  But other than his ham-handed attempt to curry favor with the Trumpists by securing some Rooskie connection or dirt or whatever, and his evan more ham-handed attempt to cover it up, I don't think he knows shit, either in terms of further criminal liability or in terms of valuable cooperation information.  And if the government is unhappy thus far with his cooperation, as they appear to be by virtue of their sentencing memorandum, I don't know what is the holdup on bringing more severe charges.

I think he and Van Der Zwaan were low-level, low-hanging fruit that the whole thing has kind of bypassed at this point.  I think if they were under serious threat of more severe charges that they could (or could have) mitigate(d) or avoid(ed) by cooperation, there would have been a more substantial cooperation agreement built into the plea.

Edited September 21, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Chad Fuck 17504]

Any body see this today? 

 

[FondrenRoad 4378]

1 minute ago, Chad Fuck said:

Any body see this today? 

 

I've seen that one.  "There will be no bargain.  I like Captain Solo where he is."

[triplehorn 2664]

^^^ Apologies, the article I mis-linked above was from the NYT.

And now, WaPo has reported on it, but with a vey different account of events:

McCabe memos say Rosenstein considered secretly recording Trump

 

By Devlin Barrett and Matt Zapotosky September 21 at 4:05 PM

Memos written by Andrew McCabe, then the acting FBI director, say deputy attorney general Rod J. Rosenstein suggested he secretly record his talks with President Trump, and that Rosenstein discussed possibly trying to remove him from office, according to people familiar with the matter.

The account, first reported by the New York Times, paints Rosenstein as so concerned in May 2017 in the wake of Trump’s firing of then-FBI director James B. Comey that he contemplated secretly recording conversations with the president. He also initiated discussions about invoking the 25th amendment, which details how the Cabinet can decide whether a president is no longer able to discharge the duties of the job, one of the McCabe memos said.

[...]

McCabe’s lawyer, Michael Bromwich, said in a statement that his client “drafted memos to memorialize significant discussions he had with high level officials and preserved them so he would have an accurate, contemporaneous record of those discussions. When he was interviewed by the special counsel more than a year ago, he gave all of his memos — classified and unclassified — to the special counsel’s office. A set of those memos remained at the FBI at the time of his departure in late January 2018. He has no knowledge of how any member of the media obtained those memos.”

Rosenstein denied the account.

"The New York Times’s story is inaccurate and factually incorrect,” Rosenstein said. “I will not further comment on a story based on anonymous sources who are obviously biased against the department and are advancing their own personal agenda. But let me be clear about this: Based on my personal dealings with the president, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment.”

[...]

While McCabe’s memos assert both the recording and 25th amendment conversations occurred at a meeting within days of Comey’s firing, another person at the meeting, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, insisted the recording comment was said in a moment of sarcasm, and that the 25th amendment was not discussed.

That person said the wire comment came in response to McCabe’s own pushing for the Justice Department to open an investigation into the president. To that, Rosenstein responded with what this person described as a sarcastic comment along the lines of, “What do you want to do, Andy, wire the president?"

cont.

 

 

[triplehorn 2664]

12 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

And if the government is unhappy thus far with his cooperation, as they appear to be by virtue of their sentencing memorandum, I don't know what is the holdup on bringing more severe charges.

I think he and Van Der Zwaan were low-level, low-hanging fruit that the whole thing has kind of bypassed at this point.  I think if they were under serious threat of more severe charges that they could (or could have) mitigate(d) or avoid(ed) by cooperation, there would have been a more substantial cooperation agreement built into the plea.

I view this as a mob style prosecution - start low, on the edges, and work up and to the center.  Per his original arrest warrant, false statements and obstruction of justice are stated in black and white, which carries a much bigger sentence than 14 days.  I can't reconcile the difference in final charges and sentence if he didn't cooperate - unless they are holding onto additional conspiracy charges while maintaining some combination of secrecy of magnitude of the investigation and incentive/leverage for future cooperation from GP (i.e. he's not already serving 10 years) and 

Spoiler

He may yet get a chance to fully deal.  I think you risk greatly underestimating his direct role in tying Trump campaign to treason with Russia.

I view Van der Zwaan as more of a shot across the bow of all the well heeled helpers in this matter - mostly attorneys and bankers - indicating that no one will be overlooked or get a pass.  It shakes the tree.  There's a fair chance some more low hanging fruit dropped off and reported to the FBI.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

 

[Gap03 3248]

1 hour ago, Chad Fuck said:

Any body see this today? 

 

Don't know why, but Rob @0:12 gave me flashbacks to Black Tony Blair:

I miss the Chappelle Show, especially at f'ed up times like now ...

[shnsajax 3589]

Seems important.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/world/national-security/former-top-white-house-official-revises-statement-to-special-counsel-about-flynns-calls-with-russian-ambassador/2018/09/21/77bb8a7e-bb50-11e8-bdc0-90f81cc58c5d_story.html?noredirect=on&__twitter_impression=true

[triplehorn 2664]

1 hour ago, shnsajax said:

Seems important.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/world/national-security/former-top-white-house-official-revises-statement-to-special-counsel-about-flynns-calls-with-russian-ambassador/2018/09/21/77bb8a7e-bb50-11e8-bdc0-90f81cc58c5d_story.html?noredirect=on&__twitter_impression=true

A summary thread for those without a sub or past limit:

 

McFarland now says Flynn may have been referring to sanctions when they spoke in late Dec. 2016 after Flynn’s calls with Russia’s ambassador. But this summer, McFarland denied to the FBI ever talking to Flynn about any discussion of sanctions between him and the ambassador.

For a time, investigators saw McFarland’s answers as “inconsistent,” putting her in legal peril as the FBI tried to determine if she had lied to them. Flynn pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his calls with the ambassador and has been cooperating with Mueller.

Eventually, McFarland and her lawyer convinced the FBI that she hadn’t intentionally misled the bureau and had spoken from memory, without the benefit of any documents that could have helped her remember. Mueller’s team appears to be satisfied with McFarland’s revised account.

However, just days after Flynn talked to the ambassador, McFarland called me and said her memory was clear, and that Flynn and the ambassador had never discussed sanctions or how the incoming Trump administration hoped Russia would respond.

This was the day David Ignatius first reported Flynn talked to the ambassador, a key point in the Russia probe. McFarland said sanctions never came up. This was later contradicted by Flynn’s own guilty plea, as well as other evidence.

It appears that McFarland has settled her account with Mueller. A big question now is what information she could provide about what other senior Trump advisers knew about Flynn’s calls with the ambassador. /end

 

tl;dr - Lying to the FBI is bad.

Edited September 22, 2018 by triplehorn

[kevwun 15598]

A bad memory appears to be the main requirement for a job in the Trump admin.

[Degenerate Gardner 4081]

19 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

Any body see this today? 

 

Sheriff Lobo has really let himself go.

[shnsajax 3589]

It makes me wonder what all they know about Flynn and how bent over the barrel he really is.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

22 minutes ago, shnsajax said:

It makes me wonder what all they know about Flynn and how bent over the barrel he really is.

Before Flynn flipped he was rumored to be facing conspiracy to kidnapping charges along with his son.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/bj7ba4/mike-flynn-and-the-insane-alleged-plot-to-kidnap-fethullah-gulen

He was fully bent over the barrel 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

On 9/21/2018 at 3:01 PM, Chad Fuck said:

If there's a way you can do this as pics only let me know.  Because seeing her speak or her stupid tweets takes all the fun out of it for me.

Edited September 22, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[happyfunball 481]

Quote

Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has verbally resigned to Chief of Staff John Kelly in anticipation of being fired by President Trump, according to a source with direct knowledge.

Per a source close to Rosenstein: “He’s expecting to be fired,” so plans to step down. 

Background: Rosenstein talked last year invoking the 25th Amendment and wearing a wire during Trump meetings, the N.Y. Times' Adam Goldman and Michael S. Schmidt reported last week. He denied both allegations.

https://www.axios.com/rod-rosenstein-resign-justice-department-trump-cf761f4c-fca3-4794-92d4-a56c9e32ff43.html

[Mdhorn 5908]

5 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

https://www.axios.com/rod-rosenstein-resign-justice-department-trump-cf761f4c-fca3-4794-92d4-a56c9e32ff43.html

why resign, make Trump tweet fire him. 

[happyfunball 481]

13 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

why resign, make Trump tweet fire him. 

Reports are conflicting. Some are saying that he is heading to WH to be fired.

[David Dennison 18625]

The Mueller Report is gonna rule so hard.

I expect we'll be reading that soon.

[Fozzz 152]

lol bye, bye Mueller

Quote

Trump's Solicitor Gen. Noel Francisco intervened in the SEC case to urge the high court to clarify the president's constitutional power to fire all "officers of the United States" who "exercise significant authority" under the law.

"The Constitution gives the president what the framers saw as the traditional means of ensuring accountability: the power to oversee executive officers through removal," he wrote in Lucia vs. SEC. "The president is accordingly authorized under our constitutional system to remove all principal officers, as well as all 'inferior officers' he has appointed."

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-trump-fire-20180415-story.html

[happyfunball 481]

 

[David Dennison 18625]

1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

lol bye, bye Mueller

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-court-trump-fire-20180415-story.html

Please, oh please, oh please, oh please let this happen.

[jimmyjazz 45514]

yeah, see how that works out.

[Fozzz 152]

If that comes to pass, I foresee a lot of whining and not much else.

[David Dennison 18625]

Just now, Fozzz said:

If that comes to pass, I foresee a lot of whining and not much else.

And a whole lot of leaks.

It's gonna be great.

[jimmyjazz 45514]

I don't think the big question is whether or not POTUS has the power to fire special council councel counsel.

I think the big question is whether or not doing so would be clear cut obstruction of justice.

[lemonlime 5503]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

And a whole lot of leaks.

It's gonna be great.

No.  The rule of law is dying a death by a thousand cuts.  And this is a giant gash.  There is nothing great about any of the bullshit going on right now.

[TwiceHorn 31188]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't think the big question is whether or not POTUS has the power to fire special council councel counsel.

I think the big question is whether or not doing so would be clear cut obstruction of justice.

Even disregarding the legalities of obstruction, I would have to think it's what is known as "abuse of power," that, in ordinary times leads directly to impeachment and conviction and removal from office.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't think the big question is whether or not POTUS has the power to fire special council councel counsel.

I think the big question is whether or not doing so would be clear cut obstruction of justice.

We’re way past asking questions about obstruction of justice 

[David Dennison 18625]

Just now, lemonlime said:

No.  The rule of law is dying a death by a thousand cuts.  And this is a giant gash.  There is nothing great about any of the bullshit going on right now.

I think we passed that threshold on January 20, 2017.

[Chad Fuck 17504]

4 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I don't think the big question is whether or not POTUS has the power to fire special council councel counsel.

I think the big question is whether or not doing so would be clear cut obstruction of justice.

And what if it is?  Who is going to do anything about it?  

The whole thing is just going to get swept under the rug. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

If Rosenstein isn’t DAG at the end of the day, I’d think massive resignations would be appropriate.

[David Dennison 18625]

Just now, Chad Fuck said:

And what if it is?  Who is going to do anything about it?  

The whole thing is just going to get swept under the rug. 

There are white hot lights on this whole thing. They can't sweep anything under the rug at this point. It's too late.

[Fozzz 152]

I think the Dems have a little better odds of winning the House than the Senate, so impeachment is a possibility, but given that it's doubtful that they will win the Senate, I don't see Donald being removed from office even if he fires Mueller.  In the end, likely nothing of consequence will happen.  

[Chad Fuck 17504]

Just now, David Dennison said:

There are white hot lights on this whole thing. They can't sweep anything under the rug at this point. It's too late.

You haven't been paying attention.  Nothing matters.

Even if Muller has a doomsday switch and everything goes public, will those in power cede the controls of power?  No.

[jimmyjazz 45514]

3 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

And what if it is?  Who is going to do anything about it?  

The whole thing is just going to get swept under the rug. 

Well, there are those pesky midterms.

[Chad Fuck 17504]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

Well, there are those pesky midterms.

And?  Will a 2/3 Dem majority in the Senate come about because of it?  Unpossible.  

 

[David Dennison 18625]

1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

I think the Dems have a little better odds of winning the House than the Senate, so impeachment is a possibility, but given that it's doubtful that they will win the Senate, I don't see Donald being removed from office even if he fires Mueller.  In the end, likely nothing of consequence will happen.  

It all depends on when Republicans decide Donald Trump is an existential political liability.

[lemonlime 5503]

2 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

I think the Dems have a little better odds of winning the House than the Senate, so impeachment is a possibility, but given that it's doubtful that they will win the Senate, I don't see Donald being removed from office even if he fires Mueller.  In the end, likely nothing of consequence will happen.  

Even if they win the Senate nothing will happen.  You need 2/3 of the Senate to convict.   

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Just now, Fozzz said:

I think the Dems have a little better odds of winning the House than the Senate, so impeachment is a possibility, but given that it's doubtful that they will win the Senate, I don't see Donald being removed from office even if he fires Mueller.  In the end, likely nothing of consequence will happen.  

Just going through the process of a TRIAL in the senate is something of consequence, even if the outcome is predetermined.

It’s like the hearing with Dr. Ford except multiplied by 10.  Even if her testimony has no influence on Kavanaugh getting confirmed, the process is politically crippling. 

[David Dennison 18625]

2 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

You haven't been paying attention.  Nothing matters.

Even if Muller has a doomsday switch and everything goes public, will those in power cede the controls of power?  No.

You're assuming those in power remain in power on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. 

The Senate is very much in play.

The House will be all up in his shit starting next January.

[jimmyjazz 45514]

Just now, Chad Fuck said:

And?  Will a 2/3 Dem majority in the Senate come about because of it?  Unpossible.  

 

No, I'm just saying that there are important tactical issues that could work out well.  Taking the House is step 1, and it's certainly better than 50/50 even before this shit.  Now it's likely.  Taking the Senate would be step 2, even if 2/3 majority is way off the table.  Look at Beto -- when in recent memory did it seem even possible that Texas would consider a Dem Senator?

[Lagunamadre 1975]

Just now, lemonlime said:

Even if they win the Senate nothing will happen.  You need 2/3 of the Senate to convict.   

Even if Trump gets booted or resigns, then we get to go all Handmaid's Tale with Pence. It's like going from getting waterboarded to getting your fingernails pulled out. 

[lemonlime 5503]

Just now, David Dennison said:

It all depends on when Republicans decide Donald Trump is an existential political liability.

They will never decide he's a political liability. They've stood by him through Kavanaugh, kiddy concentration camps, both siding Nazi terrorists, "shithole countries," mocking the disabled, and I could go on for days. There is no bottom. 

90% of the GOP base has drunk the Kool Aid.  And their congress critters are either invertebrates or in on the cult/took Russian money, etc.  or all of this.  There is no magical election or finding of any politician's spine that is going to save us.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Everyone with the “nothing matters” mindset is exactly the mentality those in power want you to have. 

“You cant win so why even fight?”

Of course you will defend this by saying you’re just being realists but the truth is you’re just being complacent.