Jump to content

The Robert Mueller Investigation

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I mean there's no way he doesn't go to prison eventually right?

The sad thing is, like Manafort, I'm pretty sure he has committed gobs of money laundering and bank fraud over his career.  And those are 20-30 year max crimes.  Unfortunately, limitations began running on most of that long before he took office.  And you can thank political hack US Attorneys and Manhattan DAs for that, including loverboy Preet Bharara.

The shit he's on the hook for now, 371, obstruction, election violations, is all five year stuff.  And you see how that works out.  Guess it depends on whether you think some jail (couple of years) is enough.

Edited by TwiceHorn
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

Loco

Loco 3752

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, yaqdum said:

totally agree.  we are going to see things this country has never seen.  people who have had free rein to plot against the rest of us will find it's not the cozy place it used to be.  in a very real sense, they've blown it.

i don't like to compare events with fiction, whether movie or whatever, because fiction can be as unrealistic and as impracticable as an audience will allow.  when our superhero defeats five bad guys who mostly just stood around to take the blows, we don't notice how goofy it really is.

that said, i am reminded of a tv series from way back when i used to watch tv.  many or most of you won't recognize the title mission impossible.  never mind most people called it mission implausible, the plot always seemed to feature a goal that wasn't approachable in any usual, main force sense, but relied on crafting a sequence of careful actions with meticulous timing to satisfy the assignment.  of course, all the agents were perfect and nobody sneezed at just the wrong time.  thus it wasn't reality, but we bought it, lock, stock, and bilious baloney.

what we are watching is a true-life mission impossible.  no cleavers here.  that's not available.  this is meticulous unwinding like defusing a bomb from the wrong end.

Feels more like "Get Smart"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Zavala said:

So thats a no?

You need to ask a specific question.  Do I know when the Mueller Report will come out?  No, but as I've said before watch Rod Rosenstein closely.  The moment he leaves, the shit should hit the fan.

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

Zavala 1384

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You need to ask a specific question.  Do I know when the Mueller Report will come out?  No, but as I've said before watch Rod Rosenstein closely.  The moment he leaves the shit should hit the fan.

I asked, but you gave a joke response. You think he's going to release the report a week before the election or are you saying that November 2020 is when he gets voted out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I'd prefer it not be while he's in office.  I would like to see him depart the White House in shame for the little justice that's worth. 

I don't think Trump gets a pass unless complicit in Congress also get a pass.  Mass resignations?  I just don't see it.  

Also Trump Org --> DonJr, Ivanka, Eric, and Jared for his part getting off w/o prison ?  Again, don't see it breaking that way at all.

My hope is Mueller blows up a massive multi-faceted foreign campaign contribution laundering operation that blows up key members of Congress/RNC which in turn tenderizes what's left of the Senate for impeachment and conviction/removal.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yuk

Yuk 1509

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I don't understand this.  Is Rosenstein still overseeing the Mueller probe?  And if so, why?  As far as I know, Barr isn't recused.  Mueller should be reporting to Barr, no?

All the day-to-day criminal stuff runs through DAG before it gets to AG.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pig Bellmont

Pig Bellmont 8691

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, lemonlime said:

I don't understand this.  Is Rosenstein still overseeing the Mueller probe?  And if so, why?  As far as I know, Barr isn't recused.  Mueller should be reporting to Barr, no?

Didn’t we discuss on this thread that Rosenstein was overseeing the day to day even after Whitacker was appointed bc the investigation fell under counter-terrorism, or am I having a fever dream?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yaqdum

yaqdum 182

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

My hope is Mueller blows up a massive multi-faceted foreign campaign contribution laundering operation that blows up key members of Congress/RNC which in turn tenderizes what's left of the Senate for impeachment and conviction/removal.

how i've seen it for a while now.  the very things that make those crooked senators unwilling to compromise are the things that will hang them by the 'nads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted (edited)

Nadler delineates a concern which tends to support a rationale for why Mueller may choose to indict Trump --> if Mueller submits his report to the AG along with evidence, but declines to indict citing DOJ *policy*, the AG in turn could decline to share Mueller's evidence with Congress about someone for whom no criminality is being charged, i.e. Trump.  However, based on SC regulations, if the AG disagrees with the SC on recommendations for criminal indictment, it triggers a report having to be submitted to House Judiciary explaining it.  That would then necessitate the House taking the evidence and matters into its own hands, as it should.

Nadler mangles the last part of his comments on precedent for DOJ sharing 800k+ pages of FBI evidence on Clinton investigation even though she wasn't indicted.  Relying on that seems to have far more pitfalls, especially considering its evidence on a sitting POTUS and the built-in protections that affords.  Mueller indicting Trump appears to be the safest bet to ensure House Judiciary gets to see the depth of Mueller's findings involving Trump.

video clip VVV

Spoiler

 

 

Edited by triplehorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, lemonlime said:

I don't understand this.  Is Rosenstein still overseeing the Mueller probe?  And if so, why?  As far as I know, Barr isn't recused.  Mueller should be reporting to Barr, no?

 

Think of Rosenstein as the gatekeeper to the Mueller investigation.  It started with him.  He hired Mueller.  He is the only one on the outside of the Mueller investigation that knows everything on the inside.  Whitaker and Barr may have been briefed to the status of it but they can’t influence or interfere without risking some obstruction of justice liability.  In fact, if I was in Whitaker or Barr’s position I’d want to know as little as possible about the inside of the Mueller investigation.  

Rod Rosenstein doesn’t have that luxury.  He is basically duty bound to remain until Mueller has concluded his business.  If Rosenstein leaves prematurely, the oversight of Mueller is vulnerable to compromise and the integrity of the investigation comes into question.

Rosenstein can’t leave while Mueller has unfinished business.  Trump can fire Rosenstein but it would be pretty clear cut obstruction of justice.  At least that’s the way I see it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Yuk said:

All the day-to-day criminal stuff runs through DAG before it gets to AG.

Except Mueller and Special Counsel is anything but day-to-day.  That's the whole raison d'etre of a Special Counsel.  Now, I wouldn't be surprised if Barr had said "Rod, you got this," as a matter of experience/convenience. 

By the Special Counsel rules, though, it is the Attorney General, not his delegate or a DAG, that handles the Special Counsel.  Period.  Rosenstein got it because Sessions recused, Sessions is not the AG and Barr has no conflict.  By most measures, Rod should be out of the picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Nadler delineates a concern which tends to support a rationale for why Mueller may choose to indict Trump --> if Mueller submits his report to the AG along with evidence, but declines to indict citing DOJ *policy*, the AG in turn could decline to share Mueller's evidence with Congress about someone for whom no criminality is being charged, i.e. Trump.  However, based on SC regulations, if the AG disagrees with the SC on recommendations for criminal indictment, it triggers a report having to be submitted to House Judiciary explaining it.  That would then necessitate the House taking the evidence and matters into its own hands, as it should.

Nadler mangles the last part of his comments on precedent for DOJ sharing 800k+ pages of FBI evidence on Clinton investigation even though she wasn't indicted.  Relying on that seems to have far more pitfalls, especially considering its evidence on a sitting POTUS and the built-in protections that affords.  Mueller indicting Trump appears to be the safest bet to ensure House Judiciary gets to see the depth of Mueller's findings involving Trump.

video clip VVV

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 

There is almost no doubt in my mind that any Attorney General will fail in keeping the Mueller Report from public view.  It may take a bit of time, and it's conceivable that some of it may be redacted on national security or ongoing investigation grounds.  I'm not even convinced Barr will try to hold it back.  One might think Trump wouldn't appoint anyone who's not a lackey, but this wouldn't be the first appointment he's fucked up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45557

Posted
Posted

Trump wants the WH to evaluate the report via executive privilege.  If he gets his way, it will be so heavily redacted as to be worthless.  I don't know the rule of law well enough to say whether or not he can pull that off, but I do think the DOJ could go along with this latest flight of fancy.  The Senate sure wouldn't give a damn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Trump wants the WH to evaluate the report via executive privilege.  If he gets his way, it will be so heavily redacted as to be worthless.  I don't know the rule of law well enough to say whether or not he can pull that off, but I do think the DOJ could go along with this latest flight of fancy.  The Senate sure wouldn't give a damn.

There would be only the thinnest claim for executive privilege there.  Woudn't stand much court scrutiny.  Executive privilege is at its strongest when it involves executive deliberations or decisionmaking processes.  Second strongest when involving national security, which is really a different issue.  The President looking at a document and materials he didn't author or authorize/mandate the creation of, is not executive privileged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45557

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I fully expect WaPo, NYT, AP and others to sue for its release the day it's issued. I would expect the trial court and appeals court to rule within a couple of months. The biggest delay may be the certiorari process. 

Would they know?  Couldn't it go from Mueller -> Barr -> WH without any announcement?  (Theoretically.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lemonlime

lemonlime 5503

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

There would be only the thinnest claim for executive privilege there.  Woudn't stand much court scrutiny.  Executive privilege is at its strongest when it involves executive deliberations or decisionmaking processes.  Second strongest when involving national security, which is really a different issue.  The President looking at a document and materials he didn't author or authorize/mandate the creation of, is not executive privileged.

Kavanaugh, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito say hah to that.  Trump just needs to run out the clock till he has a McDonald's induced heart attack or RBG dies/retires.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Yuk

Yuk 1509

Posted
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Doesnt briefing begin soon before the Supreme Court in the sealed subpoena enforcement challenge? 

Maybe I'm dense, but how does she get "this week" from that?

Edited by Yuk
Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Would they know?  Couldn't it go from Mueller -> Barr -> WH without any announcement?  (Theoretically.)

And how much power does Congress have to get the unredacted version if the WH redacts significant portions?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, AUinHsv said:

Even Nixon tried to release his recordings as an edited transcript and Supreme Court said that wasn't going to fly. I don't remember him claiming executive privilege so it may not be a valid comparison.

Nixon "invented" executive privilege, but it was prior to the tapes I think. So he didn't bother to assert it, although the tapes could under certain circumstances be classic privileged material. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, lemonlime said:

Kavanaugh, Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito say hah to that.  Trump just needs to run out the clock till he has a McDonald's induced heart attack or RBG dies/retires.

I don't actually believe that and I would be saddened to be proven wrong. 

The AG does have to report the conclusion of the investigation but not necessarily the report, to congress. I expect that event to be leaked if not outright public. 

I honestly think a private litigant has the best chance of getting the report in its most unredacted form. I kind of expect that it will contain ongoing investigation and national security material that should be legitimately redacted. 

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23356

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Mueller report delivery is likely a little anti-climatic as to how its being discussed publicly, it won't be carried on a chariot into the DoJ with a big ceremony. AG Barr took office a month ago, after getting settled, I'd imagine he wanted a FULL update on the SCO investigation

I'd guess by week 3/4, Barr in discussions with SCO types of reports to be delivered, we've already seen key departures SCO in both investigators & prosecutors, signs SCO investigation splintered into multiple jurisdictions

AG Barr if he's not already received some form of report, I imagine would see it soon, & then he needs and deserves the right to think through what to do about 1 of the most important investigations in our nation's history. I'd think a month at least to review & think it through

Barr has to make huge decisions affecting institutions & national security, how much to reveal publicly vis-a-vis Russia, what to further investigate, whether a conspiracy charge should be levied or not, and has 3 audiences (POTUS, Congress, Public) all wanting different things

I don't think anyone right now, to include AG Barr, knows exactly closure of Mueller investigation will be, when report revealed, but a guess might be. Report delivered AG = now or soon, AG decides strategy = April, Congress demands see it = May/June, Public sees "some" = summer

in conclusion, I hope we let our institutions and their leaders take their time, so they can do what's right. Barr, Rosenstein and Mueller are the only ones that know all the details to make the best decision for the country.  Let's hope, whatever the outcome, they get it right

Regarding Rosenstein staying as a sign, I see it as, Rosenstein offered to leave let Barr pick his own team (normal) & cause he’s seen enough crossfire. Barr arrives, reviews facts 1st time & situation (“wow, this is complicated”) sees need Rosenstein stay help sort things out

Sure Barr criticizes Mueller appointment, Rosenstein said Barr hadn’t seen all the facts, now he has, & unlike our President and Congressmen - Barr, Rosenstein, Mueller are professionals & can disagree at times but still work with each other for the common good

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

THAT is interesting. Also, Mueller had access to Trump .Org emails for what a year before the warrants were executed? 

 

I can't think of a more momentous revelation to date.  

"The Illegal Campaign Contribution Scheme" followed by 19 completely redacted pages ? 

Just to be clear, Mueller had all this mapped out in detail before the FBI raided Cohen's residence and devices. 

This is likely what stands to envelop the RNC, of which Cohen was deputy national finance chair, a position he maintained for months beyond his FBI raid in NYC.  pure hubris.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Let’s say it does consume the RNC in a RICO case, who goes to jail?  Who is ultimately liable? 

What will be the consequences? 

I don't know. 

One open and shut place to start is tracing the individuals who directly and knowingly accepted and/or distributed illicit cash in coordination with Cohen and his expressed 'mutual understandings.'

I'd also think about what the expected outcomes of the prosecution would be in a RICO type case.  I can't speak for Mueller, but I'd approach it by thinking of what it would take to cause the Senate to be sufficiently shaken to ensure Trump is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dertyberd

Dertyberd 394

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

 


All of them?

 

It should be the elected leadership because they're the ones who actually control how the money is spent and raised, but that won't happen.  There are bundlers (Cohen, Wynn, Romney types) who serve as legal buffers for the electeds, and they control access to lawmakers on a certain level.   I'd imagine we may get lucky and bring down the RNC apparatus, but it will be difficult to pin it on any lawmakers outside of leadership. That could change if there is evidence they knew of the dirty money and  personally directed it's spending. Lets hope there are emails.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
yaqdum

yaqdum 182

Posted
Posted

we keep talking trump, and trump is a major problem, of course.  that said, he's the little white pus, not the pimple.  it's what's behind him that counts.

the pimple has been here since nixon at least and more likely since not that long after the mayflower peeked over the horizon.  if this nation is to survive in any recognizable sense it must be reformed in a major way, and issues we have overlooked for decades or more must be resolved one way or another.  given the gravity of this attempted coup, if there aren't significant numbers sent to prison for significant amounts of time we've thrown in the towel.  our forebears were up to it with the wolf at the door, but we are not.  general george would have executed the worst of these traitors.  maybe we'll talk to them in a stern voice?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Junior Miller said:

If you strictly follow precedent the only thing that seems certain is that the US CJ system will go easy or let off rich white men. They used to try to hide it a bit but it's gotten so publicly obvious over the last several years that it is the most likely outcome here. 

It wasn't really hidden, it's just that most of America didn't give a damn or liked it that way.  I read someone somewhere observing that the system is soft on white collar criminals because it was set up by white collar criminals.  That's a super-cynical statement, but actually fairly accurate.  If you alter it to "set up by people who look like, act like, and mostly think like white collar criminals," it would be perfect.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 31272

Posted
Posted

Another thing I think that militates strongly in favor of releasing the report is the fact that almost every Special/Independent/Counsel/Prosecutor has publicly released a comprehensive report.  An exception is Watergate, but the Special Prosecutor existed only six months, was really ad hoc, and, of course was short-circuited by Nixon's resignation.

I just don't see the courts keeping this under wraps.

Maybe Trump goes so berserk trying to bury it that it leads to impeachment/resignation.  It becomes his Saturday Night Massacre.

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...