The Robert Mueller Investigation

[retread 2951]

The Mueller report is now a primer for all of the things that you can get away with when running for president -- if there are no consequences for Trump and co.

[David Dennison 19554]

Just now, retread said:

The Mueller report is now a primer for all of the things that you can get away with when running for president -- if there are no consequences for Trump and co.

We won't know there are no consequences for quite some time. 

[jimmyjazz 47221]

9 minutes ago, troph said:

involuntary manslaughter has its own provision of intent and its a lower standard than that of conspiracy.  consipiracy will require actual knowledge is my expectation and involuntary manslaughter is essentially criminal negligence which is to say "you should have known that drinking and driving could kill someone and you did in fact intentionally drink and you intentionally drove" which establishes the requisite scienter.  it's all statutorily driven by the standard of intent required.

Thanks.  That makes sense.

[Cheeseweasel 26440]

3 minutes ago, retread said:

So the highest bar for a president to get over is that he can't be indicted/convicted in a court of law? I think we should expect more from our president.

Impeachment is the option set forth in the Constitution. 

Unless the Congress has the stomach to do it, everything else is moot. 

Like it or not, it prevents people from disrupting a President with frivolous charges (not saying this is the case here, but I'm guessing that was the intention of the Founders)

[jimmyjazz 47221]

9 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The impeachment process was started with Nixon though... only once that started was he compelled to resign. 

Sure, but his statement was about a supposed impeachment trial of Nixon, which never happened.

[David Dennison 19554]

Just now, Cheeseweasel said:

Impeachment is the option set forth in the Constitution. 

Unless the Congress has the stomach to do it, everything else is moot. 

Like it or not, it prevents people from disrupting a President with frivolous charges (not saying this is the case here, but I'm guessing that was the intention of the Founders)

Until, of course, he's no longer president.

The presidency is the only thing protecting Donald Trump at the moment. That's not a good position to be in when you know your time in office is limited.

[Gatorubet 30726]

11 hours ago, triplehorn said:

I'm starting to feel the chances of Trump being toast are increasing, at least more so than I did this morning.  It's going to take a little time for Congress to pull it all together, but Trump has zero business occupying the Oval with what came out today.

Quote

"For more than the past year, the FBI also embedded personnel at the Office who did not work on the Special Counsel's investigation, but whose purpose was to review the results of the investigation and send - in writing - summaries of foreign intelligence and counterintelligence information to FBI HQ and FBI Field Offices.  Those communications and other correspondence between the Office and the FBI contain information derived from the investigation, not all of which is contained in this Volume."

Mueller had to be cognizant of his being fired or that Trump's efforts might result in his firing and his investigation halted.   And while Trump complicity was important, the information about the Russia attack on us - continually denied by Trump - was more important.   So he pollinated the counterintelligence info to many field offices so that it could not be squashed even if his investigation was.    Literally bread crumbs sent out to be followed and found if shit went bad.  

Edited April 19, 2019 by Gatorubet

[Fozzz 152]

The walls...the walls are closing in at last.

['stache 22145]

13 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

* and the Attorney General

At least his was more spin and deflection describing a document, like lawyers often do (though the AG should be neutral but it's 2019). She literally said the opposite of the truth which Muller calls her out on. It's abhorrent, dangerous, shocking, or as trumpkins say "nothingburger."

[bolverk 30344]

Where are all the pimp cane aggy like the night of the summary release? Did they run out of time?

I'm not sure their heart is in it anymore.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

3 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

The walls...the walls are closing in at last.

speaking of...did you hear miles and miles of Wall are being built?*

*just kidding, that's a complete lie.

[retread 2951]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Until, of course, he's no longer president.

The presidency is the only thing protecting Donald Trump at the moment. That's not a good position to be in when you know your time in office is limited.

Which means '20 will be a repeat of '16 only with new characters and interesting plot twists.

[jimmyjazz 47221]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

At least his was more spin and deflection describing a document, like lawyers often do (though the AG should be neutral but it's 2019). She literally said the opposite of the truth which Muller calls her out on. It's abhorrent, dangerous, shocking, or as trumpkins say "nothingburger."

I'm more alarmed by Barr's abject callousness.  For one thing, he knew he would be proven wrong within hours.  It was all about getting in front of the message, which while a great political strategy, is quite unacceptable from a law enforcement perspective.

Sarah is just a dumb broad who lies whenever she opens her mouth.  I didn't need Mueller to tell me that.  Nobody needed Mueller to tell us that.  What saddens me is that there is a good fraction of our populace for whom the end justifies any means.  I reconcile myself with the fact that, if you don't care about truth, our history, and our system of government (however flawed), you never did.  All Mueller did was finally flip the light switch and expose the cockroaches for who they are and have been all along.

[Gatorubet 30726]

12 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

https://nypost.com/2019/04/18/mueller-completely-dropped-the-ball-with-obstruction-punt/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

“Most important, the special counsel found that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and that the president’s frustration wasn’t over fear of guilt — the typical motivation for obstruction — but that the investigation was undermining his ability to govern the country.

 

Since his election Trump has  not given two shits about 'govern(ing) the country.'    If he did, he would not have devoted his entire Presidency to making you and 35% happy to the exclusion of the rest of the country.  He knows all of the things Mueller found that he did to stop the investigation.   It would stand to reason that there was more done that Mueller did not find.  See the report's finding that Trump folks destroyed evidence that could not be recreated.   It makes more sense that Trump, known to be trying to end the investigation,  was responding to the things that got destroyed.  The worst things.   Because why on earth would you destroy evidence of things that were not bad for Trump?  

It is logical to assume that the "I'm fucked" was related to that.   Not beyond a reasonable doubt, or perhaps not even more likely than not.    I'd need to see the jury instructions they give in conspiracy cases when there is proof of destroyed evidence related to the case.   Could they get a spoilation presumption?  Dunno. 

Edited April 19, 2019 by Gatorubet

['stache 22145]

Just now, jimmyjazz said:

I'm more alarmed by Barr's abject callousness.  For one thing, he knew he would be proven wrong within hours.  It was all about getting in front of the message, which while a great political strategy, is quite unacceptable from a law enforcement perspective.

Sarah is just a dumb broad who lies whenever she opens her mouth.  I didn't need Mueller to tell me that.  Nobody needed Mueller to tell us that.  What saddens me is that there is a good fraction of our populace for whom the end justifies any means.  I reconcile myself with the fact that, if you don't care about truth, our history, and our system of government (however flawed), you never did.  All Mueller did was finally flip the light switch and expose the cockroaches for who they are and have been all along.

Barr was playing politics. Troubling, but not surprising. We can also expect a press secretary to spin and deflect and contort for political reasons. To be asked a straight forward question about a specific knowable fact and to say the literal opposite of the truth is more than politics, it's disturbing as fuck.

[David Dennison 19554]

4 minutes ago, retread said:

Which means '20 will be a repeat of '16 only with new characters and interesting plot twists.

I expect 2020 to much more unhinged than 2016. Donald Trump will be a desperate man clinging to an office that, for now, is the only thing protecting him from criminal indictment.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Barr was doing more than playing politics IMO. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, David Dennison said:

I expect 2020 to much more unhinged than 2016. Donald Trump will be a desperate man clinging to an office that, for now, is the only thing protecting him from criminal indictment.

Trump and the republicans will break every law possible to get re-elected, there’s no reason for them not to. 

[jimmyjazz 47221]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Barr was doing more than playing politics IMO. 

What would you call it then?  He willfully mischaracterized multiple sections of a report that was released that same day.  His lies were going to be uncovered within hours.  What other rationale is there?

[David Dennison 19554]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump and the republicans will break every law possible to get re-elected, there’s no reason for them not to. 

You won't know that for years.

[troph 25231]

I expect 2020 to much more unhinged than 2016. Donald Trump will be a desperate man clinging to an office that, for now, is the only thing protecting him from criminal indictment.

If he’s re-elected it’s plausible he dies in office avoiding prosecution all together.

[Gatorubet 30726]

11 hours ago, Anastasis said:

I am going to quote this again because it really is required reading. 

 

So. Fucking. What?  The 'we do bad things so we should not get upset about them doing bad things' logic is child like.    I don't care if the CIA and State interfered with (fill in the blank)  elections as part of our foreign policy and national security concerns in the past.   I mean I care, but I do not care in the present context.    I care that OUR elections are being compromised and our President denies it, choosing to believe the KGB agent who is  compromising us.    It's not that hard.     Take away free elections, even with all of the big money and party machinations that make it a boys club of unfair privilege, and we cease to be a democracy.   We have non-paper backed up, manipulation vulnerable computer data to say who won an election.    We have the olds believing anything that their idiot friends forward to them, when the info is created and directed by Russian troll farms to help a specific candidate.   And while the latter is a different issue (stupid olds need to just go ahead and dirt nap), the former,complete with hacking into of our voting software, is a clear danger.   

Nothing in that post has a God damn thing to do with a President who refuses to protect our country, but it does continue your 'both sides' spiel.   

[David Dennison 19554]

4 minutes ago, troph said:

If he’s re-elected it’s plausible he dies in office avoiding prosecution all together.

That is possible, yes.

[American Swindle 102]

Interesting look back at ex-CIA director and Clinton ally's take on collusion:  "There was smoke, but no fire." 

 

 

But can we trust him because he was in the CIA? 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Glenn Greenwald, the guy who propagated the Seth Rich conspiracy is very reliable.

[David Dennison 19554]

1 minute ago, American Swindle said:

Interesting look back at ex-CIA director and Clinton ally's take on collusion:  "There was smoke, but no fire." 

 

 

But can we trust him because he was in the CIA? 

 

Smoke means there's evidence. The report lays out a lot of evidence of collusion

[jimmyjazz 47221]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Glenn Greenwald, the guy who propagated the Seth Rich conspiracy is very reliable.

That article has exactly zilch to do with Glenn Greenwald.

[David Dennison 19554]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That article has exactly zilch to do with Glenn Greenwald.

But he keeps parroting the line that there is no evidence of collusion with Russia.

That's just not factual.

[BrickHorn 18447]

5 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Interesting look back at ex-CIA director and Clinton ally's take on collusion:  "There was smoke, but no fire." 

 

 

But can we trust him because he was in the CIA? 

 

Greenwald proves yet again that he’s either a simpleton or a propagandist.  “No evidence of collusion” is a canard.  There was a significant amount of evidence that Trump conspired with Russia.  But the evidence was deemed insufficient to establish a conspiracy, beyond a reasonable doubt.  

“Lots, but not quite enough” is way fucking different than “none.”  Greenwald is repeating a lie.

[jimmyjazz 47221]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

But he keeps parroting the line that there is no evidence of collusion with Russia.

That's just not factual.

Sure, but the article is interesting inasmuch as it reflects the views of a former CIA director (in waiting).  I'm not saying the guy is right, but he isn't hysterical and puts out some interesting points about conspiracy and the dossier that at first glance don't seem absurd.

The most important thing in all of this is to try to assess the truth.  Not us as bystanders so much as Congress, but it's still important for voters to have a good read on the complexities in the evidence and the rationale behind some of Mueller's decisions.

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

53 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

While I agree regarding Trump and his actions, Nixon wasn't impeached, and there was no trial.  

Articles of impeachment sure as hell were approved by the House Judiciary. And forgive my trial reference when I guess I should have said impeachment hearings in the House. 

[Gatorubet 30726]

4 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Interesting look back at ex-CIA director and Clinton ally's take on collusion:  "There was smoke, but no fire."

But can we trust him because he was in the CIA? 

 

The focus of discussion on 'the dossier' gives me pause, as that is Trumpkin Code talk.   They like to falsely link the investigation with the dossier, when that is a blatant falsehood.  The investigation was on long before that.  But Trump and his fanbois lie about the dossier all the time.  Trump wants to debunk the pee tapes, so it is important to him.   He also wants to allege that it was a partisan political op,  when the investigation was the result of intelligence, including intelligence from allies given to U.S. intelligence , allies concerned about Russian interference, and Trump cronies like Manafort being deep in illegal acts in favor of Russian interests.

You investigate because there is smoke.   He admits smoke.  So the investigation was not a witch hunt.    I absolutely can live with and agree that the Trump campaign did not conspire with Russia.  But I do want  to know more about what information Manafort gave the Russians about battleground states - and why he gave them that info.*  Because that seems like a not-so-small thing that goes to the heart of that question.  And if that was not included in the Mueller report, for whatever reason, I'd like to know why.   

* The report notes that Manafort instructed Gates to “provide Kilimnik with updates on the Trump campaign—including internal polling data.” According to Mueller, “Manafort expected Kilimnik to share that information with others in Ukraine and with Deripaska. Gates periodically sent such polling data to Kilimnik during the campaign.”

[ulukinatme 1769]

Just think...the Russians wouldn't have had any information to share on the Clinton campaign if she protected her server.  This is all really her fault.  

[BrickHorn 18447]

“No need to read the SC report detailing all the troubling behavior by the President, folks.  Just read this year-old article about a CLINTON ALLY speculating, without knowing the facts, that there was no wrongdoing.”

Typical distractionary red herring bullshit by the Bananarepublicans.  Read the report.  Decide for yourself if the behavior described therein is what you expect from the President of the United States.  

Edited April 19, 2019 by BrickHorn

[TwiceHorn 32083]

50 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

I am not a criminal lawyer, but my understanding is that conspiracy requires that two or more people intentionally agreed to commit a criminal offense.  I’m not looking at the Report now but as I recall, the discussion of the Trump Tower meeting indicates that Jr’s attendance Or behavior at that meeting may have been a crime, but they couldn’t prove he intended to agree to commit a crime.  He kind of fell ass backward into it.  

It seems like a generous standard to apply, honestly.  I’d be interested in the crim law experts’ take on this one.

I think you are sniffing it right.  Using the Trump Tower meeting example, there was possibly an intention on Trump Jrs. part to accept and/or pay for material assistance from the Russkies for the Trump campaign, an election law violation.  However, it wasn't offered at that meeting, so no agreement was reached at that time.

Conspiracy requires an agreement by two or more to commit a criminal act and then an overt action toward that goal, in furtherance of the agreement.  So, I don't think Mueller could prove up an agreement prior to an overt act, other than those things that have been indicted.  There were tons of overt acts and several at least tacit agreements, but they just didn't time/match up right to show a conspiracy, more just a happy symbiosis of foreign corruption.

It was just more incompetence from Trumpco (they couldn't get sufficiently organized to conspire), and, as I said, it's like the Russians knew better than Trumpco what was crossing the line and avoided it.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

1 minute ago, BrickHorn said:

“No need to read the SC report detailing all the troubling behavior by the President, folks.  Just read this year-old article about a CLINTON ALLY speculating, without knowing the facts, that there was no wrongdoing.”

Typical distractionary red herring bullshit by the Bananarepublicans.  Read the report.  Decide for yourself if the behavior describes therein is what you expect from the President of the United States.  

the GOP playbook is to make sure as many people as possible remain ignorant. regardless of the topic, or the policy initiative, the less informed people are the better it is for the GOP.

[Anastasis 23723]

 

14 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Glenn Greenwald, the guy who propagated the Seth Rich conspiracy is very reliable.

[triplehorn 2664]

21 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Mueller had to be cognizant of his being fired or that Trump's efforts might result in his firing and his investigation halted.   And while Trump complicity was important, the information about the Russia attack on us - continually denied by Trump - was more important.   So he pollinated the counterintelligence info to many field offices so that it could not be squashed even if his investigation was.    Literally bread crumbs sent out to be followed and found if shit went bad.  

Yes.  It also appears to be a way to get this highly classified information into the hands of Congress without disclosing/redacting it in the Mueller report while also not being in direct conflict with rules against sharing evidence derived directly from an ongoing investigation, I believe.

Note Mueller specifying "foreign intel" and "counterintel" evidence.  Recall a year ago the Spanish wiretaps with DonJr on them:  

The FBI has obtained wiretaps of a Putin ally tied to the NRA who met with Trump Jr. during the campaign

---> "When Grinda [top prosecutor of organized crime in Spain] was asked whether he was concerned about Torshin's interactions with Trump Jr. and other American political figures, Grinda replied, "Mr. Trump's son should be concerned."

You can bet that those foreign wiretaps are a part of the "foreign intel" Mueller has waiting for HSCI to review.  It's also likely related to one of Mueller's 14 undisclosed investigations involving Russia laundering cash through the NRA to Trump/GOP.  

[Gatorubet 30726]

And Mueller cannot interview the Russians to ask what they did with the Manafort info, so they cannot 'prove' the quid pro quo.   But you know that the Russians very likely used the polling data to focus the troll farms efforts on battleground states.   I assume that we have insufficient evidence of how that info was used after it was given to Kilimnik.  We just don't know.   Unless somebody could compare the Russia interference by volume of data sent to the various states/precincts disclosed by Manafort at various time frames.      

[American Swindle 102]

14 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Glenn Greenwald, the guy who propagated the Seth Rich conspiracy is very reliable.

One of the few that didn't fall hook line and sinker for the Russia-Trump Conspiracy and constantly debates with outlets that disagree with him, but nah not reliable at all.  

 

[TwiceHorn 32083]

1 minute ago, triplehorn said:

Yes.  It also appears to be a way to get this highly classified information into the hands of Congress without disclosing/redacting it in the Mueller report while also not being in direct conflict with rules against sharing evidence derived directly from an ongoing investigation, I believe.

Note Mueller specifying "foreign intel" and "counterintel" evidence.  Recall a year ago the Spanish wiretaps with DonJr on them:  

The FBI has obtained wiretaps of a Putin ally tied to the NRA who met with Trump Jr. during the campaign

---> "When Grinda [top prosecutor of organized crime in Spain] was asked whether he was concerned about Torshin's interactions with Trump Jr. and other American political figures, Grinda replied, "Mr. Trump's son should be concerned."

You can bet that those foreign wiretaps are a part of the "foreign intel" Mueller has waiting for HSCI to review.  It's also likely related to one of Mueller's 14 undisclosed investigations involving Russia laundering cash through the NRA to Trump/GOP.  

While I have little doubt that Mueller was concerned with getting intel to the right agencies, I don't imagine the House Committee was high on his list.

Where is the factual support for 14 undisclosed investigations on that subject matter?  I have seen the numbers 12 and 14 floated around without citation.

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Read the report, decide for yourself 

What percentage of Americans do you think will read the report?

[troph 25231]

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think you are sniffing it right.  Using the Trump Tower meeting example, there was possibly an intention on Trump Jrs. part to accept and/or pay for material assistance from the Russkies for the Trump campaign, an election law violation.  However, it wasn't offered at that meeting, so no agreement was reached at that time.

Conspiracy requires an agreement by two or more to commit a criminal act and then an overt action toward that goal, in furtherance of the agreement.  So, I don't think Mueller could prove up an agreement prior to an overt act, other than those things that have been indicted.  There were tons of overt acts and several at least tacit agreements, but they just didn't time/match up right to show a conspiracy, more just a happy symbiosis of foreign corruption.

It was just more incompetence from Trumpco (they couldn't get sufficiently organized to conspire), and, as I said, it's like the Russians knew better than Trumpco what was crossing the line and avoided it.

incompetence or brilliance.  I don't buy the Trump family are bumfucks completely.  There is enough there in the entire record of Trump, his business background, and this report to easily conclude his family and his associates are very well versed in the methods of organized crime and those crimes are terribly difficult to prove in large part because of the criminal sophistication - retaining criminal lawyers as advisors throughout the process, etc.  Trump's campaign team at the highest levels had significant and meaningful ties to Russia.  Let that sink in.  Not a policy wonk who studied Russia, actual businessmen who had personal relationships with Oligarchs.  There is little doubt some of Trump's real estate holdings are prime money laundering properties and when you put all of this together and the repeated contacts with the Russians before during and after the election, it's just not a difficult conclusion to reach that the Trump family is organized crime and knows how to get away with it.

[David Dennison 19554]

2 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

One of the few that didn't fall hook line and sinker for the Russia-Trump Conspiracy and constantly debates with outlets that disagree with him, but nah not reliable at all.  

 

You might want to read the report.

[Gatorubet 30726]

8 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

While I have little doubt that Mueller was concerned with getting intel to the right agencies, I don't imagine the House Committee was high on his list.

Where is the factual support for 14 undisclosed investigations on that subject matter?  I have seen the numbers 12 and 14 floated around without citation.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/04/18/mueller-evidence-14-potential-crimes-only-two-publicly-known.html

 

Not sure if page numbers of the report is cited, but I doubt that cnbc would just make up the content here.

[American Swindle 102]

9 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

And Mueller cannot interview the Russians to ask what they did with the Manafort info, so they cannot 'prove' the quid pro quo.   But you know that the Russians very likely used the polling data to focus the troll farms efforts on battleground states.   I assume that we have insufficient evidence of how that info was used after it was given to Kilimnik.  We just don't know.   Unless somebody could compare the Russia interference by volume of data sent to the various states/precincts disclosed by Manafort at various time frames.      

Did such efforts actually change votes? Or was it just memes that got both sides riled up?

[zork 629]

 

[American Swindle 102]

8 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You might want to read the report.

Here's some more evidence that Glenn Greenwald does shitty, non-investigative slanted journalism and sucks at life:

https://theintercept.com/2019/04/18/robert-mueller-did-not-merely-reject-the-trumprussia-conspiracy-theories-he-obliterated-them/

[TwiceHorn 32083]

Thanks.  Somehow I missed that.

It's Appendix D, pp. D-3 to D-5.

Also, I believe the statement that the referrals all relate to "involving Russia laundering cash through the NRA to Trump/GOP" is fairly wild speculation.

Edited April 19, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[Biff Tannen 46170]

Glad to see the intercept has info to make me not believe my lying eyes.