The Robert Mueller Investigation

[Pods 7637]

 

Nunes and Ryan are forcing them to turn over documents during an active investigation on a "US Citizen who has provided information to the CIA and FBI". Disclosing the identity places their life at risk. 

Best odds are Felix Sater. 

[wildcat09 29579]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

@Anastasis Why do you think Mueller isn’t going to indict Cohen in 2018?

Is it because you think Mueller will get fired, or something else?

For me, the Mueller investigation is a black box as far as the timing of indictments dropping.  I can’t tell if he’s saving Cohen charges for the end  but I imagine he’s concluded his investigation into Cohen before the SDNY raid.  

Mueller may even have a sealed indictment on Cohen already but I wouldn’t bet on it.

I think the investigation is going to drag on well into 2019 as well.

I'm guessing he thinks any indictment of Cohen will be by the SDNY, not Mueller.

[joe dillon 11]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

How awesome would it be if Devin Nunes was the next person indicted in the Mueller investigation?

you have lost it-------calm down

[Pods 7637]

20 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

17 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

TIL Enron was a political scandal.

 

Something tells me a retired FBI agent who is now a dean at Yale Law School probably already knows that, but based on your general lack of information on all issues related to this, I'm not at all surprised you don't know ho Asha Rangappa is or what her background is.

She's a highly credible expert that writes clearly on the investigation. I can see why you avoid her. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11860]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

@Anastasis Why do you think Mueller isn’t going to indict Cohen in 2018?

Is it because you think Mueller will get fired, or something else?

For me, the Mueller investigation is a black box as far as the timing of indictments dropping.  I can’t tell if he’s saving Cohen charges for the end  but I imagine he’s concluded his investigation into Cohen before the SDNY raid.  

Mueller may even have a sealed indictment on Cohen already but I wouldn’t bet on it.

I think the investigation is going to drag on well into 2019 as well.

After the last couple of days, I kinda suspected the "raid" was because they knew all this info was about to come out publicly and they didn't want any evidence destroyed.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, joe dillon said:

you have lost it-------calm down

You must not know how deep Nunes is entangled in the Russia investigation.

The Nunes File

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

After the last couple of days, I kinda suspected the "raid" was because they knew all this info was about to come out publicly and they didn't want any evidence destroyed.

That might have been part of it but I think there’s a lot more to it than that.  A raid on the personal attorney to the president isn’t just about damaging press. I think they caught Cohen in the process of some kind of fraud or ongoing conspiracy to commit fraud.

[Pods 7637]

5 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I'm guessing he thinks any indictment of Cohen will be by the SDNY, not Mueller.

That's what I think will happen. Mueller is doing his best to be straight and level and avoid even the appearance of impropriety. I expect Cohen will mostly be handled by SDNY. The problem could be the NY FBI field office though. It was virulently pro-Trump prior to the election and leaked like a sieve. If they can't trust the NY field office, that may change things. 

[Pods 7637]

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

That might have been part of it but I think there’s a lot more to it than that.  A raid on the personal attorney to the president isn’t just about damaging press. I think they caught Cohen in the process of some kind of fraud or ongoing conspiracy to commit fraud.

I also think there's more to it, but if they had evidence Cohen was taking millions of dollars in bribes, which is what this looks increasingly like, it is more than enough to get the warrants. 

Cohen and the bribes would be one of the biggest scandals in history and completely impeachable for any other administration in history. We live in exciting times my friends. 

Edited May 10, 2018 by Pods

[Anastasis 23717]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

I'm guessing he thinks any indictment of Cohen will be by the SDNY, not Mueller.

I think that the likelihood of an SDNY indictment is extremely high, and a Mueller indictment rather low.  I don't think that Mueller would have kicked Cohen down to SDNY if there was Russia collusion meat to bone out and if he had pending indictments against Cohen. See also, Manafort indictment.  He didn't get kicked down, even though his indictment is not Russia related because Mueller thinks that there is a collusion angle to dive deeper on.

Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong on this one. I honestly put it at a coin toss.  

[ShaggyBevo RIP 3873]

Agree that Mueller leaves Cohen to SDNY so Trump can't pardon him.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I think Mueller has Cohen dead to rights and he will be indicted by both the SDNY and the Mueller team. 

The SDNY indictment to drop sometime before July 31, 2018 and Mueller indictment on the Russia stuff sometime after that.

The SDNY will kick any evidence they find on Russian election interference/collusion back to Mueller.

The federal districts don’t operate autonomously, they work together depending which office has jurisdiction.

[Brisketexan 106887]

2 minutes ago, ShaggyBevo RIP said:

Agree that Mueller leaves Cohen to SDNY so Trump can't pardon him.

Not accurate -- SDNY is federal.  The NY Attorney General is the state.  Trump can pardon Cohen for anything the SDNY indicts on.  And he will.

[GW Hayduke 1957]

8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Not accurate -- SDNY is federal.  The NY Attorney General is the state.  Trump can pardon Cohen for anything the SDNY indicts on.  And he will.

Kicking Cohn to SDNY was to address the potential political concern of mueller overstepping his authority,  not to avoid the pardon power

Edited May 10, 2018 by GW Hayduke

[Brisketexan 106887]

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Kicking Cohn to SDNY was to address the potential political concern of mueller overstepping his authority,  not to avoid the pardon power

Correct.

[Pods 7637]

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Not accurate -- SDNY is federal.  The NY Attorney General is the state.  Trump can pardon Cohen for anything the SDNY indicts on.  And he will.

Correct. What it also does is spread parts of the investigation around to protect it from interference. When Trump ultimately fires Rosenstein to get to Mueller, they're going to say the case can be handled by the current DOJ, or needs to be dropped altogether. 

In that case, the SDNY still has the investigation going into Cohen and they can add the NY relevant parts of Mueller's investigation quickly and keep going. Most of the pre-election crimes took place in NY. The VA and DC parts will get kicked to their respective AG's and will take a bit to get going, but NY will be able to keep going without skipping a beat.

Edited May 10, 2018 by Pods

[Gil Bang 26235]

 

ADVERTISEMENT

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[TwiceHorn 32076]

51 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

@Anastasis Why do you think Mueller isn’t going to indict Cohen in 2018?

Is it because you think Mueller will get fired, or something else?

For me, the Mueller investigation is a black box as far as the timing of indictments dropping.  I can’t tell if he’s saving Cohen charges for the end  but I imagine he’s concluded his investigation into Cohen before the SDNY raid.  

Mueller may even have a sealed indictment on Cohen already but I wouldn’t bet on it.

I think the investigation is going to drag on well into 2019 as well.

Fairly certain Anastasis was relying on the SDNY prong.  Mueller has largely washed his hands of Cohen. I'm sure he's still privy to the evidence generated by the investigation, but I don't think you are going to see anything more from Mueller on Cohen. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

12 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Kicking Cohn to SDNY was to address the potential political concern of mueller overstepping his authority,  not to avoid the pardon power

Kinda.

Mueller kicked the stuff he had on Cohen that was clearly outside the scope of his mandate.

Which is exactly what he is supposed to do.

It had nothing to do with appearances or politics.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Mueller has largely washed his hands of Cohen. 

I have no idea how you’ve come to this conclusion.

The Mueller team hasn’t even questioned Cohen yet.  He’s either a subject or more likely a target.

Many of the characters that have been questioned by the Mueller team have been specifically questioned about Michael Cohen.  Even AT&T was questioned about Cohen last year.

Assuming Cohen isn’t a target, if the Mueller team doesn’t at least attempt to question Cohen, they are committing investigation malpractice.

Edited May 10, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[TwiceHorn 32076]

17 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I have no idea how you’ve come to this conclusion.

The Mueller team hasn’t even questioned Cohen yet.  He’s either a subject or more likely a target.

Many of the characters that have been questioned by the Mueller team have been specifically questioned about Michael Cohen.  Even AT&T was questioned about Cohen last year.

Assuming Cohen isn’t a target, if the Mueller team doesn’t at least attempt to question Cohen, they are committing investigation malpractice.

Because, Hugo, kicking Cohen to the SDNY is essentially a concession that Cohen  and his crimes are  outside Mueller's mandate and therefore further investigation and any indictments resulting therefrom will issue from the SDNY and not Mueller.

Now, that could change, but it would seem that if Mueller had much nexus he wouldn't have kicked it.  That is, if the probable cause for the crimes supporting the warrants had sufficient nexus to Trump and the campaign and Russia, there would have been no kicking.

None of that is to say that Mueller won't be receiving evidence from the Cohen investigation and that he and SDNY won't apply pressure on Cohen to flip on Trump or whomever remains within Mueller's mandate, but I think it is fairly unlikely that Cohen goes back into Mueller's orbit as far as indictments are concerned.

I do find it difficult to reconcile the kicking of Cohen and the retention of Manafort.  Perhaps the pushback from Manafort, slight and ineffective as it may be, tilted Mueller to kick Cohen.

Edited May 10, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Okay, we will have to respectfully disagree.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

We didn’t find out anything was kicked to the SDNY until Cohen was raided... Makes me wonder who else might have had evidence of ongoing criminal activity kicked to the SDNY that was outside of Mueller’s scope.

[Brisketexan 106887]

3 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Because, Hugo, kicking Cohen to the SDNY is essentially a concession that Cohen  and his crimes are  outside Mueller's mandate and therefore further investigation and any indictments resulting therefrom will issue from the SDNY and not Mueller.

Now, that could change, but it would seem that if Mueller had much nexus he wouldn't have kicked it.

None of that is to say that Mueller won't be receiving evidence from the Cohen investigation and that he and SDNY won't apply pressure on Cohen to flip on Trump or whomever remains within Mueller's mandate, but I think it is fairly unlikely that Cohen goes back into Mueller's orbit as far as indictments are concerned.

I don't think they're necessarily mutually exclusive.

For example, Mueller digs into Cohen because that's where the evidence leads from his current mandate (russia-related stuff).  Maybe he finds something -- Cohen funneling payments to and from Russian interests, for example.  Maybe he doesn't.  But, he ALSO finds evidence of numerous OTHER crimes that are unrelated to the scope of his investigation...so he kicks THAT over to the SDNY.

Note that I really don't know which scenario is in play here.  I'm just noting that the referral to the SDNY doesn't mean that Cohen is not ALSO relevant to the Mueller investigation.  That remains to be seen.  Like most everything else in this story.

[Brisketexan 106887]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We didn’t find out anything was kicked to the SDNY until Cohen was raided... Makes me wonder who else might have had evidence of ongoing criminal activity kicked to the SDNY that was outside of Mueller’s scope.

Oh, and that timing might be telling as well.  If Mueller was already looking into Cohen for stuff within his scope, and had an idea that there was evidence of OTHER crimes, he might not have kicked that over to the SDNY...until his investigation gave him reason to believe that evidence might be destroyed if someone didn't grab it.  So he went to the SDNY.

Again, we're ALL playing a game of "maybe THIS is what was happening."

[jimmyjazz 47151]

2 hours ago, Incredulity said:

I'll mark you down as a tinfoil hatter.  It's good to have a track record.

I'll go one step farther than Brisket . . . you're a fucking traitor.

[TwiceHorn 32076]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I don't think they're necessarily mutually exclusive.

For example, Mueller digs into Cohen because that's where the evidence leads from his current mandate (russia-related stuff).  Maybe he finds something -- Cohen funneling payments to and from Russian interests, for example.  Maybe he doesn't.  But, he ALSO finds evidence of numerous OTHER crimes that are unrelated to the scope of his investigation...so he kicks THAT over to the SDNY.

Note that I really don't know which scenario is in play here.  I'm just noting that the referral to the SDNY doesn't mean that Cohen is not ALSO relevant to the Mueller investigation.  That remains to be seen.  Like most everything else in this story.

Certainly.  

I guess here's my thinking.  To get the highly invasive search warrants, presumably Mueller/SDNY had to provide ultra-probable cause of specific crimes from which warrants might produce evidence.  If those were, for lack of a better term, "collusion crimes," then Mueller would have retained jurisdiction.  Therefore, I assume that they are not, and Mueller decided that Cohen being Trump's butt-buddy was not sufficient conflict to retain jurisdiction if those crimes were unrelated.

Edited May 10, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

For example, Mueller digs into Cohen because that's where the evidence leads from his current mandate (russia-related stuff).  Maybe he finds something -- Cohen funneling payments to and from Russian interests, for example.  Maybe he doesn't.  But, he ALSO finds evidence of numerous OTHER crimes that are unrelated to the scope of his investigation...so he kicks THAT over to the SDNY.

Note that I really don't know which scenario is in play here.  I'm just noting that the referral to the SDNY doesn't mean that Cohen is not ALSO relevant to the Mueller investigation.  That remains to be seen.  Like most everything else in this story

This is precisely my interpretation of what is going on.

[jimmyjazz 47151]

TwiceHorn has hung his hat on a "limited mandate" for months now.  Any bit of news that might possibly hint that he is correct gets regurgitated as evidence.

We have no idea what Mueller's motives are behind sending parts of the case to SDNY.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

TwiceHorn has hung his hat on a "limited mandate" for months now.  Any bit of news that might possibly hint that he is correct gets regurgitated as evidence.

We have no idea what Mueller's motives are behind sending parts of the case to SDNY.

 

We do have a better timeline of events though.

Mueller question AT&T on Cohen last year Nov/Dec, according to AT&T.  Not sure what that has to do with Russian interference but it’s shows Mueller was being exhaustive with Cohen.

We have good reason to believe Mueller turned over Cohen criminal evidence unrelated to Russia to the SDNY sometime around the beginning of 2018, likely Jan/Feb.

We have good reason to believe Cohen was under surveillance by SDNY for months prior to the raid.

We know Stormy Daniels surfaced in January and Avenatti surfaced in early March.

We know the Oligarch tied to Cohen was searched by the Mueller team at the airport in early April.

Michael Cohen was raided five days later.

Edited May 10, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Brisketexan 106887]

9 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

TwiceHorn has hung his hat on a "limited mandate" for months now.  Any bit of news that might possibly hint that he is correct gets regurgitated as evidence.

We have no idea what Mueller's motives are behind sending parts of the case to SDNY.

 

Disagree with the bolded.  Honestly, it's really the only educated guess that makes any sense -- that he referred it to the SDNY because it involved matters outside of his proper scope.  Seriously, if it wasn't outside his scope, I can't think of a reason he would have sent it over to the SDNY.

[TwiceHorn 32076]

11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

TwiceHorn has hung his hat on a "limited mandate" for months now.  Any bit of news that might possibly hint that he is correct gets regurgitated as evidence.

We have no idea what Mueller's motives are behind sending parts of the case to SDNY.

 

Because it has to be limited.  There really isn't any reason to involve another USAO unless it's outside the mandate.  It either involves a conflict of interest with the regular DOJ (within the mandate) or it doesn't (without the mandate).  It is just as wrong to involve another USAO for something within the mandate as it is to exercise jurisdiction outside the mandate.

 

It's not a bunch options for Mueller to exercise within his sound discretion, sound as his discretion may be.  I know this irritates you because you see Mueller as the grand anti-Trump, but there is a bigger picture to all this special counsel stuff.

Edited May 10, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Anastasis 23717]

15 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'll go one step farther than Brisket . . . you're a fucking traitor.

That's just stealing his material bro. 

[jimmyjazz 47151]

I have no idea why you think that's true, TwiceHorn, but we'll never resolve this so I'll just let it go.

[TwiceHorn 32076]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

I have no idea why you think that's true, TwiceHorn, but we'll never resolve this so I'll just let it go.

Things like separation of powers.  The history of the special counsel.  I have explained my reasoning somewhat ad nauseam here and at the old place.

Guess you have to be a lawyer.

Edited May 10, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[Anastasis 23717]

18 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Certainly.  

I guess here's my thinking.  To get the highly invasive search warrants, presumably Mueller/SDNY had to provide ultra-probable cause of specific crimes from which warrants might produce evidence.  If those were, for lack of a better term, "collusion crimes," then Mueller would have retained jurisdiction.  Therefore, I assume that they are not, and Mueller decided that Cohen being Trump's butt-buddy was not sufficient conflict to retain jurisdiction if those crimes were unrelated.

You guys (twice, brisket, others) are far superior legal minds, but this is where my head is at. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I think y’all are fucking nuts assuming Mueller is finished with Micheal Cohen.

[jimmyjazz 47151]

7 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Things like separation of powers.  The history of the special counsel.  I have explained my reasoning somewhat ad nauseam here and at the old place.

Guess you have to be a lawyer.

Well, English is my first language, so the directive seems clear to me.  As it does many other attorneys.  But yeah, maybe you're right and they're wrong.

[Anastasis 23717]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I think y’all are fucking nuts assuming Mueller is finished with Micheal Cohen.

But not nuts enough that you are willing to wager on the other side of it. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

But not nuts enough that you are willing to wager on the other side of it. 

You’re the one with the time restriction 

[Tuco 5093]

12 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Because it has to be limited.  There really isn't any reason to involve another USAO unless it's outside the mandate.  It either involves a conflict of interest with the regular DOJ (within the mandate) or it doesn't (without the mandate).  It is just as wrong to involve another USAO for something within the mandate as it is to exercise jurisdiction outside the mandate.

 

It's not a bunch options for Mueller to exercise within his sound discretion, sound as his discretion may be.  I know this irritates you because you see Mueller as the grand anti-Trump, but there is a bigger picture to all this special counsel stuff.

I appreciate your legal perspective on things, but I believe you rely on it too much times, while ignoring the political implications. 

The optics of the special counsel raiding Cohen's offices is very different than the SDNY doing so.  That's a whole different group of investigators/lawyers who Trump would have to paint as partisan Democrats, despite firing their boss and installing his pick.  My Congressman tried to use "I support the investigation, but I think searching his lawyer's office seems to go a little too far" at a town hall.  I corrected him, and he backed down from his point.  I got him to say he would "be inclined to support" the bill in the Senate to protect Mueller.  What's more, I think it is likely the investigation into Cohen may include his role in the RNC, and how the payments might have affected discussions with Republican Congressmen.  It's one thing for Mueller to hold on to Manafort for money laundering, but if he wades into influence peddling in the GOP circles, there is likely to be much more backlash about his mandate.  Mueller, and Rosenstein, saw the chess board, and saw what reactions could be several weeks from now.  Kicking to the SDNY made the most sense, regardless if Mueller could make a legal case for it being in his jurisdiction.    

[TwiceHorn 32076]

18 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, English is my first language, so the directive seems clear to me.  As it does many other attorneys.  But yeah, maybe you're right and they're wrong.

There's more to it than the words of an Assistant Attorney General.  There has to be.

[TwiceHorn 32076]

42 minutes ago, Tuco said:

I appreciate your legal perspective on things, but I believe you rely on it too much times, while ignoring the political implications. 

The optics of the special counsel raiding Cohen's offices is very different than the SDNY doing so.  That's a whole different group of investigators/lawyers who Trump would have to paint as partisan Democrats, despite firing their boss and installing his pick.  My Congressman tried to use "I support the investigation, but I think searching his lawyer's office seems to go a little too far" at a town hall.  I corrected him, and he backed down from his point.  I got him to say he would "be inclined to support" the bill in the Senate to protect Mueller.  What's more, I think it is likely the investigation into Cohen may include his role in the RNC, and how the payments might have affected discussions with Republican Congressmen.  It's one thing for Mueller to hold on to Manafort for money laundering, but if he wades into influence peddling in the GOP circles, there is likely to be much more backlash about his mandate.  Mueller, and Rosenstein, saw the chess board, and saw what reactions could be several weeks from now.  Kicking to the SDNY made the most sense, regardless if Mueller could make a legal case for it being in his jurisdiction.    

I'm only addressing legal implications.  You notice that I don't participate on the more general airing of grievances against Trump threads.  It isn't because I like Trump.  Trump's a jackass.  Done.  Boring.  I don't participate in the Hilary thread either.  She's a ______________. Done. Boring.

And because I am focused on the legal implications, there are certain things legally, that have somewhat broader implications than nailing Trump's hide to the wall.  I tend to be interested in those.  Like special counsel statutes and the power and obligations of special counsels when there isn't a statute, as is the case now.  And sometimes, giving those things what I think should be their proper scope gives Trump an advantage or "out" as it were.

From jump on this thread, going back to the old place, I have pretty much confined my comments and discussion to legal aspects of it, not the political.  If that's pedantic, well sorry, that's about all I'm interested in here.  There's numerous other threads to participate in for more generalized Trump bashing.  Not that Trump doesn't deserve bashing, it just bores me.  I'm a technician in this sense.  Engineer first, lawyer second, but a technician always.

I think your last comment is astute.  I think some of the blowback on keeping Manafort may have caused Rosy and Bob to be ultra-cautious with Cohen when it appeared that the vast majority of his criminal conduct predates or is otherwise unrelated to the Trump campaign.  There may be a nugget of "collusion crime" in there and it will be interesting to see if Mueller claws it back for indictment.  I think it is incumbent upon him to do so if there is.

 

I realize there's a huge political impact and influence in all of this, it might be more than I can bear to be blunt.  I'm kind of bummed that all this legal maneuvering is kind of for naught because Trump will ultimately face only impeachment, I think.

 

Also, I have to confess that I don't really know what a "collusion crime" really is or is going to look like anymore.  It seems kind of a shame to ring these fuckers up on kind of ticky-tack stuff like campaign finance violations.

Edited May 10, 2018 by TwiceHorn

[triplehorn 2664]

Not unreasonable for this to be true:

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I hate wishful thinking Scott

[Pescado_Rojo 19586]

Goddamn, watching Nunes get perp-walked would be so dope. 

[joe dillon 11]

3 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

You must not know how deep Nunes is entangled in the Russia investigation.

The Nunes File                         This is insanity if you believe  Nunes  is in trouble

 

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Incredulity 11876]

2 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

I'll go one step farther than Brisket . . . you're a fucking traitor.

Because I don’t believe Trump could “collude” with Russians to steal the election and that “collusion” be something that takes a year to uncover?

His campaign changed managers with 3 months to go.  It was a fucking circus.