PDA

View Full Version : First the CIA, Then the Judicial Branch



oznabrag
11-24-2018, 07:17 PM
January 3.

The walls are closing in.

when will Mueller deliver his report?

After January 3.

LeeG
11-24-2018, 07:29 PM
why Jan 3?

oznabrag
11-24-2018, 07:34 PM
The Democratic Congress is sworn in on that date.

Until then they have no power.

They will have subpoena power over his every fart on that date.

If if he is going to go all authoritarian he really has to bust his move before then.

George Jung
11-24-2018, 07:44 PM
Nope. But he did predict when ol' Girouardo would blow next! Makes Old Faithful look like a Piker!

LeeG
11-24-2018, 08:08 PM
His tweets will be spectacular


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/23/donald-trump-judges-walter-shapiro?CMP=twt_gu

Trump’s concept of justice pivots around a simple question: “Is it good for me or bad for me?”

C. Ross
11-24-2018, 08:37 PM
Based on his charge, Special Counsel Mueller is obligated to deliver his report to his supervisor at the Dept of Justice (either Rosenstein or Whitaker). Not Congress. DOJ decides what to do with the report.

Its hard to imagine President Trump or his designee at DOJ completely holding the report. But they may delay, or share a summary, or a redacted version.

No matter what, President Trump and his supporters will declare complete vindication. It's their idiom.

StevenBauer
11-24-2018, 08:53 PM
Good thing Mueller is an expert with Speaking Indictments.


A "speaking indictment" is a document that criminally charges one or more defendants in a given jurisdiction and includes much more detailed information about the crimes than is required by law. (https://www.newsweek.com/what-speaking-indictment-muellers-key-tool-russia-investigation-1089564)
Speaking indictments can be particularly useful in a complex, high-profile case like the Mueller probe to give as much context possible for the defendants, the members of the grand jury convened to hear testimony, hand-down indictments, and the public.
The special counsel's 29-page indictment in July of 12 Russian military intelligence officers is an example of such an indictment. It contained far more facts and information than is required to prosecute the case.
It goes into painstaking detail, describing point-by-point (https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download)how the alleged hackers targeted and successfully obtained emails and records from the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign, falsified their identities, and laundered money via cryptocurrency networks to carry out their scheme...


https://www.businessinsider.com/what-is-a-speaking-indictment-mueller-trump-2018-11

C. Ross
11-24-2018, 11:39 PM
Mueller seems remarkable. It's hard to imagine someone better suited to the job.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
11-25-2018, 08:08 AM
Mueller seems remarkable. It's hard to imagine someone better suited to the job.

Funnily enough, Cris, when I read your post I had just finished reading this{

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/23/robert-mueller-profile-donald-trump-russia-investigation?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR39Q7LWiirmCIuDzDVr0WOmZYZQpcfdfBWQiix2b jw54av_DkE2IHBwigs

S.V. Airlie
11-25-2018, 08:31 AM
LOL nice one Doc! I was expecting John T himself to set me straight , good thing he’s got minions like you to assist!

I see his answer , I wonder if the recounts in Florida will have been completed by the end of December , I’m sure the DNC machine is still out there “counting every vote” even the one cast by the dead and buried , LOL.Boy Paul, you're on a roll, who gave you a wedgie?

John Smith
11-25-2018, 08:34 AM
I'm not sure I'd wager much on this. Acting AG may end up at the Supreme Court. If they rule Whitiker is not a legal appointment, whatever decisions he made will be unmade, but that might be too late to be of a lot of good. Whitikar, in the meantime, as power to do a great deal to disrupt/derail/end this investigation.

Dems will be able to subpoena people and continue to investigate. I'd be shocked if anything they find would convince Republicans in the senate to vote Trump out of office. Let us not forget, if the campaign did illegal things, Pence also benefited from those illegal things. If both were kicked out, Speaker of the House would take over.

My strategy for Dems would be to make the investigation their 2nd priority. Winning the election in 2020 should be their first priority.

Imagine all the s**t hitting the fan when Trump is out of office in two years, and there's no one in office who will pardon him.

I believe it is possible, and wise, to investigate WITHOUT saying the word "impeach". The public can be made aware of evil doings by Trump and his minions, his finances (they'll get his taxes), etc. and more and more of the public will be energized to vote for his opponent.

I'd like to think there's a way to get all this information to his supporters and steadily convince them they've been lied to.

Number one priority should be legislation. Even if it ALL dies in the senate, the Dems NEED to be able to point to a substantial number of bills that passed the house that would be popular with the vast majority of Americans. They should be able to pass bills to protect voting rights, insure pre-existing conditions get covered without extra cost, increase minimum wage, etc.....

Voters will see they've actually passed bills, AND voters will see how dishonest Trump has been.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
11-25-2018, 08:36 AM
I'm not sure I'd wager much on this. Acting AG may end up at the Supreme Court. If they rule Whitiker is not a legal appointment, whatever decisions he made will be unmade, but that might be too late to be of a lot of good. Whitikar, in the meantime, as power to do a great deal to disrupt/derail/end this investigation.

Dems will be able to subpoena people and continue to investigate. I'd be shocked if anything they find would convince Republicans in the senate to vote Trump out of office. Let us not forget, if the campaign did illegal things, Pence also benefited from those illegal things. If both were kicked out, Speaker of the House would take over.

My strategy for Dems would be to make the investigation their 2nd priority. Winning the election in 2020 should be their first priority.

Imagine all the s**t hitting the fan when Trump is out of office in two years, and there's no one in office who will pardon him.

I believe it is possible, and wise, to investigate WITHOUT saying the word "impeach". The public can be made aware of evil doings by Trump and his minions, his finances (they'll get his taxes), etc. and more and more of the public will be energized to vote for his opponent.

I'd like to think there's a way to get all this information to his supporters and steadily convince them they've been lied to.

Number one priority should be legislation. Even if it ALL dies in the senate, the Dems NEED to be able to point to a substantial number of bills that passed the house that would be popular with the vast majority of Americans. They should be able to pass bills to protect voting rights, insure pre-existing conditions get covered without extra cost, increase minimum wage, etc.....

Voters will see they've actually passed bills, AND voters will see how dishonest Trump has been.

If a foreigner may comment, that seems to me to be much the wisest course.

John Smith
11-25-2018, 08:46 AM
If a foreigner may comment, that seems to me to be much the wisest course.

Is anyone in this forum a foreigner? boats know no borders. IMO.

oznabrag
11-25-2018, 08:53 AM
Good thing we have folks here on WBF who are connected at the highest levels of govt. to get this info out to us!

You must be tight with the Director of the CIA Ozzie?


One doesn’t need special powers or connections to see which way the wind blows.

But you know that.

Tom Hunter
11-25-2018, 09:03 AM
I think John is right. I have very little faith in the Democratic parties ability to play smart and win.

C. Ross
11-25-2018, 09:15 AM
If a foreigner may comment, that seems to me to be much the wisest course.

I have to agree. Voters need something to vote for, not just to vote against Trump. And if the Democratic Congress is seen as obsessed with prosecuting/persecuting Trump to the exclusion of governing, voters may not be as enthusiastic.

Mueller may have no option other than to report his findings to the Department of Justice with the Consritutional expectation that the other two branches will counter an Executive which is corrupt and/or out of control.

Speaking for myself, I would be just fine with a scenario where Trump is swarmed by a cloud of evidence of misdeeds which causes him to lose support and be crushed in the 2020 elections. The main thing is that America repudiate Trumpism. Repudiation and prosecution of Trump himself is secondary, and if takes years after he leaves office to do it, so be it.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
11-25-2018, 09:51 AM
I have to agree. Voters need something to vote for, not just to vote against Trump. And if the Democratic Congress is seen as obsessed with prosecuting/persecuting Trump to the exclusion of governing, voters may not be as enthusiastic.

Mueller may have no option other than to report his findings to the Department of Justice with the Consritutional expectation that the other two branches will counter an Executive which is corrupt and/or out of control.

Speaking for myself, I would be just fine with a scenario where Trump is swarmed by a cloud of evidence of misdeeds which causes him to lose support and be crushed in the 2020 elections. The main thing is that America repudiate Trumpism. Repudiation and prosecution of Trump himself is secondary, and if takes years after he leaves office to do it, so be it.


Exactly.

LeeG
11-25-2018, 10:11 AM
House committees getting ready.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/24/betsy-devos-education-house-democrats-1012544

For two years, Democrats watched with fury as Education Secretary Betsy DeVos sought to dismantle nearly every significant Obama administration education policy.

Now, they’re gearing up to fight back. Lots of them.

Betsy DeVos has brought a special mix of incompetence and malevolence to Washington — and that’s rocket fuel for every committee in a new Congress that will finally provide oversight,” said Seth Frotman, who resigned as the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s top student loan official earlier in protest of Trump administration policies likely to be examined by Democrats.

Even in a Republican-controlled Congress, DeVos had a strained relationship at times with some committees. Her main priorities, such as expanding school choice, were largely ignored as lawmakers hashed out government funding bills. Now she will have to answer to House Democrats wielding gavels, several of whom have long worked on education issues and have been among her most vocal critics.

Rep. Mark Takano, expected to lead the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, told POLITICO that he will be tracking the effect of decisions to scale back Obama-era regulations aimed at curbing abuses by for-profit colleges that enroll tens of thousands of veterans each year.

Norman Bernstein
11-25-2018, 10:16 AM
I have to agree. Voters need something to vote for, not just to vote against Trump. And if the Democratic Congress is seen as obsessed with prosecuting/persecuting Trump to the exclusion of governing, voters may not be as enthusiastic..

I agree, but there are plenty of positive reasons available to the Democrats. Health care, and an anti-corruption message, are probably the two best.

Osborne Russell
11-25-2018, 11:03 AM
Based on his charge, Special Counsel Mueller is obligated to deliver his report to his supervisor at the Dept of Justice (either Rosenstein or Whitaker). Not Congress. DOJ decides what to do with the report.

Its hard to imagine President Trump or his designee at DOJ completely holding the report. But they may delay, or share a summary, or a redacted version.

No matter what, President Trump and his supporters will declare complete vindication. It's their idiom.

Congress could subpena the report, right? And Trump could order the DOJ to refuse. And Congress could take Trump to court.

C. Ross
11-25-2018, 11:04 AM
Congress could subpena the report, right? And Trump could order the DOJ to refuse. And Congress could take Trump to court.

Probably.

Osborne Russell
11-25-2018, 11:10 AM
I'd like to think there's a way to get all this information to his supporters and steadily convince them they've been lied to.

Committee hearings.


Number one priority should be legislation.

In a tie with committee hearings for #1.


Voters will see they've actually passed bills, AND voters will see how dishonest Trump has been.

Yep. Same time.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
11-25-2018, 11:17 AM
Congress could subpena the report, right? And Trump could order the DOJ to refuse. And Congress could take Trump to court.

Cross refer to my post on the powers of the House of Commons...

David G
11-25-2018, 11:33 AM
Judiciary is proving no shield for Trump, on several fronts --

https://www.inquisitr.com/5177801/trump-foundation-lawsuit-criminally-vulnerable/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=yahoo&utm_campaign=homepage


With New York Judge Saliann Scarpulla failing to give Donald Trump immunity in the lawsuit brought against the Trump Foundation by New York State Attorney General Barbara Underwood, experts now believe it could lead to the crumbling of the president’s “financial empire,” reports Law and Crime (https://lawandcrime.com/trump/judges-ruling-against-trump-foundation-could-mean-beginning-of-much-worse-says-attorney/).


As reported by the Inquisitr (https://www.inquisitr.com/5176457/trumps-legal-defense-but-im-president-shot-down-by-new-york-judge/), Barbara Underwood brought forward a lawsuit against the Donald J. Trump Foundation and its directors, which, along with the president, also include his children Donald Trump, Jr., Eric Trump, and Ivanka Trump. The suit alleges that the Trumps “transacted business illegally and abusively” by failing “to operate and manage the Foundation in accordance” with the law, “resulting in the misuse of charitable assets and self-dealing,” which are serious allegations and could lead to the beginning of his empire’s material downfall.



“The Trump Foundation functioned as little more than a checkbook to serve Mr. Trump’s business and political interests,” Barbara Underwood said after the ruling by Scarpulla, who shot down Trump’s legal defense of being immune to the civil lawsuit because he is the president.