The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[Grifman]

BTW, and I apologize in advance for the grammar Nazism, but you don't use an apostrophe to pluralize an acronym - it's NDAs, not NDA's.

Not so fast, that's not a universally held position

https://brians.wsu.edu/2016/05/16/acron ... strophes/

https://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com ... on-style/

http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/ ... ations.htm

[Skinypupy]

Yeah, totally a nothingburger

President Trump gave firm instructions in March to the White House’s top lawyer: stop the attorney general, Jeff Sessions, from recusing himself in the Justice Department’s investigation into whether Mr. Trump’s associates had helped a Russian campaign to disrupt the 2016 election.

Public pressure was building for Mr. Sessions, who had been a senior member of the Trump campaign, to step aside. But the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, carried out the president’s orders and lobbied Mr. Sessions to remain in charge of the inquiry, according to two people with knowledge of the episode.

Among the other episodes, Mr. Trump described the Russia investigation as “fabricated and politically motivated” in a letter that he intended to send to the F.B.I. director at the time, James B. Comey, but that White House aides stopped him from sending. Mr. Mueller has also substantiated claims that Mr. Comey made in a series of memos describing troubling interactions with the president before he was fired in May.

The special counsel has received handwritten notes from Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff, Reince Priebus, showing that Mr. Trump talked to Mr. Priebus about how he had called Mr. Comey to urge him to say publicly that he was not under investigation. The president’s determination to fire Mr. Comey even led one White House lawyer to take the extraordinary step of misleading Mr. Trump about whether he had the authority to remove him.

The New York Times has also learned that four days before Mr. Comey was fired, one of Mr. Sessions’s aides asked a congressional staff member whether he had damaging information about Mr. Comey, part of an apparent effort to undermine the F.B.I. director. It was not clear whether Mr. Mueller’s investigators knew about this episode.

Dayum.

[Grifman]

Ok, I'm no lawyer but that last paragraph looks like intent to obstruct justice to me.

[malchior]

At this point is there any doubt that just one of these incidents would have gotten Obama impeached? This is insanity. I am beginning to really think he won't make it through this year...but then again that is what I thought last year.

[El Guapo]

Ok, I'm no lawyer but that last paragraph looks like intent to obstruct justice to me.

It gets worse! Later in the article:

Two days after Mr. Comey’s testimony, an aide to Mr. Sessions approached a Capitol Hill staff member asking whether the staffer had any derogatory information about the F.B.I. director. The attorney general wanted one negative article a day in the news media about Mr. Comey, according to a person with knowledge of the meeting.

[Grifman]

Trump and Sessions, a two-fer!

[ImLawBoy]

BTW, and I apologize in advance for the grammar Nazism, but you don't use an apostrophe to pluralize an acronym - it's NDAs, not NDA's.

Not so fast, that's not a universally held position

https://brians.wsu.edu/2016/05/16/acron ... strophes/

https://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com ... on-style/

http://www.grammar-monster.com/lessons/ ... ations.htm

Yeah, and those people probably think it's OK to say "irregardless".

Actually, the NYT style guidance is interesting, and something I should probably adopt. It uses the apostrophes for plurals where the acronym uses periods (e.g., M.R.I.'s) or for single letters (e.g., mind your p's and q's). The Grammar Monster link also suggests using it when the text is all caps. My favorite part of the Grammar Monster link, though, is this:

Top Tip
Avoid Using an Apostrophe
Some grammar pedants claim that apostrophes cannot be used in any plurals. This is an outdated, dogmatic view. However, using an apostrophe for a plural is still not a popular convention, and it could irk some of your readers. Therefore, you should try to avoid it.

The ruling, however, is that you can use 's to show an awkward plural. So, if you have an awkward abbreviation, number, or letter and adding 's makes for the best-looking plural, then go for it.

I'm cool with being outdated and dogmatic.

[hepcat]

Yeah, and those people probably think it's OK to say "irregardless".

I don't care what anyone says. I love irregardless in a sentence. It makes me feel rich. Sometimes I'll wear a monocle while using it.

[El Guapo]

Republicans Turn on Bannon for Telling the Truth About Trump.

*This* is why the chances of Trump leaving office this year are miniscule. As more information has come out about Trump, the congressional GOP has become *more* openly supportive of Trump, not less. This seems likely to only deepen Trump's congressional support.

It's also why the 2018 elections are so important. Congressional Republicans are never turning on Trump on their own.

[YellowKing]

I'd agree IF the Mueller investigation drags into 2019. But if Mueller drops a bombshell this year (particularly before mid-terms), I could see things changing. As we all know, Congress is very good at changing positions on a dime.

[Kraken]

Republicans Turn on Bannon for Telling the Truth About Trump.

*This* is why the chances of Trump leaving office this year are miniscule. As more information has come out about Trump, the congressional GOP has become *more* openly supportive of Trump, not less. This seems likely to only deepen Trump's congressional support.

It's also why the 2018 elections are so important. Congressional Republicans are never turning on Trump on their own.

I wonder if Trump's base will ever realize that he's sold them down the river by embracing the establishment. Probably not, unless Bannon peels some of them away. They are not known for their thoughtfulness.

[YellowKing]

I wonder what the reaction will be if the GOP gets steamrolled in mid-terms. Do they finally realize Trump is a cancer on the party, or do they do their typical thing of doubling down on unpopularity?

Oddly enough I feel like they'd actually embrace a Democratic majority - it would give them an enemy to fight and finger point at, something they struggle with now considering they have all the power. Can you imagine the joy it would bring to be able to blame "liberal snowflakes" for their inability to pass legislation rather than their own incompetence?

[TheMix]

. Can you imagine the joy it would bring to be able to blame "liberal snowflakes" for their inability to pass legislation rather than their own incompetence?

Nope. Since I've yet to see them admit to their incompetence.

[LordMortis]

I don't care what anyone says. I love irregardless in a sentence. It makes me feel rich. Sometimes I'll wear a monocle while using it.

Die slow.

*This* is why the chances of Trump leaving office this year are miniscule. As more information has come out about Trump, the congressional GOP has become *more* openly supportive of Trump, not less. This seems likely to only deepen Trump's congressional support.

It's also why the 2018 elections are so important. Congressional Republicans are never turning on Trump on their own.

This has been my perception since Trump won. There is no weakening of this Republican block. The party needs to be dismantled. They are a block. They get in line. The followers of Trump are a block. They get in line. There is no discussion. There is no argument. There is no debate. There is Kafkaesque sophistry, allegiance, and righteousness founded in propaganda.

I long for the days I can afford to assuage my conscience by being anti democrat because I very much dislike their roadmap and party corruption.

I wonder if Trump's base will ever realize that he's sold them down the river by embracing the establishment. Probably not, unless Bannon peels some of them away. They are not known for their thoughtfulness.

I will take some kind of hindsight but for the life of me can't fathom what that hindsight will be. I can't see anything forward looking in that river that could possibly change them. It's daunting how far apart their metaphysics and epistemology are from mine. They have standards for truth and reality I can't comprehend. I despise the Us vs Them mentality but now I'm now squarely in a separate box. There is clearly a they that I can't find any sort of empathy any more. I can't grasp it.

[LordMortis]

Oddly enough I feel like they'd actually embrace a Democratic majority - it would give them an enemy to fight and finger point at, something they struggle with now considering they have all the power. Can you imagine the joy it would bring to be able to blame "liberal snowflakes" for their inability to pass legislation rather than their own incompetence?

Their narrative is that the destructive past is the problem medicare will be a disaster because of the ACA. National debt will be a disaster because of Obama give aways. All you need to do is look at the stock market to realize the US is a mess because of democrat control. But it's being fixed now. Things are better than they ever were. DOW 25,000! Of course democrats did the same thing ...

[milo]

I don't care what anyone says. I love irregardless in a sentence. It makes me feel rich. Sometimes I'll wear a monocle while using it.

Die slow.

WAT​​​​​​

[LawBeefaroni]

The Trump investigation well is so poisoned at this point. It will be hard to convince anyone to change their position regardless of what it is.



Also, can I just say, ATM's machines?

[Sepiche]

I wonder if Trump's base will ever realize that he's sold them down the river by embracing the establishment. Probably not, unless Bannon peels some of them away. They are not known for their thoughtfulness.

My uncle went to his grave believing Nixon was pushed out of office in a coup and McCarthy saved us from Communist infiltration, so...

[LordMortis]

The Trump investigation well is so poisoned at this point. It will be hard to convince anyone to change their position regardless of what it is.



Also, can I just say, ATM's machines?

I actually have faith in Mueller at this point. If he says Trump is clean, then I'll hate the answer but I'll accept it.

ATM machine doesn't bother me. I think I block machine out. There are a few of those gaffes that really bother me but I can't think of any right now and I'm thankful for it.

[hepcat]

I don't care what anyone says. I love irregardless in a sentence. It makes me feel rich. Sometimes I'll wear a monocle while using it.

Die slow.

WAT​​​​​​

It's understandable. He lost all his loved ones to a man wearing a monocle.

[ImLawBoy]

Also, can I just say, ATM's machines?

Why does an ATM need to own machines?

[pr0ner]

Also, can I just say, ATM's machines?

Why does an ATM need to own machines?

[hepcat]

The apostrophe is more dangerous than its low bred brethren, the comma, could ever be...

[stessier]

The apostrophe is more dangerous than its low bred brethren, the comma, could ever be...

Not true - the comma (or lack thereof) can be a killer!

"Let's eat Grandpa."
"Let's eat, Grandpa."

[LordMortis]

I thought the colon was the most dangerous, especially from nearing age 50 or more. Though it doesn't seem like people abuse colons like they used to. Growing up, it seemed like people were stinking things up by dumping colons in mid sentence all of the time for no reason.

[Rip]

My dad had ruptured his colon before he died, so yea, those things are killers.

[LordMortis]

My dad had ruptured his colon before he died, so yea, those things are killers.

Yeah, fuck colons. My old man has to have polyps removed every other year or so and I have chrone's.

[Carpet_pissr]

Also, can I just say, ATM's machines?

Of course. Nothing wrong with Andrew T. McGooferton's machines.

[Carpet_pissr]

My dad had ruptured his colon before he died, so yea, those things are killers.

Maybe not as dangerous as Grandpa-eating cannibals, though (if you're a Grandpa).

[Carpet_pissr]

I don't care what anyone says. I love irregardless in a sentence. It makes me feel rich. Sometimes I'll wear a monocle while using it.

Die slow.

WAT​​​​​​

It's understandable. He lost all his loved ones to a man wearing a monocle.

via Imgflip Meme Generator

[El Guapo]

Amid Calls from Trump, F.B.I. Renews Questions Over Clinton Foundation

Republican Senators Recommend Charges Against Author of Trump Dossier

This is fucking disgusting. Every GOP official needs to be run out of office ASAP.

[malchior]

Amid Calls from Trump, F.B.I. Renews Questions Over Clinton Foundation

Republican Senators Recommend Charges Against Author of Trump Dossier

This is fucking disgusting. Every GOP official needs to be run out of office ASAP.

If this goes anywhere then we will at know we are deep in banana republic territory. The Republicans deserve to be dismantled piece by piece.

Edit: Sidenote Lindsey Graham is officially carrying a *lot* of water for Trump now. He is such a snake and beyond compromised. That he is acting this way really sends shivers down my spine. He doesn't move in the open unless he feels safe.

[Skinypupy]

My dad had ruptured his colon before he died, so yea, those things are killers.

Yeah, fuck colons.

[Holman]

Amid Calls from Trump, F.B.I. Renews Questions Over Clinton Foundation

Republican Senators Recommend Charges Against Author of Trump Dossier

This is fucking disgusting. Every GOP official needs to be run out of office ASAP.

If this goes anywhere then we will at know we are deep in banana republic territory. The Republicans deserve to be dismantled piece by piece.

Yeah, this is deadly serious stuff.

Every Republican who throws in with this kind of authoritarianism deserves to go down in shame. Our only hope is a massive wave washing them out in 2018 before it's too late.

[Rip]

Amid Calls from Trump, F.B.I. Renews Questions Over Clinton Foundation

Republican Senators Recommend Charges Against Author of Trump Dossier

This is fucking disgusting. Every GOP official needs to be run out of office ASAP.

If this goes anywhere then we will at know we are deep in banana republic territory. The Republicans deserve to be dismantled piece by piece.

Yeah, this is deadly serious stuff.

Every Republican who throws in with this kind of authoritarianism deserves to go down in shame. Our only hope is a massive wave washing them out in 2018 before it's too late.

How is it authoritarianism for the FBI to investigate?

Seems like an standard investigation.

The Justice Department has launched a new inquiry into whether the Clinton Foundation engaged in any pay-to-play politics or other illegal activities while Hillary Clinton served as secretary of State, law enforcement officials and a witness tells The Hill.

FBI agents from Little Rock, Ark., where the foundation was started, have taken the lead in the investigation and have interviewed at least one witness in the last month, and law enforcement officials said additional activities are expected in the coming weeks.

The officials, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, said the probe is examining whether the Clintons promised or performed any policy favors in return for largesse to their charitable efforts or whether donors made commitments of donations in hopes of securing government outcomes.

The probe may also examine whether any tax-exempt assets were converted for personal or political use and whether the foundation complied with applicable tax laws, the officials said.
One witness recently interviewed by the FBI described the session to The Hill as “extremely professional and unquestionably thorough” and focused on questions about whether donors to Clinton charitable efforts received any favorable treatment from the Obama administration on a policy decision previously highlighted in media reports.

The witness discussed his interview solely on the grounds of anonymity. He said the agents were from Little Rock and their questions focused on government decisions and discussions of donations to Clinton entities during the time Hillary Clinton led President Obama's State Department.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/36 ... estigation

I don't see how you guys can talk about trusting Mueller and the FBI investigation on one matter and then cry authoritarianism when they investigate something you don't want them to. Do you not trust them? Do you think they are going to fabricate evidence? Seems to me it is just like the Mueller investigation, if they find something improper they will report on it with evidence. If nothing was done wrong then it will go nowhere.

[noxiousdog]

I don't see how you guys can talk about trusting Mueller and the FBI investigation on one matter and then cry authoritarianism when they investigate something you don't want them to. Do you not trust them? Do you think they are going to fabricate evidence? Seems to me it is just like the Mueller investigation, if they find something improper they will report on it with evidence. If nothing was done wrong then it will go nowhere.

Agreed on the Clinton Foundation; disagree on Steele.

Though, how many times does the FBI have to say "not worth prosecuting" before you believe them?

[LordMortis]

The Clinton Foundation, whatever.

Republican going after the Steele dossiers? Well, all I can do his hope the GOP loses power in 2018 and it never comes back, in my state or in my country. I don't have any other real option unless they start using violence.

Edit... or Quote ND with a +1...

[El Guapo]

I don't see how you guys can talk about trusting Mueller and the FBI investigation on one matter and then cry authoritarianism when they investigate something you don't want them to. Do you not trust them? Do you think they are going to fabricate evidence? Seems to me it is just like the Mueller investigation, if they find something improper they will report on it with evidence. If nothing was done wrong then it will go nowhere.

Agreed on the Clinton Foundation; disagree on Steele.

Though, how many times does the FBI have to say "not worth prosecuting" before you believe them?

The concern is not so much the investigation so much as how it came about. It's the president demanding that a political opponent be investigated, followed by the FBI investigating said political candidate. Adding to the red flags is that indications are that the FBI *did* some investigating along these lines but decided that there's nothing there.

It's a similar concern with the DOJ challenge to the AT&T / Time Warner merger. Ordinarily that would look just like a fairly aggressive merger challenge. Coming in the context of Trump threatening CNN (and threatening to block the merger as reprisal in the past), it looks bad.

And you have Trump threatening Amazon / Bezos over Amazon's shipping rates.

Altogether it reeks of a willingness to use state power to threaten critics and dissenters.

[malchior]

The Senate said they were going to investigate Russian interference yet are attacking all the witnesses to undermine the investigation. It is clear as day. This is dirty, rotten corrupt behavior. It is also a clear use/abuse of power to stifle dissention. This is 3rd world behavior and isn't anything like what Mueller is doing.

[ImLawBoy]

It's a similar concern with the DOJ challenge to the AT&T / Time Warner merger. Ordinarily that would look just like a completely unprecedented merger challenge. Coming in the context of Trump threatening CNN (and threatening to block the merger as reprisal in the past), it looks bad.

Fixed that for you.

(Hey, I have a reputation to uphold as a company shill, after all. )