The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[Drazzil]

What’s this ‘we’ crap

He's "our" president.

Oh I get it.
And if you said we, I’d have known the we we were.

We the people.

Nice try. He may be our president, but we know who elected him.

Yep.

[stessier]

What’s this ‘we’ crap

He's "our" president.

Oh I get it.
And if you said we, I’d have known the we we were.

We the people.

Nice try. He may be our president, but we know who elected him.

In fairness, Drazzil voted in CA, so it didn't really move the needle.

[Holman]

I know we've declared a national forgetting of 2016 Collusion, but Roger Stone's trial is right now unfolding some facts.

Richard Gates just testified that Trump knew Stone was in touch with WikiLeaks and that Stone was advising him on upcoming email releases. Trump denied all this under oath to Mueller.

[El Guapo]

I know we've declared a national forgetting of 2016 Collusion, but Roger Stone's trial is right now unfolding some facts.

Richard Gates just testified that Trump knew Stone was in touch with WikiLeaks and that Stone was advising him on upcoming email releases. Trump denied all this under oath to Mueller.

This is part of why I think it's important to have some references to Trump crimes beyond Ukraine in the eventual impeachment documents, even while Ukraine remains the practical focus. You never know what facts are going to develop between the drafting of impeachment articles and any impeachment trial.

[Zarathud]

How convenient we’re starting impeachment proceedings anyway. Every Republican who favored impeaching Clinton should be OUTRAGED! If they weren’t hypocrites, that is.

[Holman]

The Roger Stone material was all redacted out of the Mueller report because the Stone case was still being investigated.

Had that story been in the report--Trump and company openly coordinating with WikiLeaks and its Russian suppliers--things would have been very very different.

I feel like Mueller needs to be called back to Congress.

[El Guapo]

The Roger Stone material was all redacted out of the Mueller report because the Stone case was still being investigated.

Had that story been in the report--Trump and company openly coordinating with WikiLeaks and its Russian suppliers--things would have been very very different.

I feel like Mueller needs to be called back to Congress.

Mueller's not the right guy. He can't testify to personal factual knowledge (e.g., he can't personally link Trump to Russia) and he's got some weird code where not only does he think that he can't charge the sitting President with a crime (reasonable), he also can't publicly talk about acts by the President that amount to a crime (bonkers). Makes him worse than useless as a witness.

If they're going to call anyone on this it should be Gates.

[Alefroth]

Who ya gonna believe, Dicey Dick or Truthful Trump?

[malchior]

This is part of why I think it's important to have some references to Trump crimes beyond Ukraine in the eventual impeachment documents, even while Ukraine remains the practical focus. You never know what facts are going to develop between the drafting of impeachment articles and any impeachment trial.

I'd have it ready but in the back pocket. There is a lot of risk there. Barr already poisoned the well somewhat on it. Additionally, he has been running around the world digging up dirt on the original Russia investigation. I expect we shall see a deeply misleading report augmenting the IG report Horowitz prepared dropping anytime now. If the report lands like a thud Nunes style then sure roll out the Mueller perjury otherwise it is best not to taint the pool.

[El Guapo]

This is part of why I think it's important to have some references to Trump crimes beyond Ukraine in the eventual impeachment documents, even while Ukraine remains the practical focus. You never know what facts are going to develop between the drafting of impeachment articles and any impeachment trial.

I'd have it ready but in the back pocket. There is a lot of risk there. Barr already poisoned the well somewhat on it. Additionally, he has been running around the world digging up dirt on the original Russia investigation. I expect we shall see a deeply misleading report augmenting the IG report Horowitz prepared dropping anytime now. If the report lands like a thud Nunes style then sure roll out the Mueller perjury otherwise it is best not to taint the pool.

Basically how I would draft the impeachment bill is to include a number of things, but focused heavily on Ukraine (Ukraine should be 90%+ of the substance). But including a couple paragraphs on other issues, even if it's fairly conclusory (e.g., "Because the President obstructed justice by dangling pardons to relevant witnesses, by attempting to shut down investigations against himself, by instructing executive branch officials to not comply with properly authorized congressional subpoenas, etc. etc."), is important because if you don't include them then impeachment trial managers probably can't bring them up in the Senate trial (or at least, there would be a high risk of not being able to) even if there's some relevant new bombshell.

Also I think the obstruction of justice stuff is particularly important, because a lot of this stuff (e.g., the pardon stuff) is not obviously illegal on its face, so there is value on going on the record in terms of it being impeachable.

[malchior]

Yeah - I agree the obstruction is a strong argument especially considering the WH has gone full imperial. However, too general an article will open the proceedings to a fishing expedition argument. They have to be reasonably tied down though Obstruction is a no brainer and can be very specific without tying it to Mueller and focusing on the Ukraine investigation.

[malchior]

*A lot of threads today to consider - this one is the one that is baffling me the most tbh*

The Roger Stone material was all redacted out of the Mueller report because the Stone case was still being investigated.

Had that story been in the report--Trump and company openly coordinating with WikiLeaks and its Russian suppliers--things would have been very very different.

I feel like Mueller needs to be called back to Congress.

There are a lot of legal experts really stumped right now. He had this information and didn't put it in the report. He also had evidence that Trump lied to him directly. Nothing in the report. Maybe it was aimed to not hurt the Stone case but then again what was more important? There are a lot of people wondering if Mueller was curtailed, was he losing it like the hearings suggested, did he take a dive? Did the group decide they couldn't indict so they didn't consider it? It is truly bizarre. I agree that once impeachment is settled they should drag Mueller et. al. in and get to the bottom of this because it really stinks now.

[Holman]

I suppose it's possible that Mueller didn't know enough to connect the dots at the time. But we know that Gates had already flipped at the time of the Report's publication.

Regardless, Mueller clearly believed that he still lived in a world of norms and institutions and that he could count on others to carry the ball when he passed it. He gave some hints that he felt blindsided by Barr's summary, but I wonder how he feels about seeing the cover-up and obstruction continue past his investigation.

[Holman]

Roger Stone has been found guilty on all counts.

[Skinypupy]

Roger Stone has been found guilty on all counts.

[Isgrimnur]

WaPo

In hopes of keeping himself out of prison, Stone’s defense team urged jurors to treat his case as a referendum not on him but on Mueller’s entire Russia investigation.

Stone’s lawyers conceded that a raft of emails, texts and extensive other documentation showed Stone claiming inside information on WikiLeaks’ releases and wanting to get even more that could be relayed to the Trump campaign. But in its closing, the defense urged jurors to reframe the question from whether Stone lied to whether that issue mattered, asserting that his hectic efforts to get information from WikiLeaks never amounted to anything.

“So much of this case deals with that question that you need to ask . . . so what?” Rogow asked.

Stone’s defense repeated his position that there was “no collusion” with Russia on the presidential race and thus any of Stone’s misstatements, as his lawyers cast them, about his WikiLeaks pursuits were inconsequential. They portrayed their client as hapless and merely engaging in his usual political chicanery.

“There was nothing illegal about the campaign being interested in information that WikiLeaks was going to be sending out,” Rogow said.

The attacks prompted a passionate defense from prosecutors — of Mueller’s probe and of the importance of facts.

“If that’s the state of affairs that we’re in, I’m pretty shocked. Truth matters. Truth still matters,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Michael Marando told jurors. “I know we live in a world nowadays with Twitter, tweets, social media where you can find any view, any truth you want.” But in “our institutions of self-governance, to a congressional committee, in our courts of law, truth still matters.”

[GungHo]

I don't know why I continue to be shocked by people who willingly associate themselves with trump but I guess I'm glad that I am. But that is a truly depraved defense: 'yeah I tots did the thing I'm being tried for, but it doesn't matter bc NO COLLUSION! WITCH HUNT!'

Smdh

Also, what's the over/under on days to pardon by trump?

[malchior]

I love it. From raid to Conviction in about 10 months. Another Trump loyalist burned Nixon-style.

[stessier]

I love it. From raid to Conviction in about 10 months. Another Trump loyalist burned Nixon-style.

I'm assuming you know about the tattoo?

[malchior]

I love it. From raid to Conviction in about 10 months. Another Trump loyalist burned Nixon-style.

I'm assuming you know about the tattoo?

Yup. I'm looking forward to the many Nixon goes to jail memes.

[hepcat]

Oh man, it's gonna suck if Stone pledges Crips and Nixon goes with the Aryan Nation.

[malchior]

Oh man, it's gonna suck if Stone pledges Crips and Nixon goes with the Aryan Nation.

Woah - I didn't know the crips had a steampunk chapter! A world of opportunity.

[hitbyambulance]

can we get a new release of the Mueller Report with the Stone passages unredacted, now?

[LordMortis]

Oh man, it's gonna suck if Stone pledges Crips and Nixon goes with the Aryan Nation.

I didn't get this until someone reminded me of Stone's tattoo. I don't know much about prison culture. Where is Kingbee to explain things to me? Will Stone see the kind of prison where that Tattoo will matter? If it does, how?

[Alefroth]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/25/politics ... index.html

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson says she will decide by the close of business whether former White House counsel Don McGahn must testify about President Donald Trump to Congress.

The article states McGahn could be made to appear right away, but I don't see how it doesn't just get appealed again.

[Holman]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/11/25/politics ... index.html

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson says she will decide by the close of business whether former White House counsel Don McGahn must testify about President Donald Trump to Congress.

The article states McGahn could be made to appear right away, but I don't see how it doesn't just get appealed again.

Judge rules McGahn must comply with subpoena.

[Zaxxon]

Hopefully Bolton uses that to appear.

[Holman]

Oh hey DOJ is already asking for a stay.

[Zaxxon]

Oh hey DOJ is already asking for a stay.

I am utterly shocked.

[Unagi]

Hopefully Bolton uses that to appear.

Hope so, if he wants to appear - I've heard this should give him the cover to do so.

[El Guapo]

Hopefully Bolton uses that to appear.

Hope so, if he wants to appear - I've heard this should give him the cover to do so.

I would assume that he would continue to not appear if the decision is stayed - in that scenario not sure what would've changed for Bolton.

Unfortunately I do think it's likely to be stayed pending appeal, even though I think it's likely that the decision will be affirmed on appeal.

[gilraen]

Hopefully Bolton uses that to appear.

Bolton already said (through his lawyers) that the decision doesn't apply to him because, unlike McGahn, he would be questioned about national security matters.

Basically we've already established that Bolton wants to sell his book, so spilling the beans for free in a public hearing doesn't quite agree with him.

[malchior]

Yup - lump Bolton into the parade of cheap grifters cashing in on our collective trust. He has no interest in appearing. He just was dangling out a story line for sales and pump up his speaking tour.

[Pyperkub]

Yup - lump Bolton into the parade of cheap grifters cashing in on our collective trust. He has no interest in appearing. He just was dangling out a story line for sales and pump up his speaking tour.

In this case, I'll lend some weight to Bolton's stand as somewhat consistent with his view of Executive Power. He has *always* been on that side.

[malchior]

Yup - lump Bolton into the parade of cheap grifters cashing in on our collective trust. He has no interest in appearing. He just was dangling out a story line for sales and pump up his speaking tour.

In this case, I'll lend some weight to Bolton's stand as somewhat consistent with his view of Executive Power. He has *always* been on that side.

This is my point about him being another low class grifter. He won't speak unless physically dragged into the room but bothered to hint that he had the 'goods'. Ridiculous. These people are all awful.

[Smoove_B]

Yeah, exactly. Seemingly offended at what was happening in the White House and concerned for democracy overall. Come and tell us about it then? Nope. Needs to sell my book. F him. F all this.

[El Guapo]

Bolton has also indicated that he thinks Trump's business interests are driving his Turkey policy.

[Unagi]

Hopefully Bolton uses that to appear.

Bolton already said (through his lawyers) that the decision doesn't apply to him because, unlike McGahn, he would be questioned about national security matters.

Basically we've already established that Bolton wants to sell his book, so spilling the beans for free in a public hearing doesn't quite agree with him.

OK, but to be clear the judge said the same is true (in the rejection of the argument that top presidential advisors are absolutely immune from being compelled to talk about their official duties) even for those who worked on national security issues...

[gilraen]

OK, but to be clear the judge said the same is true (in the rejection of the argument that top presidential advisors are absolutely immune from being compelled to talk about their official duties) even for those who worked on national security issues...

Well, I didn't say it was a legitimate argument - he's not arguing immunity, exactly, only that his circumstances shouldn't be co-mingled with this specific case (which doesn't really matter in the short term anyway, since McGahn's case will drag through appeals).

[Holman]

Trump throws Rudy under the bus!

Should be an interesting week.