The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[Remus West]

It's all already bought and paid for. You can only hope it gets work for it to get better when some other chosen one gets stuck in the White House.

Hope isn't at play now. Effort is. Hope comes after, where you hope your effort and diligence were good enough, in this instance to counteract the machine Trump in place and the machine McConnell put in place that allowed Trump to do so. I have become a sort of Trump in my attitude. In order to "make us great again" we have to first undo everything his presidency has done. He has literally changed the norm and not for the better.

Whole heartedly agree.

So what is one supposed to do, other than vote at prescribed dates? All my federal reps are "opposition party". All my local officials are "opposition party".

Get involved in the campaigns of those who are not "opposition party". Support those who act in a manner you believe in with your time as well as your vote in an effort to increase support for them in the community and the ballot box.

I'm confused. By opposition party, I mean the Democrats. I'm not aware of an opportunity to get another one in. "Getting out the vote" for Democrats in Chicago is like campaigning for Trump at a Qanon convention.

I'm the one that was confused as I know you live in Chicago so.....but you could campaign for State reps. Travel to Indiana to help a campaign across the river?

[Remus West]

For me impeachment became justified the moment he won since I felt he should have been removed as a candidate for openly soliciting Russian interference in the 2016 election. When he crossed that line both major parties members (i.e. the voters) should have sent him packing with a "Don't call us. Ever." note attached to his hindquarters where they had kicked him.

[LawBeefaroni]

I'm the one that was confused as I know you live in Chicago so.....but you could campaign for State reps. Travel to Indiana to help a campaign across the river?

Funny you mention that. Indiana pols just want our money. Which is fine, I don't like the idea of going outside my jurisdiction to tell someone else who to vote for.

Now my wife was looking at properties in Detroit so there's that.

[Remus West]

I'm the one that was confused as I know you live in Chicago so.....but you could campaign for State reps. Travel to Indiana to help a campaign across the river?

Funny you mention that. Indiana pols just want our money. Which is fine, I don't like the idea of going outside my jurisdiction to tell someone else who to vote for.

Now my wife was looking at properties in Detroit so there's that.

Well, thats not going to change the voting issue for you. Or the corruption. It would be nice to have another gamer in the area even if I never actually get out and game any longer.

[Holman]

One thing anyone can do is volunteer for GOTV efforts. If you're a professional, you can probably take off from work to help drive people to the polls on election day or even just election morning. Many people (the elderly, the homebound) fail to vote because it's actually difficult for them to get around.

Think about how much more your vote counts if you manage to bring just three or four (likely Dem) voters to the polls.

[Holman]

link

McGahn's testimony was important to Mueller's obstruction case.

[Kurth]

If you believe that impeachment is justified but that it would hurt Democrats in November 2020, ask yourself why you think so. Can we be certain that not doing the right thing is somehow safer than doing the right thing?

We're in territory where political prediction is iffy at best. Politically, all we know for sure is that this congress was elected in a wave election predicated on holding Trump accountable.

Polling supports this as well. Trump's approvals have actually fallen since Barr declared him exonerated, and I don't think we've yet had polling that reflects the redacted report's availability.

Serious question: When exactly did impeachment become justified?

He's been doing impeachment-worthy things in plain sight since very early on. I'd say firing Comey to shut down the investigation was among the first to cross the bar unambiguously.

But now we've a report from the SC that is sent as a clear case for obstruction of justice and predicated on the idea that only congress may make the actual accusation. *Not* impeaching Trump at this point means ignoring the investigation's findings.

Incidentally, the fact that Mueller could not charge conspiracy does not put collusion below the bar for impeachment either. Mueller several times points out that the conspiracy requires a very high standard of proof and that his investigation faced uncooperative witnesses and a lack of accessible evidence. He details activity with and in response to foreign actors that (though no charges can be brought) can very reasonably be seen as intentional failure to protect the country from that influence.

This is the thing that troubles me: I agree that he's been doing impeachment-worthy things since day 1 (if not before) and that he's been doing them in plain sight. But if impeachment wasn't going to happen before the Mueller report, I don't see how anything in the Mueller report changes that calculation.

[Paingod]

...the idea that he is allowed to act this way unchecked is damaging the fabric of reality.

FTFY.

[YellowKing]

I don't see how anything in the Mueller report changes that calculation.

The Mueller report laid bare what we had assumed from Trump's public actions -namely that he attempted to obstruct justice on ten different occasions. It was only thwarted by the actions of his aides refusing to follow orders, but the attempt was there. Furthermore, Mueller clearly implied that the only reason he didn't charge Trump with obstruction is due to the policy that a sitting President can't be indicted, and that is why he was leaving it as a Congressional matter.

The difference is that pre-Mueller report, we only had our assumptions to go on. Post-Mueller report, we're getting handed the evidence and Mueller is saying, "My hands are tied, but here's what he did and it's up to Congress to deliver the sentence."

[Smoove_B]

This is the thing that troubles me: I agree that he's been doing impeachment-worthy things since day 1 (if not before) and that he's been doing them in plain sight. But if impeachment wasn't going to happen before the Mueller report, I don't see how anything in the Mueller report changes that calculation.

Again, if I'm to believe people that I need to assume are smarter than I am with respect to legal issues, I can only trust their analysis of the Mueller report. More specifically, that his report makes the case that given his role/powers as part of this investigation, he was (as an individual) ultimately limited in his ability to fully investigate a sitting President. The Mueller report isn't a "clear path" to impeachment and is instead a document that makes the case that only Congress will ultimately be able to determine whether or not the President should be held accountable. He wasn't passing the buck as much as he was demonstrating he could only take it so far - and now it's up to them.

[LawBeefaroni]

This is the thing that troubles me: I agree that he's been doing impeachment-worthy things since day 1 (if not before) and that he's been doing them in plain sight. But if impeachment wasn't going to happen before the Mueller report, I don't see how anything in the Mueller report changes that calculation.

Again, if I'm to believe people that I need to assume are smarter than I am with respect to legal issues, I can only trust their analysis of the Mueller report. More specifically, that his report makes the case that given his role/powers as part of this investigation, he was (as an individual) ultimately limited in his ability to fully investigate a sitting President. The Mueller report isn't a "clear path" to impeachment and is instead a document that makes the case that only Congress will ultimately be able to determine whether or not the President should be held accountable. He wasn't passing the buck as much as he was demonstrating he could only take it so far - and now it's up to them.

At the feet of the most self-serving, venal Congress ever. Yay!

Let's hope there personal or political profit in impeachment or it will never happen.

[Pyperkub]

This is the thing that troubles me: I agree that he's been doing impeachment-worthy things since day 1 (if not before) and that he's been doing them in plain sight. But if impeachment wasn't going to happen before the Mueller report, I don't see how anything in the Mueller report changes that calculation.

Again, if I'm to believe people that I need to assume are smarter than I am with respect to legal issues, I can only trust their analysis of the Mueller report. More specifically, that his report makes the case that given his role/powers as part of this investigation, he was (as an individual) ultimately limited in his ability to fully investigate a sitting President. The Mueller report isn't a "clear path" to impeachment and is instead a document that makes the case that only Congress will ultimately be able to determine whether or not the President should be held accountable. He wasn't passing the buck as much as he was demonstrating he could only take it so far - and now it's up to them.

At the feet of the most self-serving, venal Congress ever. Yay!

Let's hope there personal or political profit in impeachment or it will never happen.

Nah, that was the 2017-2019 Congress. It got better after the 2018 elections.

Just imagine if Nunes was still in charge of the House Intelligence committee....

[pr0ner]

It's hard to figure out what thread this goes in, but the Trump admin is now testing what happens when you ignore a Congressional subpoena.

[Paingod]

Where's that image of toddler Trump in a high chair with spaghetti on his head?

[El Guapo]

It's hard to figure out what thread this goes in, but the Trump admin is now testing what happens when you ignore a Congressional subpoena.

I'm sure that the hope is to try to run out the clock in court until the 2020 election.

[hepcat]

I'm not sure what he hopes to get out of this. The more he resists, the more suspicious it all seems. Is he worried there's something incriminating in his taxes? I would assume that the IRS would have already found something if that was the case. Is it simply a contrarian position he thinks will show his base he's in charge? Or is he just concerned that people will find out he isn't as rich as he claims? This one tends to be more believable for me. He has a history of getting enraged if anyone questions his claims of being one of the richest men in America.

But the optics of this can't be good for him in the long run. Just as the impeachment charge on the Dem side is proving to be a losing endeavor for them in the polls, this could potentially put a crimp on Trump's 2020 plans.

[LordMortis]

Star Wars didn't quite have it right

McConnell would have to be Palpatine saying "I am the Senate"
and then Prince would be Tarkin with "I just received word that Emperor dissolved the council permanently. The Imperial Senate is longer of concern to us. The last remnants of the Old Republic have been swept away"
And then Trump would be immortal seeking string puller who has his one truly loyal girlfriend that he is trying to dump for a younger loyal girlfriend.

But as it turns out McConnell is more of JarJar figure who manages to be destruction of the Republic rather than a mastermind and then the whole metaphor falls apart.


I really do hope none of this dies during the election cycle and that voters need to own or at least cogitate on their support, not just for for the president but for the Congress that enables him.

Mr/Ms Congress person, what actions did you take to for or against such and such move by White House? Fill in blank on Taxes, Subpeona's, cooperation, the investigation itself, the plea for interference, etc... etc... etc... Fuck do not approve. What did you do? Where did you stand now and why?

[pr0ner]

Sure it is, Jared. Sure it is.

[LawBeefaroni]

I'm not sure what he hopes to get out of this. The more he resists, the more suspicious it all seems. Is he worried there's something incriminating in his taxes? I would assume that the IRS would have already found something if that was the case. Is it simply a contrarian position he thinks will show his base he's in charge? Or is he just concerned that people will find out he isn't as rich as he claims? This one tends to be more believable for me. He has a history of getting enraged if anyone questions his claims of being one of the richest men in America.

But the optics of this can't be good for him in the long run. Just as the impeachment charge on the Dem side is proving to be a losing endeavor for them in the polls, this could potentially put a crimp on Trump's 2020 plans.

The IRS just checks to see if your are paying appropriate taxes based on what they have from employers and your self-reporting. They don't, for example, compare what you claimed you earned vs. what you told Deutche Bank that you earned. There's a lot that that the IRS doesn't look at.

[LawBeefaroni]

Nah, that was the 2017-2019 Congress. It got better after the 2018 elections.

Marginally. Overall though it is still guided by personal self-interest.

Just imagine if Nunes was still in charge of the House Intelligence committee....

It's easy if you try.

[Pyperkub]

Sure it is, Jared. Sure it is.

Well, it has. But not in the way he claims, but in the enabling of emperor Trump's blatant disregard of the rule of law.

[GungHo]

https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/23/opinio ... cnn.com%2F

Interesting take on Mueller's decision RE: obstruction. Essentially says Mueller should've said trump obstructed but still not charged him instead of dancing around the issue with his 'fairness' notion.

[Holman]

This is an enormous abuse of power easily comparable to Nixon's.

[Zarathud]

If Trump wasn't obstructing before the Mueller report, he is boldly obstructing now.

Telling advisors not to cooperate with Congress is an abuse of power.

[GreenGoo]

Hillary lost. You mad bro?

[Smoove_B]

Remember when the Republicans were apoplectic over President Obama's alleged instructions to the IRS to target tax-exempt conservative groups? Oh how they were so angry. But a Republican President actually instructing an underling to target a political rival? No worries.

[Smoove_B]

Oh hey, look at this - Deutsche Bank is now providing Trump's financial records to the NY State AG:

The bank is in the process of turning over documents, including emails and loan documents, related to Trump International Hotel in Washington, DC; the Trump National Doral Miami; the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago; and the unsuccessful effort to buy the NFL's Buffalo Bills.
A spokeswoman for Deutsche Bank declined to comment.
The bank is already the subject of a joint investigation between the House Financial Services and Intelligence committees into Trump's businesses and money laundering.

Deutsche Bank has been one of the few big banks willing to lend to the Trump Organization in recent years.
Trump's businesses have borrowed more than $300 million from Deutsche to finance the company's Florida golf course and hotels in Chicago and Washington, according to financial disclosures and public filings from 2012 to 2015.

3AM Twitter storm incoming.

[YellowKing]

What terrifies me is that in an alternate timeline where the Blue Wave never occurred, all of this would have been hushed up.

[Holman]

Since School House Rock never covered this, we have Robert Reich:

[Defiant]

[LawBeefaroni]

Oh hey, look at this - Deutsche Bank is now providing Trump's financial records to the NY State AG:

The bank is in the process of turning over documents, including emails and loan documents, related to Trump International Hotel in Washington, DC; the Trump National Doral Miami; the Trump International Hotel and Tower in Chicago; and the unsuccessful effort to buy the NFL's Buffalo Bills.
A spokeswoman for Deutsche Bank declined to comment.
The bank is already the subject of a joint investigation between the House Financial Services and Intelligence committees into Trump's businesses and money laundering.

Deutsche Bank has been one of the few big banks willing to lend to the Trump Organization in recent years.
Trump's businesses have borrowed more than $300 million from Deutsche to finance the company's Florida golf course and hotels in Chicago and Washington, according to financial disclosures and public filings from 2012 to 2015.

3AM Twitter storm incoming.

There's probably some good stuff in there. Were he not president I'd even call some of it actionable.

[Smoove_B]

There's probably some good stuff in there.

A good guess - because he's suing them:

President Trump, members of his family and his private businesses filed a federal lawsuit late Monday against Deutsche Bank and Capital One in an attempt to block the financial institutions from complying with congressional subpoenas.

The lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of New York, comes after House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) and House Financial Services Committee Chairwoman Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) issued the subpoenas seeking records on Trump's personal finances.

“The subpoenas were issued to harass President Donald J. Trump, to rummage through every aspect of his personal finances, his businesses, and the private information of the President and his family, and to ferret about for any material that might be used to cause him political damage. No grounds exist to establish any purpose other than a political one,” the complaint states.

What a snowflake.

[El Guapo]

Going by the description in the article, the suit seems so incredibly frivolous as to be borderline sanctionable (though I really doubt any court would have the stones to sanction the lawsuit for being frivolous).

The complaint filed Monday alleges that the subpoenas are sweeping and overbroad. For example, Trump’s lawyers state that the request issued to Deutsche Bank applies to “parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, branches, divisions, partnerships, properties, groups, special purpose entities, joint ventures, predecessors, successors or any other entity in which they have or had a controlling interest.”

This just says that the subpoena applies to...Deutsche Bank, specifying that that includes entities controlled by Deutsche Bank. It has to be so, or else a company could avoid turning over damaging records by just creating Incriminating Information Corp. and then not telling anyone about it.

[malchior]

He is afraid it'll exonerate him more!

[LordMortis]

He'd love for the bank to comply to the subpoena but he's suing because he's under audit from the IRS. He's always under audit, what can he do?

[Isgrimnur]

Don Jr, Erik Prince, Roger Stone, and the whole crew of them have done a *lot* of lying to Congress.

WaPo

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) said Tuesday that his panel would make a criminal referral to the Justice Department regarding potential false testimony by Erik Prince, the billionaire founder of the private military contractor Blackwater and an ally of President Trump.

[Remus West]

Don Jr, Erik Prince, Roger Stone, and the whole crew of them have done a *lot* of lying to Congress.

WaPo

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) said Tuesday that his panel would make a criminal referral to the Justice Department regarding potential false testimony by Erik Prince, the billionaire founder of the private military contractor Blackwater and an ally of President Trump.

Well thats really encouraging because I'm certain that tRump's lap dog is going to get right on charging him.

[El Guapo]

Accurate summary.

[Pyperkub]

Bad day for Trump - first Mueller/Barr, then Emoluments moving forward:

Democrats in Congress can move ahead with their lawsuit against President Trump alleging that his private business violates the Constitution’s ban on gifts or payments from foreign governments, a federal judge ruled Tuesday.

The decision in Washington from U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan adopted a broad definition of the anti-corruption ban and could set the stage for Democratic lawmakers to begin seeking information from the Trump Organization. The Justice Department can try to delay or block the process by asking an appeals court to intervene.

In a 48-page opinion, the judge refused the request of the president’s legal team to dismiss the case and rejected Trump’s narrow definition of emoluments, finding it “unpersuasive and inconsistent.”

[Holman]

Bad day for Trump - first Mueller/Barr [...]

I assume you mean this?



Mueller has been asked to testify publicly before at least two House committees. After all this time, I really want to hear what he himself says about the investigations.