Page 3 of 48 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 712

Thread: Ex-FBI Director Mueller appointed DOJ Special Counsel

  1. #31
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,475
    Yup, will have to wait in the coming months to see what more comes out. The file says there is more information known to the parties. That he pled guilty means cooperation and possibly more charges forthcoming. The timeline cuts off abruptly in August 2016, by which time this guy had been trying to set up a meeting between Russia and Trump for 5 months to no avail.

    The charges are very "meh." Based on my limited reading, this is a case where I wouldn't be upset by a jury nullification.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

  2. #32
    Global Moderator
    Military Professional
    Defense Professional
    Albany Rifles's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Apr 07
    Location
    Prince George, VA
    Posts
    8,646
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    this nothingburger is getting pretty tasty.
    Me likee
    “Loyalty to country ALWAYS. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it.”
    Mark Twain

  3. #33
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,521
    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...ntact-with-the

    Flynn to testify Trump 'directed him to make contact with the Russians': report

    Former national security adviser Michael Flynn is expected to testify that President Trump instructed him to contact Russian officials during the 2016 campaign, ABC News reports.

    Trump "directed him to make contact with the Russians," ABC's Brian Ross said Friday, just moments after Flynn entered a guilty plea for lying about his contact with Russians during the presidential transition period.

    Flynn pled guilty to lying to the FBI on Friday, after being charged with one felony count in special counsel Robert Mueller's probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

    According to ABC News, Flynn is also prepared to testify against Trump, members of Trump's family and White House officials.

    The former adviser has reportedly also "promised full cooperation to the Mueller team" within the last 24 hours.

    Flynn is the first official to hold a formal office in the Trump administration to be brought down by the Mueller probe, which is examining potential ties between the campaign and Moscow during the 2016 election.

    Flynn's misrepresentation of his conversations with Kislyak — which took place in December, before Trump took office — were the justification for his ouster from the White House after just 24 days.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  4. #34
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    Trump must be paniking... probably see Mueller fired next.

  5. #35
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,521
    well, hasn't touched Mueller yet but he's pressuring Congress to end their investigations.

    as a reminder, regarding the Flynn situation (h/t Matthew Miller):

    January 24: Flynn makes false statements to FBI

    January 26: Yates warns White House that Flynn's call had been monitored

    January 27: Trump asks Comey for loyalty pledge

    January 30: Yates is fired
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  6. #36
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    11,645
    Quote Originally Posted by GVChamp View Post
    Yup, will have to wait in the coming months to see what more comes out. The file says there is more information known to the parties. That he pled guilty means cooperation and possibly more charges forthcoming. The timeline cuts off abruptly in August 2016, by which time this guy had been trying to set up a meeting between Russia and Trump for 5 months to no avail.

    The charges are very "meh." Based on my limited reading, this is a case where I wouldn't be upset by a jury nullification.
    The abrupt cutoff of the timeline was due to keeping information regarding other defendants and aspects of the investigation under seal.

    Likewise, the Flynn indictment only covers events for the period from Dec 22 - Dec 31, 2016.

    https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download
    https://www.justice.gov/file/1015121/download

    Kind of like a jigsaw puzzle falling into place.

    I don't think Papadapoulos is eligible for jury nullification, he waived his right to a jury trial and pled guilty.

    It seems obvious to me, at minimum, Trump committed obstruction of justice (asking Comey to drop the Flynn matter and firing him when he didn't) and witness intimidation ("better hope there are no tapes").

    While I do think enough Republican senators alongside Democrats would vote to convict if impeachment were to occur in the next year, it seems doubtful that the current Republican House would bring forth articles of impeachment unless something even more extremely egregious were to come to light as a result of the Mueller investigation. Now if the Democrats win the House elections in 2018, impeachment obviously becomes much more likely.
    Last edited by Ironduke; 07 Dec 17, at 13:26.

  7. #37
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,912
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironduke View Post
    The abrupt cutoff of the timeline was due to keeping information regarding other defendants and aspects of the investigation under seal.

    Likewise, the Flynn indictment only covers events for the period from Dec 22 - Dec 31, 2016.

    https://www.justice.gov/file/1015126/download
    https://www.justice.gov/file/1015121/download

    Kind of like a jigsaw puzzle falling into place.

    I don't think Papadapoulos is eligible for jury nullification, he waived his right to a jury trial and pled guilty.

    It seems obvious to me, at minimum, Trump committed obstruction of justice (asking Comey to drop the Flynn matter and firing him when he didn't) and witness intimidation ("better hope there are no tapes").

    While I do think enough Republican senators alongside Democrats would vote to convict if impeachment were to occur in the next year, it seems doubtful that the current Republican House would bring forth articles of impeachment unless something even more extremely egregious were to come to light as a result of the Mueller investigation. Now if the Democrats win the House elections in 2018, impeachment obviously becomes much more likely.
    Sorry, but there is no obstruction. 1. Trump has prosecutorial discretion as the ultimate law enforcement officer of the country. ex Obama ordered ICE to not deport dreamers and to release minors caught crossing the border to family members already in the country. 2. You can't indict a sitting president.

    Further, all the evidence publicly available so far says Flynn was convicted as part of a witch hunt that had nothing to do with collusion. The FBI agent who ran the Flynn interrogations was also the one who ran the Hillary and company discussions and was sending anti-Trump texts and has since been demoted. In Flynn's case he gets prosecuted for lying, a mere process crime, while in the later lying, physical destruction of evidence, mishandling classified information as part of a scheme/conspiracy et al were all white washed. In fact the FBI originally cleared Flynn of lying saying the lapses in memory were not intentional. They only got a plea because they spent the general into bankruptcy and put pressure on his family. Traits Weissman is famous for, he will do anything to get a conviction, even inventing new crimes and novel readings of law that courts will later reverse.

    The whole story of collusion is unraveling. The FBI investigation seems to be based on the Steele Dossier paid for by the Clinton Campaign and advanced through the FBI and DoJ by Clinton loyalists. If Trump was working with the Russians during the campaign, why did he order Flynn to reach out to them after he was President-Elect?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...32c_story.html

    http://thehill.com/opinion/white-hou...-interested-in

  8. #38
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    11,645
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    1. Trump has prosecutorial discretion as the ultimate law enforcement officer of the country.
    If what would otherwise be a legal power is exercised with corrupt intent, it is a crime.

  9. #39
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,743
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Sorry, but there is no obstruction. 1. Trump has prosecutorial discretion as the ultimate law enforcement officer of the country. ex Obama ordered ICE to not deport dreamers and to release minors caught crossing the border to family members already in the country. 2. You can't indict a sitting president.

    Further, all the evidence publicly available so far says Flynn was convicted as part of a witch hunt that had nothing to do with collusion. The FBI agent who ran the Flynn interrogations was also the one who ran the Hillary and company discussions and was sending anti-Trump texts and has since been demoted. In Flynn's case he gets prosecuted for lying, a mere process crime, while in the later lying, physical destruction of evidence, mishandling classified information as part of a scheme/conspiracy et al were all white washed. In fact the FBI originally cleared Flynn of lying saying the lapses in memory were not intentional. They only got a plea because they spent the general into bankruptcy and put pressure on his family. Traits Weissman is famous for, he will do anything to get a conviction, even inventing new crimes and novel readings of law that courts will later reverse.

    The whole story of collusion is unraveling. The FBI investigation seems to be based on the Steele Dossier paid for by the Clinton Campaign and advanced through the FBI and DoJ by Clinton loyalists. If Trump was working with the Russians during the campaign, why did he order Flynn to reach out to them after he was President-Elect?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...32c_story.html

    http://thehill.com/opinion/white-hou...-interested-in
    No one is above the law.
    That's basic America 101.
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  10. #40
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,912
    Quote Originally Posted by DOR View Post
    No one is above the law.
    That's basic America 101.
    Except the President using his constitutional powers to control the executive is not above the law. Co-Equal Branches of Government. Its why for example no president has ever acknowledged the War Powers Act. Congress does not have the authority to statutorily confine the President's actions. We have had 2 presidents nailed for obstruction. Nixon for Bribery and Clinton for perjury. Neither of those involved using constitutional powers. The heads of executive agencies serve at the pleasure of the president and wield authority devolved from the office of the president and the president retains those powers anytime he wishes to exercise them.

    However, since no one is above the law; Mueller should be investigated for leaks from the special counsel, Comey should be prosecuted for mishandling government documents and leaks... Your words and all that.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/can-a-p...le_email_share

  11. #41
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,521
    z,

    Further, all the evidence publicly available so far says Flynn was convicted as part of a witch hunt that had nothing to do with collusion. The FBI agent who ran the Flynn interrogations was also the one who ran the Hillary and company discussions and was sending anti-Trump texts and has since been demoted. In Flynn's case he gets prosecuted for lying, a mere process crime, while in the later lying, physical destruction of evidence, mishandling classified information as part of a scheme/conspiracy et al were all white washed. In fact the FBI originally cleared Flynn of lying saying the lapses in memory were not intentional. They only got a plea because they spent the general into bankruptcy and put pressure on his family. Traits Weissman is famous for, he will do anything to get a conviction, even inventing new crimes and novel readings of law that courts will later reverse.
    if the Flynn investigation was run on a single thread by a biased investigator (which shouldn't matter outside purposes of professional perception; after all, the charges/evidence needs to hold up in court), then there's no way Flynn pleads guilty to anything.

    the idea that Flynn gave up because he feared bankruptcy is risible-- not only does the LTG (ret) have plenty of resources by himself, Trump certainly wouldn't leave a guiltless subordinate in the lurch, plus every conservative law group in DC would be jumping to fight this out pro-bono.

    i agree that ultimately the President himself will be judged not in a court of law but as part of a straight political calculation in the Senate. does Trump being there help or hurt the Republican cause, or more specifically, the re-election cause of a bunch of GOP senators.

    the way this investigation is going leads me to believe there will probably be more indictments and convictions of other members in the Trump candidacy, but probably not of Trump himself-- as far as i can tell he neither has the cunning nor the secretiveness needed to keep up a campaign of deliberate collusion.

    given that Trump's campaign DID feature more-than-the-usual collection of stupid naive fools (see: Papadopoulos, Kushner, Trump Jr), it's likely there was a bunch of situational activities, a la Trump Jr accepting "help" from Wikileaks.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  12. #42
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,743
    Quote Originally Posted by snapper View Post
    Wasn't Uranium I a Canadian company?

    “Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?”
    Can I get a big “nope” ?
    Yup.
    https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clint...m-russia-deal/


    "Did Hillary Clinton Tell FBI's Mueller to Deliver Uranium to Russians in 2009 'Secret Tarmac Meeting'?"
    Did someone say, “nope” ?
    Yup.
    https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clint...eller-uranium/


    "Two Clinton Employees Arrested For Destroying Evidence As Uranium Probe Begins?"
    Does Snopes.com have a “liar, liar, pants on fire” rating?
    Nope, but it should.
    https://www.snopes.com/two-clinton-e...-probe-begins/
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  13. #43
    Senior Contributor DOR's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Mar 11
    Location
    London
    Posts
    2,743
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Except the President using his constitutional powers to control the executive is not above the law. Co-Equal Branches of Government. Its why for example no president has ever acknowledged the War Powers Act. Congress does not have the authority to statutorily confine the President's actions. We have had 2 presidents nailed for obstruction. Nixon for Bribery and Clinton for perjury. Neither of those involved using constitutional powers. The heads of executive agencies serve at the pleasure of the president and wield authority devolved from the office of the president and the president retains those powers anytime he wishes to exercise them.

    However, since no one is above the law; Mueller should be investigated for leaks from the special counsel, Comey should be prosecuted for mishandling government documents and leaks... Your words and all that.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/can-a-p...le_email_share
    Wow.
    Just, wow.

    You're actually responding to "no one is above the law" with "the President using his constitutional powers to control the executive."

    What part of your response was supposed to be related in some way to my statement?
    Trust me?
    I'm an economist!

  14. #44
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Aug 08
    Location
    UK/Europe
    Posts
    4,671
    Reminiscent of Charles l. But in truth it is more Roman Law vs Common Law dating back from Justinian's codification of Roman Law and declaring the 'legal code' by virtue of him being him - Emperor and God's Regent and whatever else. Napoleon did another codification in much the same way. But Common Law does not work from the top down but from the bottom up being originally built on custom. I believe if you can prove that some practice has been carried on in such a place/fashion or whatever since the time of Richard ll or some other ways that I forget but which prove it has always been that way for known memory in England that becomes enshrined in Common Law and only an Act of Parliament may change it.

    The English Civil War actually started on a point of law regarding who should pay for Navy. By custom certain ports (called the "Cinque Ports", there being 5 of them) were free from excise duty payments when importing French wine etc... In return they had to supply ships for the Navy or pay a 'ship tax' so others could build and maintain the Navy. Well Charlie l was after money so he proposed that all towns should contribute to the 'ship tax' but the law, being based on custom, said no; this is not normal practice. Charles was very reluctant to call Parliament to propose this change and tried to impose it himself because of his theory of the Divine Right of Kings - being appointed by God etc - and therefore all law must be derived from God's Appointed - just like Justinian. Of course the English at the time were not so easily fooled - if one person is the font of law and therefore above it then absolute rule - a la Loius XlV - follows. When Charles eventually had to call Parliament they kicked up a fuss and he insisted on his presumed 'rights' which were contrary to the Common Law. Thus war.

    I don't know much about the US version of Common Law but if you let this claptrap pass liberty is over. It disgusts me to see so called 'conservatives', the very idea of which is enshrined in the custom based Common Law, try to say that the Head of State is above all law. So should he turn the troops on the people that would be legal, should he imprison all opposition - abolish the Congress - nothing illegal would have passed? Perhaps this is what he admires in Putin? A 'show democracy' might suit him or just rule by decree. No no this a very dark path.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBiLT3LASk

  15. #45
    Senior Contributor GVChamp's Avatar
    Join Date
    26 Aug 06
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,475
    The President has absolute and total authority over all federal criminal prosecution.

    The last administration to lay out the policy that DOJ could not indict the President was Clinton.

    Liberty is not dead. There is the opportunity to hold the President accountable: it's impeachment.
    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 6 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 6 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Director Comey fired
    By Ironduke in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 418
    Last Post: 21 Jun 18,, 13:50
  2. Somalia: Abdiweli Mohamed Ali appointed prime minister
    By tomkent45 in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23 Jun 11,, 16:10
  3. A Chat With ISAF's Director Of Intelligence
    By S2 in forum Operation Enduring Freedom and Af-Pak
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05 Nov 09,, 15:57
  4. Dennis Ross appointed NSC senior director
    By Ironduke in forum The Staff College
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 26 Jun 09,, 16:56
  5. Nambiar appointed UN chief of staff
    By Tronic in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01 Jan 07,, 21:26

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •