[Mueller Investigation] Manafort "Sentenced"

So It Goes

The investigation continues. Stay on topic to Mueller's investigation.

Other investigations of Trump have their own separate threads.

Do not speculate about impeachment in this thread until actual articles of impeachment are seriously pursued, at which point it will no longer be speculation, will it?

Here's a mostly updated giant timeline: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/features/russia-timeline/

Recently:

https://www.npr.org/2018/11/29/671939382/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-latest-big-news-in-the-mueller-russia-investigat

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/12/19/michael-flynn-hoped-cooperating-would-keep-him-out-prison-heres-why-he-may-face-five-years/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.c934cc53fa23

PantsB

Guys I think he might be guilty

Hevach

PantsB wrote: »

Guys I think he might be guilty

Who?

("Yes.")

Quid

Current reasons members of this administration have claimed crimes are okay:

They didn’t know it was a crime.

The crimes were only technically crimes according to the law.

There are arguably worse crimes that could have been committed.

Drez

Individual 1

RMS Oceanic

Drez wrote: »

Individual 1

Could be anyone

HerrCron

RMS Oceanic wrote: »

Drez wrote: »

Individual 1

Could be anyone

I feel there's more to this, and it's set to the tune of "Fairytale of New York".

I Zimbra

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1075455024921223168?s=19

Atlantic staff writer.

I believe this is the 'tat' theyre referring to in 'tit for tat.'

Henroid

Maybe I'm naive as shit but when the Congress votes to impose sanctions, isn't the Treasury supposed to follow and not act on its own?

Edit - Fun fact, the previous iteration of this thread lasted exactly 100 days.

Jragghen

I Zimbra wrote: »

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1075455024921223168?s=19

Atlantic staff writer.

I believe this is the 'tat' theyre referring to in 'tit for tat.'

Wait. They did this today?

That is horrible timing, if so.

enlightenedbum

I mean the whole thing is out in the open at this point, you have to be willfully blind to not see it. Happily, something like 40% of the country is, in fact, willfully blind.

AngelHedgie

Jragghen wrote: »

I Zimbra wrote: »

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1075455024921223168?s=19

Atlantic staff writer.

I believe this is the 'tat' theyre referring to in 'tit for tat.'

Wait. They did this today?

That is horrible timing, if so.

It gets "better":

https://twitter.com/jedshug/status/1075478360090910720

From Mnuchin's Treasury Dept letter to lift sanctions on Deripaska's firms.
Note here who is taking over his En+:
1) VTB Bank. The sanctioned Russian bank for Ukraine conspiracy, linked to Trump Tower Moscow financing.
2) Glencore. The co-buyer, along with Qatar, of Rosneft.

Jed Shugerman is a law professor at Fordham.

Apparently, someone's annual review didn't go well.

Hevach

Rosneft. We were talking about that like... yesterday, right? Which one was that, the mob bank Trump owes his shirt to or the oil company with the 19.5% stake being moved around shadily?

Please slow down the ride. I don't want to get off just yet, I just... I just want to know where it's going.

Edit: Maybe a glossary for all this shit so I can look it up when I don't know how angry to be about a thing.

AngelHedgie

Hevach wrote: »

Rosneft. We were talking about that like... yesterday, right? Which one was that, the mob bank Trump owes his shirt to or the oil company with the 19.5% stake being moved around shadily?

Please slow down the ride. I don't want to get off just yet, I just... I just want to know where it's going.

The latter.

Hevach

AngelHedgie wrote: »

Hevach wrote: »

Rosneft. We were talking about that like... yesterday, right? Which one was that, the mob bank Trump owes his shirt to or the oil company with the 19.5% stake being moved around shadily?

Please slow down the ride. I don't want to get off just yet, I just... I just want to know where it's going.

The latter.

Thanks. So if I'm understanding right, just these two in particular ones are being de-sanctioned, not everything this guy has fingers in?

i.e. the two that are actually in the way of things Trump has been accused of?

Gaddez

Quid wrote: »

Current reasons members of this administration have claimed crimes are okay:

They didn’t know it was a crime.

The crimes were only technically crimes according to the law.

There are arguably worse crimes that could have been committed.

Also: CLINTON!!!!!11!

I Zimbra

Hevach wrote: »

AngelHedgie wrote: »

Hevach wrote: »

Rosneft. We were talking about that like... yesterday, right? Which one was that, the mob bank Trump owes his shirt to or the oil company with the 19.5% stake being moved around shadily?

Please slow down the ride. I don't want to get off just yet, I just... I just want to know where it's going.

The latter.

Thanks. So if I'm understanding right, just these two in particular ones are being de-sanctioned, not everything this guy has fingers in?

i.e. the two that are actually in the way of things Trump has been accused of?

As near as I can tell he is still personally sanctioned, but these two companies are being de-sanctioned because he is transferring his controlling shares in those companies to other, equally-shady companies.

Fencingsax

And he can still have 50%-1 shares in the companies, which is basically controlling anyways.

Gaddez

Not gonna lie: I'm super ammused at how 2 years into an investigation regarding russian interference and trumps involvement thereof the man is still trying to do buisness with the bear.

It's like...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pxG4yd8U3U

Captain Inertia

Mueller doesn’t have a lot of time to wrap this up before we get the holiday forum

PulpDogg

So with that whole "Trump signed the letter of intent" thing coming out.

A few thoughts.

Trump isn't / wasn't in with the mob. At least not to the effect of being his motivation. All he wanted was to make some money with the Trump Tower in Moscow. Nothing more.

Putin never cared a single bit about Trump or him being President. All he ever wanted was to avoid a President Clinton at ALL costs, because sanctions would never have been lifted under her and he hates her guts.

At worst he'd sow enough dissent to hobble her entire presidency, at best she doesn't become president.

He didn't actively want Trump as president, and might have been getting more than he bargained for with Trump actually winning and being THAT incompetent at being, well, a functioning adult really, let alone president.

What I want out of the Mueller investigation is Trump stripped of every asset he owns and behind bars.

Trump will regret the day he decided to run for president. He never actually wanted to win, all he wanted is to make some money on that Trump Tower Moscow deal and that is it. He would have happily turned his supposedly inevitable loss into Trump TV and sniping from the sidelines, but somehow he won.

If all that was some weird Hollywood comedy, it would be funny, with a poignant end. But its stupid reality and I really hope he doesn't destroy the US completely.

PantsB

WaPo

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone’s testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime.

It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign, according to the people.

The move suggests that the special counsel is moving to finalize his months-long investigation of Stone — a key part of Mueller’s inquiry into whether anyone in President Trump’s orbit coordinated with the Russians.

Stone, who has advised Trump on and off for decades and was in contact with the candidate during the 2016 campaign, has been a focus of the special counsel as Mueller probes whether the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’s release of Democratic emails allegedly hacked by Russian operatives.

Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said.

The special counsel could use the threat of a false-statement charge to seek cooperation from Stone, as Mueller has done with other Trump advisers, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
For weeks, the special counsel’s office has had access to an unofficial copy of Stone’s closed-door September 2017 interview, according to people with knowledge of the process. Mueller’s request of the official copy signals the special counsel could now be pursuing an indictment, several legal experts said.

“That suggests prosecutors are getting ready to bring a charge,” said former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner. “Prosecutors can’t bring a charge without an original certified copy of the transcript that shows the witness lied.”

So we'll have to see whats up on Friday

Taramoor

PantsB wrote: »

WaPo

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone’s testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime.

It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign, according to the people.

The move suggests that the special counsel is moving to finalize his months-long investigation of Stone — a key part of Mueller’s inquiry into whether anyone in President Trump’s orbit coordinated with the Russians.

Stone, who has advised Trump on and off for decades and was in contact with the candidate during the 2016 campaign, has been a focus of the special counsel as Mueller probes whether the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’s release of Democratic emails allegedly hacked by Russian operatives.

Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said.

The special counsel could use the threat of a false-statement charge to seek cooperation from Stone, as Mueller has done with other Trump advisers, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
For weeks, the special counsel’s office has had access to an unofficial copy of Stone’s closed-door September 2017 interview, according to people with knowledge of the process. Mueller’s request of the official copy signals the special counsel could now be pursuing an indictment, several legal experts said.

“That suggests prosecutors are getting ready to bring a charge,” said former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner. “Prosecutors can’t bring a charge without an original certified copy of the transcript that shows the witness lied.”

So we'll have to see whats up on Friday

Odds on Nunes editing the official transcript?

Preacher

Taramoor wrote: »

PantsB wrote: »

WaPo

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone’s testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime.

It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign, according to the people.

The move suggests that the special counsel is moving to finalize his months-long investigation of Stone — a key part of Mueller’s inquiry into whether anyone in President Trump’s orbit coordinated with the Russians.

Stone, who has advised Trump on and off for decades and was in contact with the candidate during the 2016 campaign, has been a focus of the special counsel as Mueller probes whether the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’s release of Democratic emails allegedly hacked by Russian operatives.

Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said.

The special counsel could use the threat of a false-statement charge to seek cooperation from Stone, as Mueller has done with other Trump advisers, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
For weeks, the special counsel’s office has had access to an unofficial copy of Stone’s closed-door September 2017 interview, according to people with knowledge of the process. Mueller’s request of the official copy signals the special counsel could now be pursuing an indictment, several legal experts said.

“That suggests prosecutors are getting ready to bring a charge,” said former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner. “Prosecutors can’t bring a charge without an original certified copy of the transcript that shows the witness lied.”

So we'll have to see whats up on Friday

Odds on Nunes editing the official transcript?

100%. Like I'll be surprised if he gives it over at all.

Nirya

Taramoor wrote: »

PantsB wrote: »

WaPo

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone’s testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime.

It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign, according to the people.

The move suggests that the special counsel is moving to finalize his months-long investigation of Stone — a key part of Mueller’s inquiry into whether anyone in President Trump’s orbit coordinated with the Russians.

Stone, who has advised Trump on and off for decades and was in contact with the candidate during the 2016 campaign, has been a focus of the special counsel as Mueller probes whether the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’s release of Democratic emails allegedly hacked by Russian operatives.

Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said.

The special counsel could use the threat of a false-statement charge to seek cooperation from Stone, as Mueller has done with other Trump advisers, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
For weeks, the special counsel’s office has had access to an unofficial copy of Stone’s closed-door September 2017 interview, according to people with knowledge of the process. Mueller’s request of the official copy signals the special counsel could now be pursuing an indictment, several legal experts said.

“That suggests prosecutors are getting ready to bring a charge,” said former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner. “Prosecutors can’t bring a charge without an original certified copy of the transcript that shows the witness lied.”

So we'll have to see whats up on Friday

Odds on Nunes editing the official transcript?

I mean, he definitely will, but what does it matter? Can’t the new leadership that takes over in January just give an unedited copy then?

Santa Claustrophobia

'Perjury trap! It's totes unfair that the new committee chair gave the unedited transcript to prove I obstructed justice!' - Former congresscritter Nunes


ohpmeaseohpleaseohplease

Undead Scottsman

Nirya wrote: »

Taramoor wrote: »

PantsB wrote: »

WaPo

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone’s testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime.

It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign, according to the people.

The move suggests that the special counsel is moving to finalize his months-long investigation of Stone — a key part of Mueller’s inquiry into whether anyone in President Trump’s orbit coordinated with the Russians.

Stone, who has advised Trump on and off for decades and was in contact with the candidate during the 2016 campaign, has been a focus of the special counsel as Mueller probes whether the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’s release of Democratic emails allegedly hacked by Russian operatives.

Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said.

The special counsel could use the threat of a false-statement charge to seek cooperation from Stone, as Mueller has done with other Trump advisers, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
For weeks, the special counsel’s office has had access to an unofficial copy of Stone’s closed-door September 2017 interview, according to people with knowledge of the process. Mueller’s request of the official copy signals the special counsel could now be pursuing an indictment, several legal experts said.

“That suggests prosecutors are getting ready to bring a charge,” said former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner. “Prosecutors can’t bring a charge without an original certified copy of the transcript that shows the witness lied.”

So we'll have to see whats up on Friday

Odds on Nunes editing the official transcript?

I mean, he definitely will, but what does it matter? Can’t the new leadership that takes over in January just give an unedited copy then?

That's what makes this great. Either the GOP themselves have to hand over the transcript, or let Nunes obsfucate and then look even worse when the truth comes out.

Unless I'm critically misunderstanding something.

Preacher

Undead Scottsman wrote: »

Nirya wrote: »

Taramoor wrote: »

PantsB wrote: »

WaPo

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone’s testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime.

It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign, according to the people.

The move suggests that the special counsel is moving to finalize his months-long investigation of Stone — a key part of Mueller’s inquiry into whether anyone in President Trump’s orbit coordinated with the Russians.

Stone, who has advised Trump on and off for decades and was in contact with the candidate during the 2016 campaign, has been a focus of the special counsel as Mueller probes whether the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’s release of Democratic emails allegedly hacked by Russian operatives.

Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said.

The special counsel could use the threat of a false-statement charge to seek cooperation from Stone, as Mueller has done with other Trump advisers, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
For weeks, the special counsel’s office has had access to an unofficial copy of Stone’s closed-door September 2017 interview, according to people with knowledge of the process. Mueller’s request of the official copy signals the special counsel could now be pursuing an indictment, several legal experts said.

“That suggests prosecutors are getting ready to bring a charge,” said former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner. “Prosecutors can’t bring a charge without an original certified copy of the transcript that shows the witness lied.”

So we'll have to see whats up on Friday

Odds on Nunes editing the official transcript?

I mean, he definitely will, but what does it matter? Can’t the new leadership that takes over in January just give an unedited copy then?

That's what makes this great. Either the GOP themselves have to hand over the transcript, or let Nunes obsfucate and then look even worse when the truth comes out.

Unless I'm critically misunderstanding something.

The GOP assumes the democrats will cater to "decorum" of covering their lies.

Undead Scottsman

Preacher wrote: »

Undead Scottsman wrote: »

Nirya wrote: »

Taramoor wrote: »

PantsB wrote: »

WaPo

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III asked the House Intelligence Committee on Friday for an official transcript of Trump adviser Roger Stone’s testimony, according to people familiar with the request, a sign that prosecutors could be moving to charge him with a crime.

It is the first time Mueller has formally asked the committee to turn over material the panel has gathered in its investigation of Russian interference of the 2016 campaign, according to the people.

The move suggests that the special counsel is moving to finalize his months-long investigation of Stone — a key part of Mueller’s inquiry into whether anyone in President Trump’s orbit coordinated with the Russians.

Stone, who has advised Trump on and off for decades and was in contact with the candidate during the 2016 campaign, has been a focus of the special counsel as Mueller probes whether the Trump campaign had advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’s release of Democratic emails allegedly hacked by Russian operatives.

Securing an official transcript from the committee would be a necessary step before pursuing an indictment that Stone allegedly lied to lawmakers, legal experts said.

The special counsel could use the threat of a false-statement charge to seek cooperation from Stone, as Mueller has done with other Trump advisers, such as former national security adviser Michael Flynn and longtime Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.
...
For weeks, the special counsel’s office has had access to an unofficial copy of Stone’s closed-door September 2017 interview, according to people with knowledge of the process. Mueller’s request of the official copy signals the special counsel could now be pursuing an indictment, several legal experts said.

“That suggests prosecutors are getting ready to bring a charge,” said former federal prosecutor Glenn Kirschner. “Prosecutors can’t bring a charge without an original certified copy of the transcript that shows the witness lied.”

So we'll have to see whats up on Friday

Odds on Nunes editing the official transcript?

I mean, he definitely will, but what does it matter? Can’t the new leadership that takes over in January just give an unedited copy then?

That's what makes this great. Either the GOP themselves have to hand over the transcript, or let Nunes obsfucate and then look even worse when the truth comes out.

Unless I'm critically misunderstanding something.

The GOP assumes the democrats will cater to "decorum" of covering their lies.

Schiff is practically drooling over the stuff he's going to be able to do in January, so I wouldn't feel comfortable if I was the GOP.

38thDoe

Can’t mueller send Nunes to jail if he sends the wrong transcript?

KalTorak

38thDoe wrote: »

Can’t mueller send Nunes to jail if he sends the wrong transcript?

I dunno, is lying to the FBI even a crime? brb asking Michael Flynn

HamHamJ

My expectation is refusing to provide the transcript and bluffing that Mueller won't actually subpoena it or won't try to enforce it.

Captain Inertia

Try for another contempt of Congress song and dance

Gork

I’m sure if Nunes fucks with it, Schiff will be more than happy to point out any inconsistencies from the version he viewed.

That’s not to say Nunes won’t try. He’s colossally stupid.

RMS Oceanic

It's interesting he's asking now, given the turnover scheduled for two weeks time.

Dark_Side

RMS Oceanic wrote: »

It's interesting he's asking now, given the turnover scheduled for two weeks time.

I can't help but wonder if they're trying to catch Nunes up to some shit.

AngelHedgie

RMS Oceanic wrote: »

It's interesting he's asking now, given the turnover scheduled for two weeks time.

He's giving Nunes enough rope to hang himself with.

Trace

Quid wrote: »

Current reasons members of this administration have claimed crimes are okay:

They didn’t know it was a crime.

The crimes were only technically crimes according to the law.

There are arguably worse crimes that could have been committed.

They didn't know they couldn't do that.

Shadowfire

Captain Inertia wrote: »

Mueller doesn’t have a lot of time to wrap this up before we get the holiday forum

We'll need a separate holiday forum for the Trump threads.

Henroid

Shadowfire wrote: »

Captain Inertia wrote: »

Mueller doesn’t have a lot of time to wrap this up before we get the holiday forum

We'll need a separate holiday forum for the Trump threads.

I seriously doubt that, we can probably do with the break.

Heir

Henroid wrote: »

Shadowfire wrote: »

Captain Inertia wrote: »

Mueller doesn’t have a lot of time to wrap this up before we get the holiday forum

We'll need a separate holiday forum for the Trump threads.

I seriously doubt that, we can probably do with the break.

We both know that's not going to be realistic.