Y'know how Republicans could avoid having damaging leaks occur in the wake of Trump applying 'unconventional or inappropriate pressure'? Make Trump not do that.
People keep thinking anyone can make Trump do something he doesn't want to. You can't. Nobody can.
She either doesn't understand that an investigation and an accusation are different things or she does and she is purposefully trying to mislead people.
Either way, she needs to shut the whole fuck up.
PAFC Top 10 Finisher in Seasons 1 and 3. 2nd in Seasons 4 and 5. Final 4 in Season 6.
WASHINGTON—President Donald Trump’s firing of former FBI Director James Comey is now a subject of the federal probe being headed by special counsel Robert Mueller, which has expanded to include whether the president obstructed justice, a person familiar with the matter said.
Mr. Mueller is examining whether the president fired Mr. Comey as part of a broader effort to alter the direction of a probe into allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 presidential election, which at the time was being led by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
Mr. Mueller’s team is planning to interview Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers as part of its examination of whether Mr. Trump sought to obstruct justice, the person said. The special counsel also plans to interview Rick Ledgett, who recently retired as the deputy director of the NSA, the person added.
Mark Corallo, a spokesman for Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, denounced the revelation in a statement.
“The FBI leak of information regarding the president is outrageous, inexcusable and illegal,” Mr. Corallo said.
Neither the Washington Post, which first reported Wednesday that the special counsel was looking into whether the president obstructed justice, nor The Wall Street Journal named the people who confirmed the news.
While Mr. Ledgett was still in office, he wrote a memo documenting a phone call that Adm. Rogers had with Mr. Trump, according to people familiar with the matter. During the call, the president questioned the veracity of the intelligence community’s judgment that Russia had interfered with the election and also tried to persuade Adm. Rogers to say there was no evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russian officials, they said.
If I believed they were capable of much foresight, I would say they are setting this up to justify firing Mueller for the leaks.
The early leaked RNC talking points: but her emails and the real crime are the leaks.
My blood boils a little bit every time I see some GOP critter demur.
The man admitted in a nationally televised interview that he fired Comey because of the investigation. Admitting their first story was a lie and just pretense.
He also admitted this to two Russian diplomats and then insulted Comey as well and the White House doesn't deny it.
Interesting that it's Trump's personal lawyer's spokesman making the statement, and not a white house statement.
Dunno what that means exactly, but it's interesting.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
Interesting that it's Trump's personal lawyer's spokesman making the statement, and not a white house statement.
Dunno what that means exactly, but it's interesting.
Probably that it has more to do with Trump's own feelings. I've always felt like the WH statements are mostly reactionary and removed from Trump himself. "Oh, Trump did another ridiculous thing...let's figure out how to spin this and hope he doesn't throw us under a bus..."
Trump's lawyer saying stuff feels more like something Trump himself had a say in.
With the crisis engulfing Trump’s young presidency intensifying, senators, Trump aides, former prosecutors, and FBI veterans are sending the White House an urgent warning: Whatever you do, don’t. Fire. Mueller/
White House officials are still insisting to the president that he should leave Mueller in his post. “We are all advising him not to [get rid of] Mueller. That has not changed,” one Trump aide told The Daily Beast. “It would be an absolute nuclear explosion if he did.”
But some privately concede that Trump is so unpredictable—and so frustrated with the persistence of the investigation and its cost in political capital—that they’re not ruling it out. Another White House official conceded that it would be “suicide” if Trump sacked Mueller at this point, but “I’d be insincere if I said it wasn’t a concern that the president would try to do it anyway.”
For now, officials are simply concerned with limiting fallout from what is sure to be a thunderous reaction from the president to news that he is personally the target of the FBI’s probe.
Asked what the internal game plan should be, one senior Trump administration official replied, “Keep him away from Twitter, dear God, keep him away from Twitter.”
“The president did this to himself,” the official added.
A second senior administration official pointed to Trump’s role in propagating the rumor that he might fire Mueller—according to the Times, he felt the prospect of being sacked might convince Mueller to resolve the investigation in Trump’s favor—and suggested that the leak to the Post on Wednesday might have been an unintended consequence of that move.
“Whoever leaked [news of the obstruction investigation] was obviously reading that he was thinking about giving Mueller the boot,” the official said. Trump “shot himself in the foot again with this cockamamie scheme to get Mueller to play ball.”
Nobody is stopping them from just walking away from their self imposed hell.
This is a level of detail I would have been ok with not knowing til charges are filed.
But they won't file charges against Trump.
Probing Trump for possible crimes is a complicated affair, even if convincing evidence of a crime were found. The Justice Department has long held that it would not be appropriate to indict a sitting president. Instead, experts say, the onus would be on Congress to review any findings of criminal misconduct and then decide whether to initiate impeachment proceedings.
The DOJ can't charge a sitting president with a crime.
Congress needs to do it. I wonder if that's the real reason why all of this stuff is being leaked out. Congress needs to be primed, prepared for what they ultimately need to do.
Charge him anyway and let SCOTUS figure it out. In for a penny, in for a pound on constitutional crises.
+9
Options
augustwhere you come from is goneRegistered Userregular
Yeah threaten to fire Muller so he'll fall in line like he's a line cook at Arby's or some shit.
To clarify -- the talking point that Trump himself was/is not under investigation is now wrong?
He wanted the public to know that he wasn't under investigation for collision with Russia.
He fired Comey and as a result is now under investigation for obstruction of justice.
(And also probably collusion at this point as well)
My favorite in that list of ways to discredit Mueller is that Trump being under investigation for obstruction PROVES that they couldn't find any collusion.
So I mentioned that Marshall was hinting at things like this yesterday. First time he's outright stated it. (You should read the rest too, obviously):
As I said, a basic perusal of business in the Trump world makes clear that serious legal scrutiny would turn up no end of problems. Just consider what was from a financial perspective, a tiny island in the Trump archipelago of mischief, The Trump Foundation which David Fahrenthold did so much with. Almost every rock Fahrenthold overturned exposed some self-dealing, at least legal violations and often real wrongdoing and as much as anything a wild level of sloppiness and indifference to doing business like even semi-honest people. From one perspective it’s hard to say Trump knowingly broke the law with the Foundation since the whole conduct of the Foundation seemed to be carried on as though none of the relevant laws even existed. Again, the Foundation was just a sideline for Trump. It’s not where he made his big money and ran off from his biggest obligations. That’s how they do business.
If Mueller is taking a serious prosecutor’s lens to Trump’s financial world and the financial worlds of Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort, Mike Flynn and numerous others, there’s going to be a world of hurt for a lot of people. And that is if no meaningful level of 2016 election collusion even happened.
And I don’t think that’s true.
He should say why he thinks that, otherwise he's just another guy speculating.
Because a cursory glance at anything trump does turns up lawsuits, bankruptcy, failure, and more often than not, a combination of the three
Yeah, that's likely. I'm just talking about the bolded. There's no public reporting or any acknowledged evidence about that.
To clarify -- the talking point that Trump himself was/is not under investigation is now wrong?
He wanted the public to know that he wasn't under investigation for collision with Russia.
He fired Comey and as a result is now under investigation for obstruction of justice.
(And also probably collusion at this point as well)
My favorite in that list of ways to discredit Mueller is that Trump being under investigation for obstruction PROVES that they couldn't find any collusion.
Because people can only be guilty of one thing.
Especially when it's obstruction.
Because no one who was guilty would ever obstruct justice into their own investigation.
Trump uses people, careers and ridiculous accusation as an insulating vector between his personal reality and the one the rest of us exist in. I really wonder how that will play out when he's questioned under oath.
0
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
It would be more surprising to know there's something Trump isn't guilty of.
"In no particular order, he's a traitor, colluded with the enemy, evaded taxes, raped underage prostitutes, had puppy-drowning parties so that's cruelty to animals too, caused the 1995 Kobe earthquake (we're still working on the exact mechanism), sold nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, and the Maldives for some reason, dumped untreated sewage directly into several rivers and harbors, stole billions of dollars which he lost in other schemes that then ripped off millions of people, BUT it turns out there wasn't actually a pee tape."
Trump: "VINDICATED! THE PEE TAPE IS LIES!"
So I mentioned that Marshall was hinting at things like this yesterday. First time he's outright stated it. (You should read the rest too, obviously):
As I said, a basic perusal of business in the Trump world makes clear that serious legal scrutiny would turn up no end of problems. Just consider what was from a financial perspective, a tiny island in the Trump archipelago of mischief, The Trump Foundation which David Fahrenthold did so much with. Almost every rock Fahrenthold overturned exposed some self-dealing, at least legal violations and often real wrongdoing and as much as anything a wild level of sloppiness and indifference to doing business like even semi-honest people. From one perspective it’s hard to say Trump knowingly broke the law with the Foundation since the whole conduct of the Foundation seemed to be carried on as though none of the relevant laws even existed. Again, the Foundation was just a sideline for Trump. It’s not where he made his big money and ran off from his biggest obligations. That’s how they do business.
If Mueller is taking a serious prosecutor’s lens to Trump’s financial world and the financial worlds of Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort, Mike Flynn and numerous others, there’s going to be a world of hurt for a lot of people. And that is if no meaningful level of 2016 election collusion even happened.
And I don’t think that’s true.
He should say why he thinks that, otherwise he's just another guy speculating.
Because a cursory glance at anything trump does turns up lawsuits, bankruptcy, failure, and more often than not, a combination of the three
Yeah, that's likely. I'm just talking about the bolded. There's no public reporting or any acknowledged evidence about that.
To clarify -- the talking point that Trump himself was/is not under investigation is now wrong?
He wanted the public to know that he wasn't under investigation for collision with Russia.
He fired Comey and as a result is now under investigation for obstruction of justice.
(And also probably collusion at this point as well)
My favorite in that list of ways to discredit Mueller is that Trump being under investigation for obstruction PROVES that they couldn't find any collusion.
Because people can only be guilty of one thing.
Especially when it's obstruction.
Mueller hasn't even been in the job for more than a month. It takes more time than that to discover there is nothing.
The magnitude of that "fuck you" would be mythic. If it was represented by a twinkie, it would be 35 feet long and weighing approximately 600 pounds.
An organization would be started to buy out the lots in front of all Trump properties with statues of Mueller giving the building the bird. Schiff isn't in my state, I'm stuck with McCain, but damn it I'd vote for him for eternity.
Officials said one of the exchanges of potential interest to Mueller took place on March 22, less than a week after Coats was confirmed by the Senate to serve as the nation’s top intelligence official.
Coats was attending a briefing at the White House with officials from several other government agencies. When the briefing ended, as The Washington Post previously reported, Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.
Coats told associates that Trump had asked him whether Coats could intervene with Comey to get the bureau to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn in its Russia probe, according to officials.Coats later told lawmakers that he never felt pressured to intervene.
A day or two after the March 22 meeting, Trump telephoned Coats and Rogers to separately ask them to issue public statements denying the existence of any evidence of coordination between his campaign and the Russian government.
Coats and Rogers refused to comply with the president’s requests, officials said.
It is unclear whether Ledgett had direct contact with Trump or other top officials about the Russia probe, but he wrote an internal NSA memo documenting the president’s phone call with Rogers, according to officials.
I wonder why DNI Coats is testifying in a closed Intelligence Committee hearing tomorrow?
Now I'm no lawyer, but that sounds an awful lot like he lied to congress (under oath?).
Personally, I thought Coats was leaning heavily on the word "felt"; he was implying that whatever pressure he might have received was not effective at changing his behavior
I made a game! Hotline Maui. Requires mouse and keyboard.
So I mentioned that Marshall was hinting at things like this yesterday. First time he's outright stated it. (You should read the rest too, obviously):
As I said, a basic perusal of business in the Trump world makes clear that serious legal scrutiny would turn up no end of problems. Just consider what was from a financial perspective, a tiny island in the Trump archipelago of mischief, The Trump Foundation which David Fahrenthold did so much with. Almost every rock Fahrenthold overturned exposed some self-dealing, at least legal violations and often real wrongdoing and as much as anything a wild level of sloppiness and indifference to doing business like even semi-honest people. From one perspective it’s hard to say Trump knowingly broke the law with the Foundation since the whole conduct of the Foundation seemed to be carried on as though none of the relevant laws even existed. Again, the Foundation was just a sideline for Trump. It’s not where he made his big money and ran off from his biggest obligations. That’s how they do business.
If Mueller is taking a serious prosecutor’s lens to Trump’s financial world and the financial worlds of Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort, Mike Flynn and numerous others, there’s going to be a world of hurt for a lot of people. And that is if no meaningful level of 2016 election collusion even happened.
And I don’t think that’s true.
He should say why he thinks that, otherwise he's just another guy speculating.
Because a cursory glance at anything trump does turns up lawsuits, bankruptcy, failure, and more often than not, a combination of the three
Yeah, that's likely. I'm just talking about the bolded. There's no public reporting or any acknowledged evidence about that.
Yes. There is. Evidence of connections is evidence of collusion. Its just not proof.
Personally, I thought Coats was leaning heavily on the word "felt"; he was implying that whatever pressure he might have received was not effective at changing his behavior
Pretty sure this has been the dance all along. Trump probably (I mean, who knows with this guy) never directly said "shut this down," just "hinted" and "suggested" and "hoped" and whatever the hell, so he can claim he never directly asked and they can can claim they never "felt pressure" because they're response was lolfuckoff we're not getting involved.
To get to the heart of it you'd need some direct transcripts of the conversation and that's difficult to drill down to in the 5 minutes each senator had while questioning these guys, especially when they choose not to answer for no legal reason they know of or whatever bullshit.
Personally, I thought Coats was leaning heavily on the word "felt"; he was implying that whatever pressure he might have received was not effective at changing his behavior
Pretty sure this has been the dance all along. Trump probably (I mean, who knows with this guy) never directly said "shut this down," just "hinted" and "suggested" and "hoped" and whatever the hell, so he can claim he never directly asked and they can can claim they never "felt pressure" because they're response was lolfuckoff we're not getting involved.
To get to the heart of it you'd need some direct transcripts of the conversation and that's difficult to drill down to in the 5 minutes each senator had while questioning these guys, especially when they choose not to answer for no legal reason they know of or whatever bullshit.
I'm just laughing at the fact that Trump's own action probably ensured his downfall. At this point we don't really have to speculated if Trump or someone in his campaign staff colluded with the Russians, their behavior and how they reacted to the various Russian hacks, seems to indicate that someone was in the loop but cared more about winning, than they cared about the country's welfare. Hell, he probably removed the ability of any of his underlings to fall on the sword for him because he fired Comey and made it pretty clear, it had everything to do with the Russian investigation.
Well by all accounts, Nixon didn't order Watergate and Clinton wasn't at fault for Whitewater. They were both brought down by their followup actions during the subsequent investigation.
So really Trump may just be following in the proud tradition of impeachment.
Well by all accounts, Nixon didn't order Watergate and Clinton wasn't at fault for Whitewater. They were both brought down by their followup actions during the subsequent investigation.
So really Trump may just be following in the proud tradition of impeachment.
Well Clinton actually wasn't at fault for whitewater. Whitewater was a land deal the Clintons got swindled on. Ken Star wasn't investigating Whitewater at the time.
Also Nixon very much ordered disruption of the Democrats in 1972. He may not have specifically ordered the break in, leaving that to his AG, but he created that climate.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Personally, I thought Coats was leaning heavily on the word "felt"; he was implying that whatever pressure he might have received was not effective at changing his behavior
Comey made a similar distinction as well in his own testimony.
A trap is for fish: when you've got the fish, you can forget the trap. A snare is for rabbits: when you've got the rabbit, you can forget the snare. Words are for meaning: when you've got the meaning, you can forget the words.
Posts
People keep thinking anyone can make Trump do something he doesn't want to. You can't. Nobody can.
Either way, she needs to shut the whole fuck up.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/mueller-probe-examining-whether-donald-trump-obstructed-justice-1497490897 If I believed they were capable of much foresight, I would say they are setting this up to justify firing Mueller for the leaks.
The early leaked RNC talking points: but her emails and the real crime are the leaks.
Washington Post reporter:
images:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCU21etXUAAtfaH.jpg
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCU22pvXgAE0I71.jpg
These are godawful.
The man admitted in a nationally televised interview that he fired Comey because of the investigation. Admitting their first story was a lie and just pretense.
He also admitted this to two Russian diplomats and then insulted Comey as well and the White House doesn't deny it.
I mean come on.
Dunno what that means exactly, but it's interesting.
Trumps personal lawyer was telling White House aides what their best options were legally.
Which, he has no business doing.
Probably that it has more to do with Trump's own feelings. I've always felt like the WH statements are mostly reactionary and removed from Trump himself. "Oh, Trump did another ridiculous thing...let's figure out how to spin this and hope he doesn't throw us under a bus..."
Trump's lawyer saying stuff feels more like something Trump himself had a say in.
Aides are coming out of the woodworks to blame Trump now.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/even-trumps-aides-blame-him-for-obstruction-probe-president-did-this-to-himself Nobody is stopping them from just walking away from their self imposed hell.
Charge him anyway and let SCOTUS figure it out. In for a penny, in for a pound on constitutional crises.
He wanted the public to know that he wasn't under investigation for collision with Russia.
He fired Comey and as a result is now under investigation for obstruction of justice.
(And also probably collusion at this point as well)
My favorite in that list of ways to discredit Mueller is that Trump being under investigation for obstruction PROVES that they couldn't find any collusion.
Because people can only be guilty of one thing.
Especially when it's obstruction.
Yeah, that's likely. I'm just talking about the bolded. There's no public reporting or any acknowledged evidence about that.
Because no one who was guilty would ever obstruct justice into their own investigation.
"In no particular order, he's a traitor, colluded with the enemy, evaded taxes, raped underage prostitutes, had puppy-drowning parties so that's cruelty to animals too, caused the 1995 Kobe earthquake (we're still working on the exact mechanism), sold nuclear secrets to North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, and the Maldives for some reason, dumped untreated sewage directly into several rivers and harbors, stole billions of dollars which he lost in other schemes that then ripped off millions of people, BUT it turns out there wasn't actually a pee tape."
Trump: "VINDICATED! THE PEE TAPE IS LIES!"
Ooohh gotcha
Mueller hasn't even been in the job for more than a month. It takes more time than that to discover there is nothing.
The magnitude of that "fuck you" would be mythic. If it was represented by a twinkie, it would be 35 feet long and weighing approximately 600 pounds.
An organization would be started to buy out the lots in front of all Trump properties with statues of Mueller giving the building the bird. Schiff isn't in my state, I'm stuck with McCain, but damn it I'd vote for him for eternity.
I wonder why DNI Coats is testifying in a closed Intelligence Committee hearing tomorrow?
Now I'm no lawyer, but that sounds an awful lot like he lied to congress (under oath?).
Also it seems increasingly likely there was collusion
Yes. There is. Evidence of connections is evidence of collusion. Its just not proof.
Pretty sure this has been the dance all along. Trump probably (I mean, who knows with this guy) never directly said "shut this down," just "hinted" and "suggested" and "hoped" and whatever the hell, so he can claim he never directly asked and they can can claim they never "felt pressure" because they're response was lolfuckoff we're not getting involved.
To get to the heart of it you'd need some direct transcripts of the conversation and that's difficult to drill down to in the 5 minutes each senator had while questioning these guys, especially when they choose not to answer for no legal reason they know of or whatever bullshit.
Or, like....tapes.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
So really Trump may just be following in the proud tradition of impeachment.
Well Clinton actually wasn't at fault for whitewater. Whitewater was a land deal the Clintons got swindled on. Ken Star wasn't investigating Whitewater at the time.
Comey made a similar distinction as well in his own testimony.