• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Ed Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Pittsburgh police is ready for a firing of Mueller. The police commander, Victor Joseph, has sent an email to all his employees:
“There is a belief that President Trump will soon move to fire Special Prosecutor Mueller. This would result in a large protest within 24 hours of the firing,” Joseph writes in his email. “Based on this information, beginning tomorrow, April 19 2018 all Major Crimes detectives are required to bring a full uniform and any issued protective equipment (riot gear) with them to work until further notice.”
Click to expand...
 
blutoski said:
I wouldn't take those odds.

I think the strategy at this point is that Trump intends to fire Rosenstein, and replace him with somebody who will then fire Mueller. I don't think Mueller's untouchable.
Click to expand...
McConnell is stalling, probably for fund raising reasons.


The better option (given to Trump by a few of his insiders who mentioned they had given that advice to Trump) is to replace Rosenstein with someone who will rewrite Mueller's mandate to limit any and all financial investigation and give the investigation a short time limit.


I suspect Mueller is more than ready to farm all these discoveries out to the states faster than Trump can replace the state Attorneys General.

It could be close though.

But either way the Democrats are going to cream the Republicans in 2018 and the GOP knows it.
 
quadraginta said:
Oh, I disagree.

I think it would be at least as good, if not better, to put Trump in the position of either having to accept it, or pay the political price of vetoing it, whether or not it was ever voted upon again to try to override the veto.

That price would be considerable.
Click to expand...

Placing him the position to veto the bill would most likely prompt him to fire Mueller along with vetoing it.
 
logger said:
President has the discretion. Has to be just cause but Congress cannot get in the way.
Click to expand...

Quote the part of the Constitution that says that. Also cite cases because I don't think you are right. Congress has in the past appointed special counsels. Ken Starr as a matter of fact if I remember correctly.
 
acbytesla said:
Quote the part of the Constitution that says that. Also cite cases because I don't think you are right. Congress has in the past appointed special counsels. Ken Starr as a matter of fact if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

Back then, there was a law that said Congress could appoint a Special Counsel. That law has been abolished after Ken Starr.
 
ddt said:
Back then, there was a law that said Congress could appoint a Special Counsel. That law has been abolished after Ken Starr.
Click to expand...

I understand that. But the Senate Judiciary committee could appoint Mueller to continue his investigation for them. They could hire most of the lawyers from his team and I'm pretty sure the President couldn't do a damn thing about it. There may also be other legal methods to prevent what is really an attempt by the President to obstruct justice.
 
acbytesla said:
Quote the part of the Constitution that says that. Also cite cases because I don't think you are right. Congress has in the past appointed special counsels. Ken Starr as a matter of fact if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

Nope, I’m not doing it.

It’s quite obvious it’s part of the executive branch. Congress can’t touch it
 
blutoski said:
I wouldn't take those odds.

I think the strategy at this point is that Trump intends to fire Rosenstein, and replace him with somebody who will then fire Mueller. I don't think Mueller's untouchable.
Click to expand...

Trump intended to fire Mueller, but the people around him -- they're the best -- have been protecting the President from his dumber impulses. The outside advice from Bannon and others about firing Rosenstein will just invite more scandal and intrigue. For a long time, the strategy has been to let the investigation proceed but to undermine it by saying Mueller hasn't found anything/is on a fishing expedition etc. The problem is that Trump acts like where there's smoke there's a volcano. I've heard umpteen lawyers say they've never had a client who behaved as guilty as Trump.

What matters isn't what happened, but what Mueller can prove. A lot of Democrats seem to have this idea that Mueller is the republic's savior and will have the Orange Menace ousted, so when the Special Prosecutor eventually presents his findings, Republicans will argue "That's it??" We already see this when they diminish "process crimes" and Manafort's marrow-level corruption because it's not explicitly tied to 2016 Russian interference in the American election.

Comey's more or less right in saying that a removal of Trump let's the American public off the hook. Elections carry greater moral authority (though as a matter of law, the candidate who gets more votes ought to be declared the winner). Democrats should be focusing on ridding the country of Trump in 2020 rather than impeachment hearings -- not least of all because calls for impeachment came before the guy was even sworn in.
 
Cain said:
Trump intended to fire Mueller, but the people around him -- they're the best -- have been protecting the President from his dumber impulses. The outside advice from Bannon and others about firing Rosenstein will just invite more scandal and intrigue. For a long time, the strategy has been to let the investigation proceed but to undermine it by saying Mueller hasn't found anything/is on a fishing expedition etc. The problem is that Trump acts like where there's smoke there's a volcano. I've heard umpteen lawyers say they've never had a client who behaved as guilty as Trump.

What matters isn't what happened, but what Mueller can prove. A lot of Democrats seem to have this idea that Mueller is the republic's savior and will have the Orange Menace ousted, so when the Special Prosecutor eventually presents his findings, Republicans will argue "That's it??" We already see this when they diminish "process crimes" and Manafort's marrow-level corruption because it's not explicitly tied to 2016 Russian interference in the American election.

Comey's more or less right in saying that a removal of Trump let's the American public off the hook. Elections carry greater moral authority (though as a matter of law, the candidate who gets more votes ought to be declared the winner). Democrats should be focusing on ridding the country of Trump in 2020 rather than impeachment hearings -- not least of all because calls for impeachment came before the guy was even sworn in.
Click to expand...

I agree with him....to a point. I would much prefer that the Democrats win back Congress and provide a check against Trump. But if there is actual evidence of this President engaged in fraud or collusion with the Russians, I would like to see a bipartisan impeachment of Trump.

I'm more concerned about our system of laws today than Trump's horrible policies. I see Trump as a clear and present danger to our democratic republic. He is eroding our institutions and inuring the people to a lower standard of ethics. Im very afraid if we are forced to suffer Trump through to 2020, we won't have a democratic republic any longer.
 
acbytesla said:
I agree with him....to a point. I would much prefer that the Democrats win back Congress and provide a check against Trump. But if there is actual evidence of this President engaged in fraud or collusion with the Russians, I would like to see a bipartisan impeachment of Trump.

I'm more concerned about our system of laws today than Trump's horrible policies. I see Trump as a clear and present danger to our democratic republic. He is eroding our institutions and inuring the people to a lower standard of ethics. Im very afraid if we are forced to suffer Trump through to 2020, we won't have a democratic republic any longer.
Click to expand...
Yeah right. The rest of us, the 3 million more than voted for Trump should just deal with the installed criminal enterprise no matter what the FBI investigation uncovers because heaven forbid we cause Comey to admit how badly he ********** up not making the Trump investigation of actual voting fraud public while making the trivial but much pushed claim Clinton belonged in jail over her email server public. :mad:
 
alfaniner said:
I understand the Ferguson and racial-related protests, but this seems strictly political in nature. I don't see how it would raise the anger to a similar level.
Click to expand...

It really should. It would be a sign that the President sees himself as above the law. The only remedy is massive protest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom