Cont: Mueller Investigation pt3

Status
Not open for further replies.
dasmiller said:
I think Mueller has answers to many of them, and Trump (and his lawyers) don't know which ones Mueller already knows.

And that's the perjury trap, IMO. If Trump answers everything truthfully, he'll probably be giving Mueller some incriminating info that Mueller didn't already have. If he lies, he risks lying about stuff that Mueller already knows and exposing himself to perjury charges.
Click to expand...

That's a real shame. I wonder how Trump ever could have put himself into this position in the first place.
 
dasmiller said:
I think Mueller has answers to many of them, and Trump (and his lawyers) don't know which ones Mueller already knows.

And that's the perjury trap, IMO. If Trump answers everything truthfully, he'll probably be giving Mueller some incriminating info that Mueller didn't already have. If he lies, he risks lying about stuff that Mueller already knows and exposing himself to perjury charges.
Click to expand...


Trump lies so much that even his lies contradict each other.

And I doubt very seriously that he could keep them all straight even if he wanted to. He seems to live in the present only. Past and future have no relevance to anything he does as far as he is concerned.
 
quadraginta said:
Trump lies so much that even his lies contradict each other.

And I doubt very seriously that he could keep them all straight even if he wanted to. He seems to live in the present only. Past and future have no relevance to anything he does as far as he is concerned.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

For me, the only way to make sense of President Trump’s positions was to assume his philosophy is to look around the room and say whatever he thinks will make him look good to the people standing before him. Others put a finer point on it and assume that he says whatever he thinks will impress the white men in the room.

That’s why he can say something and the very next day not only say something completely different but also deny that he held a different stance the day before. It can be surreal.
 
CapelDodger said:
The subject of the investigation is Russian interference in the 2016 election and matters relating to it. The aim of the investigation is to establish, to the extent possible, what happened.
Click to expand...

Is it any interference or just that perceived to be by Trump?
 
Drysdale said:
Is it any interference or just that perceived to be by Trump?
Click to expand...

Mmm. To quote from the mandate letter...

(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)
Click to expand...

The starting point is Trump's campaign and Russia. That's not specifically Trump, quite obviously. Also quite obvious is that Trump is the biggest and most important player there.

So... not any interference initially, nor just that perceived to be by Trump, but if they find evidence of other criminal interference in the process of investigating, that can be investigated, too. Pending, of course, approval by Rosenstein, at present.
 
Rosenstein's double role as guardian of the investigation and potentially important witness is problematic.
I think shielding Mueller and not testifying might be the lesser evil, but it would be better for Congress to make the investigation Trump-proof and then for Rosenstein to recuse himself.
 
Aridas said:
The starting point is Trump's campaign and Russia. That's not specifically Trump, quite obviously. Also quite obvious is that Trump is the biggest and most important player there.

So... not any interference initially, nor just that perceived to be by Trump, but if they find evidence of other criminal interference in the process of investigating, that can be investigated, too. Pending, of course, approval by Rosenstein, at present.
Click to expand...

"(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a)"​

And unlike a certain recent FBI investigation, this one is not hamstrung and straight-jacketed by the White House.

The reference to 28 C.F.R. Section 600.4(a) means that Mueller can investigate and prosecute “federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel’s investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses.”
In other words, anyone committing a Federal crime in attempting to interfere with the Special Investigation, such as witness tampering (Paul Manafort, are you listening?) is also subject to prosecution.

There is a very good explanation here..

https://blog.volkovlaw.com/2017/05/understanding-special-counsel-muellers-authorization/

.. of example how to understand the terms of the Special Investigation
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Rosenstein's double role as guardian of the investigation and potentially important witness is problematic.
I think shielding Mueller and not testifying might be the lesser evil, but it would be better for Congress to make the investigation Trump-proof and then for Rosenstein to recuse himself.
Click to expand...

Its certainty problematic for Trump.

Maybe that's why Trump hasn't fired Rosenstein... he knows that if he does, Rosenstein could go right to Mueller and ask him what he wants to know.
 
Papadopoulos to testify against Alexander Downer to Congress inquiry.



https://www.theage.com.au/world/nor...testify-on-downer-drinks-20181013-p509hv.html


Papadopoulous, sentenced last month in Washington DC to 14 days' jail for lying to the FBI, is scheduled to testify behind closed doors before members of the House Judiciary and Oversight committee on October 25.
It was a meeting over gin and tonics at a London wine bar in 2016 between Papadopoulos and Downer months before the presidential election that has been credited as the spark that launched the FBI probe into Russia's role in Trump's victory.
Papadopoulos has used Twitter and media interviews to claim the Downer drinks were a set up, the former Australian foreign affairs minister recorded their conversation and the Australian and British governments "were illegally spying on the Trump campaign".


....




Downer has denied Papadopoulos' claims.
Downer told The Australian newspaper Papadopoulos, during their London drinks, mentioned "the Russians might use material that they have on Hillary Clinton in the lead-up to the election, which may be damaging".
Click to expand...

I know who Congress is going to believe.
 
I'm wondering about one thing. Can NY State/Feds justifiably subpoena Trump's tax returns? Since it is very clear that tax fraud was practiced in passing on Fred Trump's wealth to his children. Isn't that probable cause to follow the money and see what other crimes were committed?
 
acbytesla said:
I'm wondering about one thing. Can NY State/Feds justifiably subpoena Trump's tax returns? Since it is very clear that tax fraud was practiced in passing on Fred Trump's wealth to his children. Isn't that probable cause to follow the money and see what other crimes were committed?
Click to expand...


Here's the law. I don't know if a subpoena is the correct procedure, but law enforcement can definitely access tax returns if they have cause. I've heard a number of TV commentators say they're sure Mueller already has Trump's.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/6103

What's more interesting is that certain Congressional committees can obtain tax returns, and you can be sure that if the Democrats get the House back we'll be seeing plenty.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi vowed this week to demand President Trump's tax returns if Democrats win control of the House of Representatives next month.

Pelosi, seeking to regain her gavel as House speaker after elections in November, told The San Francisco Chronicle editorial board that the move "is one of the first things we'd do — that's the easiest thing in the world. That's nothing."
Click to expand...
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/11/6566...-demand-and-get-trumps-tax-returns-here-s-how
 
It's been said before but bears repeating:

Trump refuses to release his tax records for a reason. He's hiding something.
Trump's attacks on the FBI, Sessions, the Mueller investigation and Mueller himself are not because he has nothing to hide, but because he has something to hide.

It's impossible for his actions to be read any other way except by the Trump Kool Aid drinkers.
 
acbytesla said:
I'm wondering about one thing. Can NY State/Feds justifiably subpoena Trump's tax returns? Since it is very clear that tax fraud was practiced in passing on Fred Trump's wealth to his children. Isn't that probable cause to follow the money and see what other crimes were committed?
Click to expand...

So this isn't about Russian interference at all in your view, it's to nail Trump for anything possible? Is that correct?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom