Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Breccia]

The NYTimes article about the latest subpoenas, as linked in the dedicated thread.

The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, has subpoenaed the Trump Organization in recent weeks to turn over documents, including some related to Russia, according to two people briefed on the matter. The order is the first known instance of the special counsel demanding records directly related to President Trump’s businesses, bringing the investigation closer to the president.

The breadth of the subpoena was not clear, nor was it clear why Mr. Mueller issued it instead of simply asking for the documents from the company, an umbrella organization that encompasses Mr. Trump’s business ventures. Mr. Mueller ordered the Trump Organization to hand over records related to Russia and other topics he is investigating, the people said.

The subpoena is the latest indication that the investigation, which Mr. Trump’s lawyers once regularly assured him would be completed by now, will continue for at least several more months. Word of the subpoena came as Mr. Mueller appears to be broadening his inquiry to examine the role foreign money may have played in funding Mr. Trump’s political activities. In recent weeks, Mr. Mueller’s investigators have questioned witnesses, including an adviser to the United Arab Emirates, about the flow of Emirati money into the United States.

Mr. Mueller has already indicted 13 Russians and three companies accused of meddling in the 2016 presidential campaign, and on Thursday, the Trump administration included them in sanctions it leveled at Moscow as punishment for interference in the campaign and “malicious cyberattacks.”

The Trump Organization has typically complied with requests from congressional investigators for documents for their own inquiries into Russian election interference, and there was no indication the company planned to fight Mr. Mueller’s order.

“Since July 2017, we have advised the public that the Trump Organization is fully cooperative with all investigations, including the special counsel, and is responding to their requests,” said Alan S. Futerfas, a lawyer representing the Trump Organization. “This is old news and our assistance and cooperation with the various investigations remains the same today.”

The White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, reiterated during her daily briefing that the president was cooperating with the special counsel inquiry and referred further questions to the Trump Organization.

There are few other publicly known examples of Mr. Mueller using subpoenas. In January, he ordered the president’s former chief strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, to appear before a grand jury. Mr. Mueller dropped the subpoena after Mr. Bannon agreed to be interviewed by investigators.

Mr. Mueller could run afoul of a line the president has warned him not to cross. Though it is not clear how much of the subpoena is related to Mr. Trump’s business outside ties to Russia, Mr. Trump said in an interview with The New York Times in July that the special counsel would be crossing a red line if he looked into his family’s finances beyond any relationship with Russia. The president declined to say how he would respond if he concluded that the special counsel had crossed that line.

Mr. Trump campaigned as a businessman whose deal-making prowess would translate directly into reforming Washington. The argument helped propel him to the White House, but the Trump Organization has been a magnet for criticism from Democrats, ethics watchdogs and some Republicans, who expressed concern that he remained vulnerable to conflicts of interest because he did not separate from the company.

Before Mr. Trump was sworn in, he pledged that he would stay uninvolved in his businesses while in office but insisted it would be too punitive for his business partners for him to divest from the company altogether.

Among the Trump Organization’s holdings are golf clubs, hotels and licensing agreements for the use of the Trump name on properties and other products. While its holdings are complex, the company has always been run like a small, family-owned business; Mr. Trump brought in his three eldest children to help run the enterprise.

The Trump Organization is not publicly held, making it difficult to determine where it receives its money and invests it. The company has said that it never had real estate holdings in Russia, but witnesses recently interviewed by Mr. Mueller have been asked about a possible real estate deal in Moscow.

In 2015, a longtime business associate of Mr. Trump’s, Felix Sater, emailed Mr. Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen, at his Trump Organization account claiming he had ties to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia and that building a Trump Tower in Moscow would help Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign. Mr. Trump signed a nonbinding letter of intent for the project in 2015 and discussed it at least three times with Mr. Cohen.

A revealing comment about Russia by Eric Trump, the president’s middle son, also drew scrutiny when it emerged last year. James Dodson, a longtime golf writer from North Carolina, said offhand in a radio interview that Eric Trump, who oversees the golf courses for the Trump Organization, told him in 2013 that the Trumps relied on Russian investors to back their golf clubs. Eric Trump has denied those remarks.

Mr. Mueller was appointed in May to investigate whether Mr. Trump’s campaign colluded with the Russians to influence the 2016 election and any other matters that may arise from the inquiry.

A month later, the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, threatened to quit after Mr. Trump asked him to have Mr. Mueller fired because the president believed he had conflict-of-interest issues that precluded him from running the special counsel investigation.

Mr. Mueller is also examining whether the president has tried to obstruct the investigation.

Mr. Trump’s lawyers are in negotiations with Mr. Mueller’s office about whether and how to allow his investigators to interview the president. Mr. Mueller’s office has shared topics it wants to discuss with the president, according to two people familiar with the talks. The lawyers have advised Mr. Trump to refuse an interview, but the president has said he wants to do it, as he believes he has done nothing wrong and can easily answer investigators’ questions.

At the same time, Mr. Trump is considering whether to bring on a new lawyer to help represent him in the special counsel’s investigation. Last week, Mr. Trump spoke with Emmet T. Flood, a longtime Washington lawyer who represented former President Bill Clinton during the impeachment process, about coming into the White House to deal with the inquiry.

It should be noted that this kind of subpoena is standard for a white collar crime investigation. It would be 100% worthless to look at Trump's known, admitted fiscal connections with Russia, and not investigate to see how deep they go and how tainted they are. This move would have happened sooner or later.

[Stormspark]

The NYTimes article about the latest subpoenas, as linked in the dedicated thread.



It should be noted that this kind of subpoena is standard for a white collar crime investigation. It would be 100% worthless to look at Trump's known, admitted fiscal connections with Russia, and not investigate to see how deep they go and how tainted they are. This move would have happened sooner or later.

Yep, and the fact that Mueller is doing it now, with all the rumors that he is going to be "fired", means he has a plan.

All I want is for Trump to be publicly humiliated (dragged out of the white house in cuffs), lose absolutely everything he has, be miserable the rest of his life, and die in prison.

[Somewhatconcerned]

Agreed. In any reasonable country with reasonable laws and checks and balances, he would've already been dragged out in cuffs. The problem is, the framers of the US constitution never foresaw using political parties to completely subvert all of the checks and balances we have. The country is extremely close to either 1) dictatorship, or 2) civil war if he isn't removed soon.

Right now, Trump himself and everyone who still supports him ALL need to be removed (at the minimum) and put in jail (preferably). I only wish the bar for treason wasn't so high, because they are all guilty as hell of it.

If he's not removed it's going to lead to civil war. We can only hope that the military refuse orders if he tries to nuke or invade someplace. The rest of the world needs to put sanctions on the US, like yesterday. Canada, Mexico, and the entire EU. Complete total trade sactions. And they basically need to say "get back to us when you get rid of the clownshow and actually have a properly functioning government".

Right now, the only chance this country has is...Mueller knows all this.

Not a fan of this administration but your post is super dramatic.

Civil war? Really?

[mvaliz]

Yep, and the fact that Mueller is doing it now, with all the rumors that he is going to be "fired", means he has a plan.

All I want is for Trump to be publicly humiliated (dragged out of the white house in cuffs), lose absolutely everything he has, be miserable the rest of his life, and die in prison.

That's what I want to see at this point as well is to see that douchebag do the perp walk.

I've also joked that if Dump truly believed that America was greater in the past than in the present, than we should give him what he wants and Tar n' Feather his fat-ass and parade him across all 50 states (via military parade, of course! ;P) so we can throw eggs and rotten veggies at him.

- - - Updated - - -

If he's not removed it's going to lead to civil war. We can only hope that the military refuse orders if he tries to nuke or invade someplace.

I don't believe it would lead to Civil War. A fukton of protests, absolutely. A HUGE concerted effort to vote out all the remaining Republicans n' Dump, Absolutely. But I don't believe it would lead to Civil War. The fact we didn't do this when the Orange Turd won the election is proof that one side is still reasonably more sensible than the other...

Now... on the OTHER side of the coin, however...

If Dump does get impeached/voted out, while I do not believe there will be a full on Civil War I DO however believe enough of his followers will form militas and America is going to see a series of week-long mass shootings by his most deplorable retinue, desiring to start a Civil War.

My stance on a "Civil War" is simple, it doesn't matter which side stands up. The reality is that whichever side rises up is going to get quashed VERY quickly! Whomever rises up and takes arms is going to go up against the United States Armed Servicemen, nevermind SWAT and police officers. And the Army/SWAT are going to fight them unquestioningly for one reason only - to protect innocent AMERICANS from being shot. Not Conservative lives, not Liberal lives. innocent AMERICAN citizen lives who don't participate in this.

This isn't the 1860s anymore where the US military and regular milita are armed with the relatively the same weapons sans cannons. You're talking AR-15s and Army Surplus Gear vs Sniper Rifles and mutherfukin Tanks. And their primary misison isn't "which side are you on". It's going to be "Restore Order via stopping the shooters".

[Somewhatconcerned]

That's what I want to see at this point as well is to see that douchebag do the perp walk.

I've also joked that if Dump truly believed that America was greater in the past than in the present, than we should give him what he wants and Tar n' Feather his fat-ass and parade him across all 50 states (via military parade, of course! ;P) so we can throw eggs and rotten veggies at him.

- - - Updated - - -



I don't believe it would lead to Civil War. A fukton of protests, absolutely. A HUGE concerted effort to vote out all the remaining Republicans n' Dump, Absolutely. But I don't believe it would lead to Civil War. The fact we didn't do this when the Orange Turd won the election is proof that one side is still reasonably more sensible than the other...

Now... on the OTHER side of the coin, however...

If Dump does get impeached/voted out, while I do not believe there will be a full on Civil War I DO however believe enough of his followers will form militas and America is going to see a series of week-long mass shootings of his most deplorable retinue, desiring to start a Civil War.

My stance on a "Civil War" is simple, it doesn't matter which side stands up. The reality is that whichever side rises up is going to get quashed VERY quickly! Whomever rises up and takes arms is going to go up against the United States Armed Servicemen, nevermind SWAT and police officers. And they're going to do it for one reason only - to protect innocent AMERICANS from being shot. Not Conservative lives, not Liberal lives. innocent AMERICAN citizen lives who don't participate in this.

This isn't the 1860s anymore where the US military and regular milita are armed with the relatively the same weapons sans cannons. You're talking AR-15s and Army Surplus Gear vs Sniper Rifles and mutherfukin Tanks.

But what if they drape themselves with the confederate flag? Does that give them bonus powers?

[mvaliz]

But what if they drape themselves with the confederate flag? Does that give them bonus powers?

No, but it sure does make them a much easier to see target for the Military to aim at - forsure! ;P

[FeedsOnDevTears]

Not a fan of this administration but your post is super dramatic.

Civil war? Really?

Probably not a "these states secede and join the new/old President while those states stay loyal to the new/old President" civil war right away, but it doesn't take much imagination to see widespread terror attacks by Trumpers against 'the enemy': Democrats, liberals, minorities of all stripes. Trump would probably egg them on via twitter. It would start with an increase in small-scale violence, attacks on minorities by individuals or small groups, vandalism of minority business or mosques. You'd have some bombings too, and a few white-nationalist (aka Nazi Republicansi) motivated mass shootings. The media would hype it all to hell, and the number of attacks would ramp up.

The victims wouldn't all just take it, or rely on the law. You'd have retaliatory attacks, too. And at the same time, the cops, and the federal, state and local governments are going to find themselves picking sides, whether they want to or not. Being really neutral is going to be HARD in a lot of places. (And most Republican governments won't be interested in being neutral anyway.) So then you start getting militias - basically factional gangs with guns. AND clashes around state borders as people give up and flee the nastiest and most chaotic states.

So now we're three-six months in. There are terror attacks and factional violence like Americans haven't seen since the 60s. Only the media are covering it all non-stop, people are getting killed over what they posted on Facebook, and the White House (and too many Republicans in Congress) are feeding the fires instead of putting them out. Law and order is breaking down in some cities and counties as the authorities choose factional allegiance over doing their jobs, or are rendered powerless by the ongoing violence.

Sure, governors will call up the national guard to enforce order, but in some places (and probably mostly strongly Republican places) that will mean very biased martial law. Or they just throw up their hands and let some places descend into lawlessness. In other places, you'll have (again, mostly right-wing) milita fighting the national guard in a guerilla war and morphing into straight-up terror organizations as they do. And the President and many Republicans will be cheering on the forces of anarchy and chaos, not law and order.

There are a lot of different ways it can all go, but if we get to this point, yeah, it'll be rightly called a civil war.

[Somewhatconcerned]

Probably not a "these states secede and join the new/old President while those states stay loyal to the new/old President" civil war right away, but it doesn't take much imagination to see widespread terror attacks by Trumpers against 'the enemy': Democrats, liberals, minorities of all stripes. Trump would probably egg them on via twitter. It would start with an increase in small-scale violence, attacks on minorities by individuals or small groups, vandalism of minority business or mosques. You'd have some bombings too, and a few white-nationalist (aka Nazi Republicansi) motivated mass shootings. The media would hype it all to hell, and the number of attacks would ramp up.

The victims wouldn't all just take it, or rely on the law. You'd have retaliatory attacks, too. And at the same time, the cops, and the federal, state and local governments are going to find themselves picking sides, whether they want to or not. Being really neutral is going to be HARD in a lot of places. (And most Republican governments won't be interested in being neutral anyway.) So then you start getting militias - basically factional gangs with guns. AND clashes around state borders as people give up and flee the nastiest and most chaotic states.

So now we're three-six months in. There are terror attacks and factional violence like Americans haven't seen since the 60s. Only the media are covering it all non-stop, people are getting killed over what they posted on Facebook, and the White House (and too many Republicans in Congress) are feeding the fires instead of putting them out. Law and order is breaking down in some cities and counties as the authorities choose factional allegiance over doing their jobs, or are rendered powerless by the ongoing violence.

Sure, governors will call up the national guard to enforce order, but in some places (and probably mostly strongly Republican places) that will mean very biased martial law. Or they just throw up their hands and let some places descend into lawlessness. In other places, you'll have (again, mostly right-wing) milita fighting the national guard in a guerilla war and morphing into straight-up terror organizations as they do. And the President and many Republicans will be cheering on the forces of anarchy and chaos, not law and order.

There are a lot of different ways it can all go, but if we get to this point, yeah, it'll be rightly called a civil war.

What you describe will almost certainly never happen.

[SirBeef]

It shouldn't be. But Trump is basically purging of anyone who's disagreed with him and setting the stage to replace Mueller.

I would also be concerned about conflict with Iran. Just about every person he's bringing in or will be bringing in, if reports continue to be true, are Iran warhawks and Trump going to war with Iran to protect himself is entirely possible.

Yet we needed to worry about Hilary.

[Mormolyce]

So has anything been happening in this fake Russia-ghazi investigation as of late? Haven't heard anything.

Those must be some damn impressive earmuffs then lol.

- - - Updated - - -

Yet we needed to worry about Hilary.

She was going to start WWIII with Russia.

And... something about emails?

Oh, and she called neo-Nazis and white supremacists "deplorable". Can't have a President throwing out insults like that.

[Ripster42]

Not a fan of this administration but your post is super dramatic.

Civil war? Really?

Talk to roger stone about it. He's been saying there will be a civil war over this since last year.

That being said, I don't think this ends up in a civil war.

[Breccia]

So there's more information available about these sanctions the US just put on Russia.

First of all, a lot of the targets of the sanctions were those Mueller indicted. I think we can all agree, that's kind of mandatory. If there's enough evidence to convince a grand jury, maybe doing business with them is off-limits until the issue is resolved. Which, because Putin won't extradite, is "never".

But then comes the rest.

Along with imposing sanctions on 19 individuals and five entities including Russian intelligence services, the Trump administration publicly blamed Moscow for the first time for a campaign of cyber attacks stretching back at least two years that targeted the U.S. power grid including nuclear facilities.

The United States also joined Britain, Germany and France in demanding that Russia explain a military-grade nerve toxin attack in England on a former Russian double agent, with Trump saying: “It certainly looks like the Russians were behind” the incident.

But congressional critics called the administration’s action a woefully inadequate retaliation for Russia interference in the 2016 U.S. election and other actions.

“The sanctions today are a grievous disappointment and fall far short of what is needed to respond to that attack on our democracy let alone deter Russia’s escalating aggression, which now includes a chemical weapons attack on the soil of our closest ally,” said Adam Schiff, top Democrat on the House of Representatives Intelligence Committee.

“Today’s action, using authorities provided by Congress, is an important step by the administration. But more must be done,” Republican House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce added. He later urged Trump to sanction Russia for the poisoning in Britain.

So there's informed bipartisan criticism. Here's why.

“They didn’t hit Putin’s power structure and they didn’t team up with Europe,” Brian O’Toole, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council think tank and a former senior adviser at the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, said of the administration’s actions.

A senior administration official told Reuters that Trump, who campaigned on warmer ties with Putin, had grown exasperated with Russian activity. “A classic bully,” the official said of Putin.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders, asked if Russia was a friend or foe, told reporters: “Russia is going to have to make that determination. They’re going to have to decide whether they want to be a good actor or a bad actor.”

In Moscow, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Russia was preparing retaliatory measures, as U.S.-Russian relations plunged again.

So, the sanctions don't have enough sting to be felt, and it's apparently up to Russia to decide what their relationship with us will be. Yep, official word from the WH: it's up to Russia.

"But what about further penalties?"

Well...don't hold your breath.

But Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin was unequivocal in saying that Thursday’s action by his department “counters Russia’s continuing destabilizing activities, ranging from interference in the 2016 election to conducting destructive cyber-attacks.”

Mnuchin said there would be additional sanctions against Russian government officials and oligarchs “for their destabilizing activities.” Mnuchin did not give a time frame for those sanctions, which he said would sever the individuals’ access to the U.S. financial system.

There you have it. These sanctions basically cover everything -- including the attack on the election, which Team Trump now admits Putin did -- and it has little to no weight behind it. And, while Trump promises more sanctions with the same level of credibility he told Canada about the trade balance, there's no word on how or when -- and remember, these sanctions signed by Trump crying like a bitch are a full six months behind schedule. I put zero to negative chances Trump will go after Putin around midterms. You can interpret my reason for such as you will.

- - - Updated - - -

Hey remember when Trump's lawyers told him the investigation would be over by Thanksgiving?

MSNBC remembers. They called it "It sounds like that was a bedtime story the president’s lawyers were telling to make him feel better about this investigation."

[Stormspark]

Looks like the rest of this week/weekend is going to pass silently with no more news. Not that I'd expect any. Mueller knows what he's doing.

[Breccia]

The GOP members of the HIC are trying to defend their decision to end the Russia probe, despite half the people not coming in to answer questions and some of those who did refusing to answer them. In fact, they're even trying to suggest the US Intelligence community didn't actually mean "Russia attacked the election" when they said "Russia attacked the election", because -- and this one is an exact quote -- “It’s a matter of, do we have Vladimir Putin on tape saying ‘I prefer Donald Trump’ — no, we don’t.”

That's right: the GOP HIC members are claiming that US Intel didn't have ironclad proof enough to say there was a problem...despite the move to disband without getting answers from half the people they asked.

- - - Updated - - -

"Reluctantly I have concluded that President Trump is a serious threat to US national security. He is refusing to protect vital US interests from active Russian attacks. It is apparent that he is for some unknown reason under the sway of Mr Putin."

Retired four-star General McCaffrey

[Felya]

Looks like the rest of this week/weekend is going to pass silently with no more news. Not that I'd expect any. Mueller knows what he's doing.

lol McCabe was just fired...

[Breccia]

lol McCabe was just fired...

Yeah, but that wasn't Mueller's investigation. That was "but her emails".

As it's off-topic I'll be brief: Sessions is desperate to hold onto his job, and based on Trump's tweets, this was one way to do it. It has no real effect -- McCabe wasn't even in the office, wasn't running anything, and would be gone in two days -- but he gets to satiate the ire of Trump by carrying out his wishes: firing someone two days before retirement and shortly before they turn 50.

McCabe was basically fired for talking to the press. Trump is still under investigation for collusion with Russia -- his own businesses have now been subpoena-ed -- obstruction of justice -- for, amongst other things, firing Comey to end the investigation and then bragging about it to Russia -- and other monetary crimes. Trump needed a distraction after yet another week of losing badly. This was it.

- - - Updated - - -

I guess as long as it's being broached anyhow, McCabe is now claiming his firing is an attempt to undermine the Mueller investigation.

It won't work. McCabe's supposed transgression had nothing to do with the Russia probe; whether or not McCabe did anything from leak to the press or assassinate someone on Clinton's behalf doesn't make Trump any less guilty; and Mueller is the fuckin' Terminator.

[mvaliz]

lol McCabe was just fired...

Also, Dumbfuck Dump's laywer just called for the Mueller Probe to end its investigation into Russia, sighting that it was manufactured by James Comey. >_<

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/17/polit...ion/index.html

I mean, holyshit... could you even imagine the furor from the Dump Supporters that would've happen if a Democrats' lawyer (particularly Hillary or Obama) called for an investigation into them (one that has produced guilty pleas and solid results) to end!? >_<

It still shows how much of a knife-edge we're on with our Gov ATM. We're literally challenging our entire due-process system and undermining our decades of established justice system soley in favor of not making a Dumbfuck they elected look worse than he already does! =/

[zorkuus]

Honestly at some point, everyone who is has any moral fiber should just walk out of government until something is done. Shut it down.

The republicans are soulless, the democrats are spineless. The change can only come from the people I'm afraid.

[Dontrike]

Also, Dumbfuck Dump's laywer just called for the Mueller Probe to end its investigation into Russia, sighting that it was manufactured by James Comey. >_<

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/17/polit...ion/index.html

I mean, holyshit... could you even imagine the furor from the Dump Supporters that would've happen if a Democrats' lawyer (particularly Hillary or Obama) called for an investigation into them (one that has produced guilty pleas and solid results) to end!? >_<

It still shows how much of a knife-edge we're on with our Gov ATM. We're literally challenging our entire due-process system and undermining our decades of established justice system soley in favor of not making a Dumbfuck they elected look worse than he already does! =/

If this obstruction was any more obvious they'd just be saying it like a slogan for some commercial. "Are you obstructing?" "Man, I'm so obstructing right now" "Yeah!" and they all high five.

[Stormspark]

Also, Dumbfuck Dump's laywer just called for the Mueller Probe to end its investigation into Russia, sighting that it was manufactured by James Comey. >_<

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/17/polit...ion/index.html

I mean, holyshit... could you even imagine the furor from the Dump Supporters that would've happen if a Democrats' lawyer (particularly Hillary or Obama) called for an investigation into them (one that has produced guilty pleas and solid results) to end!? >_<

It still shows how much of a knife-edge we're on with our Gov ATM. We're literally challenging our entire due-process system and undermining our decades of established justice system soley in favor of not making a Dumbfuck they elected look worse than he already does! =/

I can already hear Mueller's response to this. How do you say "piss off" in legalese?