Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Deleted]

So the judge over the Manafort case is a corrupt and possibly senile piece of shit. This will likely end up complicating things a bit.

He started mocking Michael Dreeben, THE Michael Dreeben, openly, started regurgitating Fox News talking points, and admittedly has little interest in the case and feels the prosecution is biased against Manafort because Mueller is investigating Trump.

- - - Updated - - -

Another note is the judge basically already admitted/is assuming Manafort's guilt during his little rant and mocking session. So not only is him talking and acting this way bizarre, but he grossly overstepped.

- - - Updated - - -

The judge is now also seemingly demanding the fully unredacted statements (the same ones being requested by Nunes and goons curiously enough) before he's even willing to budge on Manafort's fucking bank fraud charges. Now they can be released to the judge under seal, which means penalty to the judge if leaked, but the argument is that they're not necessary for this particular case and it still runs the risk of the documents making their way up the chain.

This is starting to sound like a Dan Brown novel. All we need is some Illuminati symbolism and we're golden.

[NYC17]

This is starting to sound like a Dan Brown novel. All we need is some Illuminati symbolism and we're golden.

Well that's what conspiratorial ramblings tend to do.

The judge said some odd things. Judges with lifetime appointments tend to do that. He's not a secret Trump associate embedded in the judiciary.

[Antiganon]

He just took the existing "Fitness, Sports and Nutrition" council and swapped the first two words. Then appointed the coach who received the largest fine the NFL has ever given ever ever.

Didn't see that it included Belichek.

My understanding is that it has historically included highly regarded athletes, doctors in sports medicine, dieticians, etc. I believe it was originally called the "President's Council for Physical Fitness" back in the 90s.

I can see the reason for such a council. No idea why Belichek would be on it. No idea why changing the name and primary goal to emphasize youth involvement in sports (which was already part of the council's goals) over nutrition (which was a pet project of Michelle Obama) is newsworthy.

[NYC17]

Didn't see that it included Belichek.

My understanding is that it has historically included highly regarded athletes, doctors in sports medicine, dieticians, etc. I believe it was originally called the "President's Council for Physical Fitness" back in the 90s.

I can see the reason for such a council. No idea why Belichek would be on it. No idea why changing the name and primary goal to emphasize youth involvement in sports (which was already part of the council's goals) over nutrition (which was a pet project of Michelle Obama) is newsworthy.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...last-week.html

http://www.nbcsports.com/boston/new-...e-letter-trump

That's why he's on it.

[Felya]

I can see the reason for such a council. No idea why Belichek would be on it. No idea why changing the name and primary goal to emphasize youth involvement in sports (which was already part of the council's goals) over nutrition (which was a pet project of Michelle Obama) is newsworthy.

Same reason as Hershel Walker, they are friends of Trump. Not his supporters, but his friends. Walker befriended Trump when he plaid in USFL...

[Breccia]

Well, it's been a day or two, and Rudy hasn't said anyth--

We don’t have to [comply with a subpoena]. He’s the president of the United States.

...okay, that didn't last long.

That's right, Giulliani went on ABC and did three, erm, "questionable" things.

1) Insisted that Mueller, who was specifically tasked with investigating Trump, didn't have the ability to subpoena him. Naturally, this brings up a rather minor question: if Trump can just ignore the subpoena, why is Team Trump coming up with all these conditions for an interview? Giullani did it that same interview. Why not just refuse the subpoena, tell the American people it's for their own good, and move on? His rabid fanbase would buy it, everyone knows it.

Giulliani pretended that some Presidents have blocked a subpoena before. In truth, that's never been tested. In Clinton's case, for example, both sides came to an agreement instead of a subpoena being served. Giulliani should have gone with that. But considering the nature and scope of the investigation, and the lack of a perfect parallel (Nixon had evidence he was required to turn over, and Clinton was in a civil suit, not criminal) Giulliani should have avoided absolutes, especially when it's both untested and most experts say he's wrong.

Also, rule of law? Remember that?

2) Giulliani said he would expect Trump to get the same treatment Clinton got, namely, questions provided ahead of time and not under oath. First of all, lying to the FBI is a crime whether you take a formal oath or not. Second of all, you could make a pretty good case that Clinton wasn't the subject of a criminal special investigation the way Trump is -- and near as I can tell, nobody in Clinton's case got indicted. Correct me if I'm wrong, of course. But most importantly: Trump said the FBI botched Clinton's case. It was even one of the excuses he gave for firing Comey, and why he's still going after the rest of the DoJ. He can't claim the FBI treated Clinton improperly to the point of firing people, then also demand the same special treatment itself.

3) This part:

“I’ve got a client who wants to testify,” Giuliani said.

“Jay [Sekulow] and I said to ourselves ‘My goodness, I hope we get a chance to tell him the risk he’s taking,' ” he added. “So he may testify.”

That's right, that's Giulliani, going on public TV, to say "I hope we get a chance to talk to our client".

Now, that's just mind-bogglingly stupid. Giullani is implying he hasn't been able to tell Trump this. If he's telling the truth, once again, Trump ally gets on TV to talk to Trump cliche (*ding*). If, far more likely, he's lying, he's lying making himself look more incompetent, he's lying making Trump look more stupid, and he's treating his audience like ignorant children. Might have gone better on FOX.

- - - Updated - - -

And here's Nunes, threatening Sessions with contempt.

Nunes is asking for more information from the FBi about the Russia investigation. The FBI, big surprise, doesn't want to give Nunes anything more info on their ongoing investigation into Trump, because Nunes would give it to Trump. That's why Nunes recused himself.

Here's the funny part: Nunes is asking for information on behalf of his House Intelligence Committee.

Which already had a partisan vote to end their investigation.

So Nunes is not only forcing a division amongst what's left of Trump's allies, he's blatantly lying to do it.

[Dontrike]

And here's Nunes, threatening Sessions with contempt.

Nunes is asking for more information from the FBi about the Russia investigation. The FBI, big surprise, doesn't want to give Nunes anything more info on their ongoing investigation into Trump, because Nunes would give it to Trump. That's why Nunes recused himself.

Here's the funny part: Nunes is asking for information on behalf of his House Intelligence Committee.

Which already had a partisan vote to end their investigation.

So Nunes is not only forcing a division amongst what's left of Trump's allies, he's blatantly lying to do it.

How this man has the time to do all of this while sucking Trump's cock I have no idea. That's got to be an all day job.

[Stormspark]

How this man has the time to do all of this while sucking Trump's cock I have no idea. That's got to be an all day job.

He's got Trump's cock so far down his throat it's coming out his ass. I really hope they all go down together.

[Fugus]

He's got Trump's cock so far down his throat it's coming out his ass. I really hope they all go down together.

Given his tiny hands, I think you are giving Trump WAY too much credit to be capable of going that deep.

[NYC17]

Well, it's been a day or two, and Rudy hasn't said anyth--



...okay, that didn't last long.

That's right, Giulliani went on ABC and did three, erm, "questionable" things.

1) Insisted that Mueller, who was specifically tasked with investigating Trump, didn't have the ability to subpoena him. Naturally, this brings up a rather minor question: if Trump can just ignore the subpoena, why is Team Trump coming up with all these conditions for an interview? Giullani did it that same interview. Why not just refuse the subpoena, tell the American people it's for their own good, and move on? His rabid fanbase would buy it, everyone knows it.

Giulliani pretended that some Presidents have blocked a subpoena before. In truth, that's never been tested. In Clinton's case, for example, both sides came to an agreement instead of a subpoena being served. Giulliani should have gone with that. But considering the nature and scope of the investigation, and the lack of a perfect parallel (Nixon had evidence he was required to turn over, and Clinton was in a civil suit, not criminal) Giulliani should have avoided absolutes, especially when it's both untested and most experts say he's wrong.

Also, rule of law? Remember that?

2) Giulliani said he would expect Trump to get the same treatment Clinton got, namely, questions provided ahead of time and not under oath. First of all, lying to the FBI is a crime whether you take a formal oath or not. Second of all, you could make a pretty good case that Clinton wasn't the subject of a criminal special investigation the way Trump is -- and near as I can tell, nobody in Clinton's case got indicted. Correct me if I'm wrong, of course. But most importantly: Trump said the FBI botched Clinton's case. It was even one of the excuses he gave for firing Comey, and why he's still going after the rest of the DoJ. He can't claim the FBI treated Clinton improperly to the point of firing people, then also demand the same special treatment itself.

3) This part:



That's right, that's Giulliani, going on public TV, to say "I hope we get a chance to talk to our client".

Now, that's just mind-bogglingly stupid. Giullani is implying he hasn't been able to tell Trump this. If he's telling the truth, once again, Trump ally gets on TV to talk to Trump cliche (*ding*). If, far more likely, he's lying, he's lying making himself look more incompetent, he's lying making Trump look more stupid, and he's treating his audience like ignorant children. Might have gone better on FOX.

- - - Updated - - -

And here's Nunes, threatening Sessions with contempt.

Nunes is asking for more information from the FBi about the Russia investigation. The FBI, big surprise, doesn't want to give Nunes anything more info on their ongoing investigation into Trump, because Nunes would give it to Trump. That's why Nunes recused himself.

Here's the funny part: Nunes is asking for information on behalf of his House Intelligence Committee.

Which already had a partisan vote to end their investigation.

So Nunes is not only forcing a division amongst what's left of Trump's allies, he's blatantly lying to do it.

And the White House siding with the DOJ...

This time, the Justice Department appears to have the backing of the White House in resisting Nunes' request -- at least for now.
Boyd's letter makes clear that the Justice Department determined after consulting with the White House, FBI and Office of the Director of National Intelligence that it was "not in a position to provide information responsive to your request regarding a specific individual."

We are in the stupidest timeline...

[Breccia]

We all know there's a Trump tweet for every occasion, that proves him to be self-contradictory. Sometimes it's ignorance, sometimes it's hypocrisy.

Turns out, Giulliani's right there with him.

“Then there is a procedure for handling that. You go before a judge and a judge decides whether or not he has a recognizable exemption or privilege from testifying. And if a judge decides that he doesn’t, you have to testify. You don’t have a choice about it.”

-- Rudy Giulliani, 1998.

Wanna see the video?

[Dontrike]

We all know there's a Trump tweet for every occasion, that proves him to be self-contradictory. Sometimes it's ignorance, sometimes it's hypocrisy.

Turns out, Giulliani's right there with him.



-- Rudy Giulliani, 1998.

Wanna see the video?

It's like they just defeat themselves.

[Kujako]

It's like they just defeat themselves.

Hey... do you have ANY idea how hard it is to keep track of all those lies? It's impossible!

[Felya]

It's like they just defeat themselves.

Guiliani turned 9/11 into a business for him self. The guy is as slimy as he looks... pocketed millions to do nothing in Mexico City.

I have a grudge against Guiliani, because of his “clean up” of NYC. By the time I was old enough to get into clubs and bars I was stalking, they were all gone...

[Skroe]

You know, I was all aboard the Rudy 2008 train.

I want to take a time machine back 10 years and hit myself with a baseball bat. I honestly deserve it.

[NYC17]

You know, I was all aboard the Rudy 2008 train.

I want to take a time machine back 10 years and hit myself with a baseball bat. I honestly deserve it.

For how long? He pretty quickly revealed himself to be unequal to the task.

[SirBeef]

For how long? He pretty quickly revealed himself to be unequal to the task.

We knew back during the clean up after 9-11 he was kicking people out of their little housing/resting units to cheat on his wife. We knew prior to him becoming mayor of NY, he was a sleazeball questionable attorney. No one really should have been supporting him in 2008.

[Skroe]

For how long? He pretty quickly revealed himself to be unequal to the task.

I don't remember. I think until McCain won New Hampshire or something.

[Breccia]

You can't have a foreign donation to an inauguration and expect Mueller not to know about it.

Federal investigators are reportedly looking into donations to President Trump's inauguration from donors with links to foreign entities.

Sources told ABC News that special counsel Robert Mueller's team has questioned several inauguration donors with personal or business connections to Russia, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.

Mueller's team has also interviewed longtime Trump friend Tom Barrack, who oversaw the inauguration fundraising efforts, and also operates a fund with hundreds of millions in real estate and other holdings in the Middle East.

Barrack brought in more than $107 million for Trump’s inauguration.

Multiple donors who gave up to $1 million to the Trump inauguration fund have links to the named countries, according to public records reviewed by ABC.

Mueller’s team has reportedly been asking witnesses about Leonard Blavatnik and Andrew Intrater, two American businessmen who made major donations to the inauguration and have business ties to Russia, according to ABC News.

[Shkar]

You can't have a foreign donation to an inauguration and expect Mueller not to know about it.

I'm more surprised Trumpnis supposedly friends with a man named Barrack than the actual important bits.