Mega-Thread: Mueller investigation

[Breccia]

perjury trap lmao what a tool.

That is laughable. Like "I swear, Marge, I thought you'd never find out!"

Don't lie to the FBI. Like, end of story.

[cubby]

I tend to believe what I've read in some comment, that the most damning thing the papers could reveal, the one he really does not want up to know, is that he's not rich. That he's not the great dealmaker he wants us to see him as. That he really is just a money-launderer for the Russian mob, of which, if this is true, he's not worried about the criminal implications, but the optics and power dynamics of that relationship.

That's an interesting thought. And it makes a lot of sense. He's all about the optics, and if his federal tax returns show him to be not rich, then his image is forever tainted.

[Deleted]

I'm trying to google what his net worth is so that i can be depressed. I'm wasting my time not becoming a con man.

[cubby]

Agreed, and will likely play out the same way for everything else--nothing says power like complete, structural unaccountability.

And historically it's how he operates. Do some illegal shit. Lawyer up and win because his daddy's money always allowed him to our maneuver the competition - in most cases the little guy.

[Breccia]

In the "worth mentioning, but I'll believe it when I see it" Whitaker is meeting with the DoJ ethics team to discuss...well...his possible recusal.

Again, I'll believe it when I see it. But...well, just picture Trump's face if he fires Sessions for recusing himself, and the guy who replaces Sessions recuses himself.

Someone wake the Mooch.

[cubby]

In the "worth mentioning, but I'll believe it when I see it" Whitaker is meeting with the DoJ ethics team to discuss...well...his possible recusal.

Again, I'll believe it when I see it. But...well, just picture Trump's face if he fires Sessions for recusing himself, and the guy who replaces Sessions recuses himself.

Someone wake the Mooch.

IF that happens, and as you said it's a huge if, the staffer in charge of breaking that news to Cheeto needs to bring their banned phone and video the reaction, then immediately release it to interwebs and resign.

Actually, nvm - not release, but record it, and then sell it to CNN.

[Skroe]

I'm going to go out on a limb here:

-> Trump Jr. won't be indicted this coming round (before Thanksgiving).
-> This is the last round of indictments before the "innermost circle" round that includes Trump Jr. That round will hit in January, after there is a Democratic Congress to protect Mueller.
-> Stone, maybe Assange, and some people we aren't familiar with will be indicted, along with a bunch of people whose names aren't well known (yet).
-> This will be the most "collusion-y" of the indictments yet, in contrast to the other ones and plea deals. It will set the collusion side of the argument for "the why" as to why Trump obstructed justice.


Timeline will be as follows:
-> The "Collusion Indictments Part 1", featuring the outer-inner circle + associates and contacts, in November
-> The "Collusion Indictments Part 2", featuring Trump Junior, some more inner-cicle, and contacts in January
-> Mueller goes after Trump in March / April with the submission of the final report, and a recommendation to Congress to impeach Trump.

- - - Updated - - -

In the "worth mentioning, but I'll believe it when I see it" Whitaker is meeting with the DoJ ethics team to discuss...well...his possible recusal.

Again, I'll believe it when I see it. But...well, just picture Trump's face if he fires Sessions for recusing himself, and the guy who replaces Sessions recuses himself.

Someone wake the Mooch.

I wholeheartedly believe that we're within sight of the breaking point as to where people stop taking proverbial bullets for Trump.

The huge loss Trump suffered in November was crucial (and always was), because it painted him as an electoral loser. His actions since them have made it look even worse for him. He keeps shitting away his power. It's getting to the point it's going to be very easy to see fewer and fewer people wanting to go to bat for him, in any way, when doing so will tarnish them too.

Like his pending firing of Neilsen... who the hell is going to want that job. He's going to get a sycophant with a dead end future (think Rudy), or a nobody who can't say no to a chance in the big chair. Same thing with Attorney General. Who is going to want that job and be subjected to Trump's ongoing abuse and lack of support when they are FORCED to be more ethical than he is?

Nobody.
@Dacien

[Flarelaine]

I think he could easily have a stroke over such news. I think that is his out, having or faking a stroke leading to being replaced for health reasons. The Dems are not going to go after him because let's face it, the optics would be disastrous.

It would also give a very convenient out to the GOP. People would get time to forget Trump's antics and he would make any successor look sage and wise by comparison.

[Belize]

It would also give a very convenient out to the GOP. People would get time to forget Trump's antics and he would make any successor look sage and wise by comparison.

Trump would never concede though, nor resign. Short of dropping dead, he will never leave the WH early.

[Ripster42]

In the "worth mentioning, but I'll believe it when I see it" Whitaker is meeting with the DoJ ethics team to discuss...well...his possible recusal.

Again, I'll believe it when I see it. But...well, just picture Trump's face if he fires Sessions for recusing himself, and the guy who replaces Sessions recuses himself.

Someone wake the Mooch.

I'm going to guess this is going to head to the courts, not just about his recusal over mueller, but as to his appointment generally as AG.

[Breccia]

not just about his recusal over mueller

Oh, absolutely. But I think everyone here knows (some will even admit it) that Whitaker knows he has one job. The second he hears the clock ticking, Mueller gets fired. This meeting is, my admitted conjecture, "is there any way I can get out of this without recusing myself?"

If the answer is "Yes" Whitaker will take that as a mandate and run with it, until as you point out his generic legitimacy is being destroyed, at which point, fire Mueller, rocks fall, everyone dies.

If the answer is "No" Whitaker will...honestly, probably come out better. He'll recuse himself as required, lawsuits like these will basically dry up, and Trump won't be able to touch him without an actual reason -- which is 2020 barring massive fuckupery, which Whitaker will spend every day not doing.

[cubby]

Oh, absolutely. But I think everyone here knows (some will even admit it) that Whitaker knows he has one job. The second he hears the clock ticking, Mueller gets fired. This meeting is, my admitted conjecture, "is there any way I can get out of this without recusing myself?"

If the answer is "Yes" Whitaker will take that as a mandate and run with it, until as you point out his generic legitimacy is being destroyed, at which point, fire Mueller, rocks fall, everyone dies.

If the answer is "No" Whitaker will...honestly, probably come out better. He'll recuse himself as required, lawsuits like these will basically dry up, and Trump won't be able to touch him without an actual reason -- which is 2020 barring massive fuckupery, which Whitaker will spend every day not doing.

There is still the hope of a rational option. Perhaps someone with enough sway is pointing out to Cheeto that if he fires Mueller, Pelosi (the Dem investigative Committee Chairpersons) will hire him right back up, without all the constraints of the DoJ. If they "lose" control of Mueller the Dems will release EVERYTHING to the public.

One other guess on my part. There is talk that Mueller got Trump's tax records. I don't know how the legal mechanics would work, but the Dems might get control of all the documents Mueller has, including those. If Mueller stays under the ever-decreasing-budget thumb of the DoJ, they can control more of what Mueller does. The irony is that Mueller is a 100% straight shooter, so he'll follow the rules to a tee.

- - - Updated - - -

I think he could easily have a stroke over such news. I think that is his out, having or faking a stroke leading to being replaced for health reasons. The Dems are not going to go after him because let's face it, the optics would be disastrous.

Agreed - it would be the cleanest way out for the GOP. And I also agree that the Dems wouldn't go after him if he was knowingly addled. His kids however....

[Bodakane]

There is still the hope of a rational option. Perhaps someone with enough sway is pointing out to Cheeto that if he fires Mueller, Pelosi (the Dem investigative Committee Chairpersons) will hire him right back up, without all the constraints of the DoJ. If they "lose" control of Mueller the Dems will release EVERYTHING to the public.

One other guess on my part. There is talk that Mueller got Trump's tax records. I don't know how the legal mechanics would work, but the Dems might get control of all the documents Mueller has, including those. If Mueller stays under the ever-decreasing-budget thumb of the DoJ, they can control more of what Mueller does. The irony is that Mueller is a 100% straight shooter, so he'll follow the rules to a tee.

- - - Updated - - -



Agreed - it would be the cleanest way out for the GOP. And I also agree that the Dems wouldn't go after him if he was knowingly addled. His kids however....

My fear is the Dems will get cocky and think having leverage on Trump will give them control of him. He's a chaotic cancer and needs to be destroyed and not used.

[cubby]

My fear is the Dems will get cocky and think having leverage on Trump will give them control of him. He's a chaotic cancer and needs to be destroyed and not used.

There is still a great deal to be concerned about. The Dems have to play long, smart, and hard (it's too easy, don't) or they could lose everything. Do it right, and we could win the day.

[Breccia]

That's what --

(it's too easy, don't)

Dammit.

I can see the appeal: force him to sign a few things, then send him up the river anyhow. So there's going to be some of that thought process going on, whether it comes to pass or not. However, if the Dems even want to pretend to be the party of transparency and honesty, they have to make the proper moves on anything they get, when they get it. Blackmail is hilarious but it's still illegal, and it comes with one major flaw: if the target comes clean, you lose everything.

[Fugus]

That's what --



Dammit.

I can see the appeal: force him to sign a few things, then send him up the river anyhow. So there's going to be some of that thought process going on, whether it comes to pass or not. However, if the Dems even want to pretend to be the party of transparency and honesty, they have to make the proper moves on anything they get, when they get it. Blackmail is hilarious but it's still illegal, and it comes with one major flaw: if the target comes clean, you lose everything.

And besides, blackmail would cost the Democrats any credibility they have.

And the better response would be to hammer them to the wall with it anyways and force them to be accountable for it. It would hurt them with the truth while you still got the high road morally and actually gain credibility for yourself and your side in the process.

Why blackmail them when you can use it to remove them entirely either upfront or over the long term and replace them with people who actually WANT to do the right thing instead.

[Breccia]

The possible next head of the HJC has written a polite letter to the DoJ, asking them to kindly get a move on with the requests for information the HJC has asked for, but never received.

"As you are no doubt aware..."

Actually I'll stop right here. "As you know" is a movie/TV cliche in which two characters discuss information openly that they both clearly know, but the audience might not. In art, it's considered a negative trope and a violation of the Show Don't Tell Accord of 1936. In politics, it's another story. Yes, politics is showmanship, but Rep. Nadler knows full well this letter would get around. "As you know" isn't just to tell the audience something. It's to remind the DoJ, politely, that they were fully aware of these requests and did nothing. And that he'll have subpoena power in a matter of weeks.

"...Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee have written over one hundred letters to the Trump Administration, including the Department of Justice and the FBI, concerning legitimate oversight matters that fall within our jurisdiction," Nadler wrote. "To date, we have received no substantive response to these communications."

Some of this information is likely unrelated to the ongoing probe into Trump's increasingly blatantly criminal business and circle of friends he hasn't fired yet. But most of it is related.

Nadler said he expects the two top government officials to work with him on "a number of our highest priority requests," before the next Congress — specifically pointing to President Trump's decision to fire Jeff Sessions and appoint Whitaker to the role, the president's comments about ongoing federal investigations, and his "personal attacks" on top DOJ officials.

"The President’s behavior appears to be motivated by an urge to shield himself, his family, and his business interests from the ongoing work of the Department and the Bureau," Nadler wrote.

[Edge-]

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...me-corsi-claim

And Mueller is looking into Nigel Farage now, apparently.

[Thekri]

I'm trying to google what his net worth is so that i can be depressed. I'm wasting my time not becoming a con man.

Good luck with that. The margin of error for estimates of Trump's net worth is larger then the estimate itself.

Very literally in this case, because we don't really know if his net worth is a positive or negative number.

[Edge-]

Good luck with that. The margin of error for estimates of Trump's net worth is larger then the estimate itself.

Very literally in this case, because we don't really know if his net worth is a positive or negative number.

Or if, like his grifter buddy and fake billionaire Wilbur Ross, he's spent years lying to everyone including outlets like Forbes and vastly overstating his wealth.