Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > The Witch-hunt for Red Trumptober

The Witch-hunt for Red Trumptober (Page 4)
Thread Tools
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2018, 12:52 PM
 
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2018, 01:33 PM
 
Kinda got things out of order. This is presumably in response to Gates flipping, right?
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2018, 01:53 PM
 
Shouldn't this thread be "Orange Trumptober"?
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 27, 2018, 10:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Kinda got things out of order. This is presumably in response to Gates flipping, right?
That the general consensus. Not sure why today's news is different than fridays.

---

https://www.washingtonpost.com/power...=.0d1aafee4d45
“No one’s asserting privilege; they’re following the orders of the White House not to answer certain questions,” said Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.), a committee member, after the interview had been going for about four hours.
It's amazing that the trick to not getting your executive privilege challenged is just not to assert it.

In the end, members of both parties said, Hicks answered all of their questions from the campaign period and “most” of their questions about the transition. But she answered none of their questions pertaining to the period since Trump took office, which meant that lawmakers were unable to secure her testimony regarding a key event in which she played a role: the drafting of a misleading statement to explain an un­or­tho­dox meeting at Trump Tower in Manhattan between top Trump campaign members and a Russian lawyer during the 2016 race.

Sessions has not faced official congressional censure. But several Republican and Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee believe they must issue a contempt citation for Bannon to demonstrate to future witnesses that congressional subpoenas must be complied with. The decision depends on Conaway and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) reaching an agreement, but the two have not yet met to discuss the issue, according to Conaway.
Good luck with that
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 1, 2018, 09:41 PM
 
https://twitter.com/MLevineReports/s...91934241140736


https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/statu...31756527869952
The court documents make this clear. Gates' attorneys filed to withdraw on the date of Gates' proffer session with the Mueller team and it was in that session that he LIED to federal investigators.
He lied while trying set up a deal.


https://twitter.com/dsamuelsohn/stat...76414919294976
Rick Gates is quickly discovering that cooperation with Robert Mueller has its advantages. Special counsel drops charges; judge OKs spring break trip w/ his kids to Boston. http://politi.co/2Cr30RV @politico
Hard not to surmise he had to give something substantial for the quick, sudden reversal. A detail many people forget is that while Gates worked with Manafort a long time, he stayed with the Trump campaign through transition. He may have witnessed something damaging in his own right.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 7, 2018, 10:43 PM
 
Wanted to post this like a week ago

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/...austria-423439
Manafort “secretly retained” several former senior European politicians to covertly promote Ukrainian interests in Washington. “Although the former politicians would appear to be providing their independent assessments of Government of Ukraine actions, in fact they were paid lobbyists for Ukraine,” according to a superseding indictment of Manafort filed by Mueller’s team.

The coterie of Europeans was known as the Hapsburg Group, Andrew Weissman, one of Mueller’s prosecutors, said at a hearing on Friday. The group was led by a “former European chancellor” and was paid more than 2 million euros in 2012 and 2013, according to the court filings.

The former chancellor isn’t named in the court filings, but appears to be Alfred Gusenbauer, who served as chancellor of Austria between 2007 and 2008. Gusenbauer and two lobbyists involved in Manafort’s lobbying campaign met with members of Congress and staffers in 2013, according to Justice Department disclosures retroactively filed last year by the lobbying firm Mercury.

Manafort called the Hapsburg Group’s lobbying effort “SUPER VIP” in an “EYES ONLY” memo cited in the new indictment. It would involve “a small group of high-level European highly influencial [sic] champions and politically credible friends who can act informally and without any visible relationship with the Government of Ukraine,” he said.

The retroactively filed disclosures show that Gusenbauer met with House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce, Reps. Tom Marino (R-Pa.) and Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), House Foreign Affairs Committee staffers and others in Washington one week in 2013. He was accompanied by two Mercury lobbyists, Ed Kutler (who has since left the firm) and Mike McSherry. Kutler also accompanied Romano Prodi, a former Italian prime minister, to meetings with Royce and a staffer for House Majority Whip Eric Cantor months beforehand.

Gusenbauer and Prodi said their work was focused on bringing Ukraine and the European Union closer together and denied being paid by Yanukovych or Manafort.
Its going to be incredible if Mueller's witch-hunt ends up taking some high-profile European scalps.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 8, 2018, 06:52 PM
 
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/adam-sc...everal-topics/
The former Trump campaign manager would not talk about the production of a false statement about the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting between top campaign officials and a Russian lawyer. Nor would he answer questions about conversations surrounding the firing of FBI Director James Comey, or any discussions he had with President Trump about special counsel Robert Mueller's potential firing.

Rep. Adam Schiff, D-California, told reporters Thursday that Lewandowksi argued to the panel that he didn't think the topics were "relevant," though the committee emphasized that was not his determination to make.
No one is afraid of repercussions of not cooperating with House panel since Bannon. It also transparently shows what a farce it is.



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hicks-t...nt-was-hacked/
In her testimony before the House Intelligence Committee last week, outgoing White House Communications Director Hope Hicks said one of her email accounts had been hacked, a committee source familiar with Hicks' testimony confirms to CBS News.

According to the source, the email account that was hacked was not a Trump organization or campaign email address but, as first reported by NBC News, Hicks explained that she no longer had access to a campaign account as well as a personal email account, and it wasn't clear which of the two accounts was hacked. During lawmakers' questions, she also presented herself as being not technologically savvy.
Sounds like a great excuse to use if you don't want to produce any docs. Also a 29 year-old claiming she's not technologically savvy is hilarious given the context of the technical literacy of all the old people she's surrounded with.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2018, 05:00 PM
 
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2018, 05:25 PM
 
If it's what I saw earlier it's the dumbest offer
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2018, 05:33 PM
 
Of course it is. Would you expect anything else?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 9, 2018, 09:45 PM
 
I wasn't expecting an offer at all. I'm expecting them to fight a subpoena. I'm guessing this is more for PR.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 07:07 PM
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/power...=.1bab6ae70718
House Intelligence Committee Republicans have completed a draft report in their year-long Russia probe that states they found no evidence President Trump or anyone affiliated with him colluded with Russian officials to affect the outcome of the 2016 election, a conclusion expected to incite backlash from Democrats.

Republicans also determined that while the Russian government did pursue “active measures” to interfere in the election, it did not do so with the intention of helping Trump’s campaign, contradicting the U.S. intelligence community’s findings.
Sure, Jan.


He argued against using subpoenas or stronger measures — including contempt citations — to compel more testimony from witnesses who refused to answer questions about their time in the administration, arguing that Trump might eventually want to invoke executive privilege.
Bannon, Lewandowski, and Hicks all refused to fully cooperate. Plus they refused several Democratic subpoenas because ?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 07:12 PM
 
https://twitter.com/ChadPergram/stat...31945747861504
Intel Cmte mbr Conaway on if there was contact between the Committee and Robert Mueller: Precious little..once he indicted somebody, we decided not to bring those people in
When Mueller finds someone guilty, they decide they're not worth talking to?
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 10:13 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
When Mueller finds someone guilty, they decide they're not worth talking to?
An Indictment is an accusation. It remains up to a court to determine guilt.

Not summoning indicted people is the right move. If the committee compels testimony, then it can't be used against them in court. The 5th limits things. They either don't compel (no useful answers), or compel and lose the resulting evidence. The best answer is to leave the indicted to the courts.

I have problems with the (R)s whitewashing conclusions for their pal in office. Once again, party loyalty above national loyalty. But the above choice isn't on my list.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 10:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
An Indictment is an accusation. It remains up to a court to determine guilt.
You're right, I'm pre-judging because it was an open secret Manafort was involved all sort of nefarious goings on in Ukraine. Except for the Russians everyone else has already pled guilty.

Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
Not summoning indicted people is the right move. If the committee compels testimony, then it can't be used against them in court. The 5th limits things. They either don't compel (no useful answers), or compel and lose the resulting evidence. The best answer is to leave the indicted to the courts.
If that were the case, wouldn't the Special Counsel step-in if he wanted to preserve testimony?

Also, I'm not sure I understand. If someone admitted to the committee they murdered someone that couldn't be used in court?
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 10:57 PM
 
As I understand it, the issue is compelled answers. If they volunteer info to a committee, everything's good for prosecution. It would be a confession. But if the committee compels answers, those answers cannot be used against them in court. And the courts can punish to a far greater degree than Congress can (using contempt). IANAL
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 11:00 PM
 
That seems like a strange loophole.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 11:11 PM
 
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.
As I understand it, Congress can compel someone to answer anyway. But the 5th still applies. So any compelled answer could not be used against the witness. However, anything the witness coughed up (compelled or not) could be used against someone else. They just can't force a person to incriminate themselves. If they do, it's not admissible.

The 5th doesn't have an exception written into the clause, so it's binding on Congress too. I'm not a lawyer, but how else could it work if Congress compels an incriminating answer? Either a) Congress can't compel such answers, or b) the answer becomes inadmissible against that witness, or c) the 5th is just words on old paper. I believe b) is the correct one.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 12, 2018, 11:55 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
An Indictment is an accusation. It remains up to a court to determine guilt.

Not summoning indicted people is the right move. If the committee compels testimony, then it can't be used against them in court. The 5th limits things. They either don't compel (no useful answers), or compel and lose the resulting evidence. The best answer is to leave the indicted to the courts.

I have problems with the (R)s whitewashing conclusions for their pal in office. Once again, party loyalty above national loyalty. But the above choice isn't on my list.
Yeah, that's the problem here: the GOP cherry picks, and it smells that they want have something to sell to their base come mid-term election time. But just like the dumb Nunes memo (biggest scandal since Watergate!!) that means their report will not stand the test of time.

I don't think they can reach a conclusion without speaking to these important witnesses. Which might mean that they have to wait with a final report until Mueller's investigation has concluded — which may take years.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 13, 2018, 02:25 AM
 
I guess the technicality is compelled testimony could likely lead to evidence. So even if you admit you murdered the person, it helps connect dots once they get evidence.

I dunno, Speaking out of my ass. If Person A says "Yes I colluded!" that doesn't stop them from being charged with evidence they obtain. But since its protected, can Mueller use that testimony to obtain a warrant, say for emails?
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 13, 2018, 05:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
I guess the technicality is compelled testimony could likely lead to evidence. So even if you admit you murdered the person, it helps connect dots once they get evidence.

I dunno, Speaking out of my ass. If Person A says "Yes I colluded!" that doesn't stop them from being charged with evidence they obtain. But since its protected, can Mueller use that testimony to obtain a warrant, say for emails?
First of all, these are independent investigations, and I see no reason why the House Committee shouldn't at least try to get witness statements. AFAIK you have the right to plead the 5th in this context, so their testimony might not be interesting. But I think Mueller can (and should) use all testimony in his case. The biggest difference here as far as I can tell is that these statements are under oath, so if Mueller catches them lying, they can be charged with perjury.

Secondly, if the Republicans on the House Committee declare the case closed without even trying to get testimony from Gates, Flynn and co., I don't think they can claim that they performed an investigation in good faith, turned over all the rocks, searched all the nooks and crannies, to reach a conclusion either way. Half-arsing the investigation to prevent being slaughtered in the mid-terms will further erode trust in the political system and ultimately, in them. It's a pyrrhic “victory”.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 13, 2018, 05:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
As I understand it, Congress can compel someone to answer anyway. But the 5th still applies. So any compelled answer could not be used against the witness. However, anything the witness coughed up (compelled or not) could be used against someone else. They just can't force a person to incriminate themselves. If they do, it's not admissible.

The 5th doesn't have an exception written into the clause, so it's binding on Congress too. I'm not a lawyer, but how else could it work if Congress compels an incriminating answer? Either a) Congress can't compel such answers, or b) the answer becomes inadmissible against that witness, or c) the 5th is just words on old paper. I believe b) is the correct one.
That's the way I understand it, too. Although there is also executive privilege which has been stretched beyond recognition by former Trump White House and transition team officials (dubbed “Schrödinger's executive privilege”).
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2018, 08:13 PM
 
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2018, 11:51 AM
 
Down goes Dowd. Who recently called for the Mueller investigation to end and then backtracked and said it was a personal tweet.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2018, 10:35 PM
 
CNN think Trump is about to shit-can Mueller.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2018, 10:41 PM
 
“Go ahead, make my day.”
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 22, 2018, 10:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
CNN think Trump is about to shit-can Mueller.
If he does that before the mid-term election, the GOP is going to get creamed.

One of Trump's lawyers, the one who at least in public did not go along with condemning the Mueller investigation, just resigned for what it's worth.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2018, 01:04 AM
 
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep View Post
CNN think Trump is about to shit-can Mueller.
Who gives a shit what CNN thinks?

Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
If he does that before the mid-term election, the GOP is going to get creamed.

One of Trump's lawyers, the one who at least in public did not go along with condemning the Mueller investigation, just resigned for what it's worth.
Yeah, about that...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/john-do...obe-1521733529
Mr. Dowd drew criticism last weekend when he gave a statement to the media calling for the Justice Department to shut down Mr. Mueller’s investigation. Mr. Dowd later said he was speaking for himself, not the president.

But in the interview, Mr. Dowd said that Mr. Trump had approved the statement he had given. “He thought it was a good statement. And I still do,” Mr. Dowd said. He said there was nothing in the statement that he hadn’t already said directly to Mr. Mueller.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2018, 01:47 AM
 
Oh, did I get Trump's lawyers mixed up here? (It's really hard to get all this information on the circus that is the Trump administration straight.)
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Waragainstsleep
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2018, 05:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
If he does that before the mid-term election, the GOP is going to get creamed.

One of Trump's lawyers, the one who at least in public did not go along with condemning the Mueller investigation, just resigned for what it's worth.
Thats why they think he's about to get rid of Mueller, because he got rid of the guy who was stopping him.
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2018, 09:30 AM
 
Reading the tea leaves, if GOP stammering over Trumps lawyers statement last weekend was a preview of how they'll act if he goes through with firing Mueller, they're going to throw their hands up and say, 'hey it's within his power' and absolve themselves of responsibility.

How they'll punt on reinstating Mueller as an independent counsel, I'm not sure, though I suspect it'll be needing to move on or it creating a distraction.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2018, 12:11 PM
 
The TV pundit conspiracy lawyer Trump was hiring that caused Dowd to leave is now not signing on because he was talked out of it by his wife lawyer who was also considering signing on.

That is a real factual sentence. Also, Trump confirmed it by going on twitter to call the reporting fake news. One of his more entertaining rants.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2018, 12:36 PM
 
I've got to admit Trump is entertaining. A disaster for the country, but also the comedy show that keeps on giving. Unexpected plot twists weekly.
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 25, 2018, 12:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
I've got to admit Trump is entertaining. A disaster for the country, but also the comedy show that keeps on giving. Unexpected plot twists weekly.
Nero was an accomplished fiddler, too.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2018, 10:29 PM
 
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.cf1b40cca028
The new filings show that Rosenstein specifically approved lines of investigation for the special counsel in an August 2017 memo. A version of the memo filed in court showed that Rosenstein signed off on an investigation of whether Manafort “committed a crime or crimes by colluding with Russian government officials” and of Manafort’s work as an international political consultant in Ukraine before joining Trump’s campaign.
Get ****ed, Manafort.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/local...=.73d04da0772c
A London-based lawyer was ordered to serve 30 days in prison after a federal judge Tuesday handed down the first sentence in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Alex van der Zwaan, 33, a son-in-law of a prominent Russian-based banker, pleaded guilty Feb. 20 to lying to the FBI about his contacts in September and October of 2016 with a business associate of onetime Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and with Manafort’s deputy, former Trump aide Rick Gates. Prosecutors said van der Zwaan also destroyed emails the special counsel had requested.
     
reader50
Administrator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 4, 2018, 11:20 PM
 
So a lawyer destroyed evidence. In a special Federal investigation. Gets to spend 30 days in (low-security) jail. Um, very scary?

I'd think destroying evidence in an investigation would be behavior unbecoming an officer of the court. Besides the penalty, the crime should result in loss of law license. Plus a fat fine. A lawyer has to know better, it can't be an innocent mistake.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 5, 2018, 11:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by reader50 View Post
So a lawyer destroyed evidence. In a special Federal investigation. Gets to spend 30 days in (low-security) jail. Um, very scary?

I'd think destroying evidence in an investigation would be behavior unbecoming an officer of the court. Besides the penalty, the crime should result in loss of law license. Plus a fat fine. A lawyer has to know better, it can't be an innocent mistake.
Is/was he licensed to practice law in the US?
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 05:22 PM
 
Guliani and two other lawyers join Trumps legal team. Guliani reportedly to negotiate an end to the Muellerprobe.

Rosenstein also told Trump he wasn't a target in the Cohen raid.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 08:40 PM
 
DOJ turned over Comey's memos tonight and AP had them within an hour.

lulz
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 08:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
DOJ turned over Comey's memos tonight and AP had them within an hour.

lulz
So did Fox News and others. They got the redacted versions.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 10:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Final Dakar View Post
Guliani and two other lawyers join Trumps legal team. Guliani reportedly to negotiate an end to the Muellerprobe.
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/sta...47681700171776
Comey tells @maddow that the FBI started investigating whether Rudy Giuliani had advanced notice from inside the FBI that Comey would re-open the Clinton probe and whether there were leaks inside the FBI for political reasons, but he was fired before the investigation finished.
Trump's new lawyer everyone!
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 2, 2018, 07:46 PM
 
So, Cobb has 'retired' which is a fairly graceful manner to bail.

There's a new lawyer in, but it's not clear if he's working for the WH or Trump. Word is he's in line to take McGahn's job and it's safe to say McGahn has been wanting to hit the exits forever.

Oh, and with Cobb's exit, an old storyline has reemerged: No one on Trump's team has security clearance.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 3, 2018, 05:45 PM
 
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile...paul-manafort/
Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who filed a request Thursday for 70 blank subpoenas. Mueller requested subpoenas for appearances in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (EDVA) in the case against former Donald Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.
Guys, I think Mueller might have the receipts in the Manafort case.

Just a hunch.
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 3, 2018, 05:56 PM
 
I’m glad Abrams finally realized “lawnewz” was a really stupid name.

And, yeah. Manafort’s going away for so long his hair will be white by the time he gets out.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 3, 2018, 05:59 PM
 
I didn't realize he had rebranded the site. Yes, it was a dumb name.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 14, 2018, 08:21 PM
 
I'm a few days early, but Happy 1st Birthday, Special Investigation!
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2018, 09:32 AM
 
Junior's senate testimony got posted. I imagine there'll be some news there. Only thing I've seen so far is he 'couldn't remember' if he told his father about the meeting.
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 16, 2018, 07:37 PM
 
     
Thorzdad
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2018, 08:04 AM
 
     
The Final Dakar  (op)
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
May 17, 2018, 08:11 AM
 
It's preliminary and its from Feinstein. I'd wait before taking a victory lap on that.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:50 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,