Collusion has now been shown. What now?

Posted by: NW Ponderer

Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/11/19 03:15 PM

The leak of Manafort's response filing demonstrates, without peradventure, that "the Trump campaign" was colluding with Russia during the election. Where does it go from here?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/11/19 08:02 PM

Quote:
Where does it go from here?


First there is denial.....after that, more denial. Then anger. And more denial.

But accusations haven't been made yet, at least in the form of indictments and such. With Rosenstein leaving there will be no firewall to protect Mueller's investigation. Trump's acting AG can shut it down or see to it that portions of it never see the light of day. The House of Reps can subpoena the documents but Trump has shown no qualms with refusing to cooperate.

Republicans see Trump as a victim, not as a criminal.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/11/19 08:35 PM

I don't think the AG has any sort of immunity to indictment or subpoenas from courts or the House. Whoever he (or she) is, is going to be in danger of arrest and imprisonment for contempt if they resist appearing, refuse to supply documents, or refuse to testify. Trump's supposed immunity does not extend to any other employee of the Executive Branch. The courts are going to side with the House, because one of the Legislative Branch's constitutional responsibilities is to oversee the Executive Branch. An Executive Branch that is entirely immune from congressional oversight is not a republic: It is a dictatorship.

The House investigating committees will get everything Mueller has. Trump has no control over that. For that matter, as soon as Trump's fake National Emergency gets into court it will be shut down. Judges like real facts, not made up BS. Even conservative judges.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/11/19 08:50 PM

You seem to have a great deal more faith in the courts and government doing the right thing than I do.
In normal times you'd be right. These aren't normal times.
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/11/19 11:15 PM

Always go to the fundamentals.

Originally Posted By: wiki
collusion

n. where two persons (or business entities through their officers or other employees) enter into a deceitful agreement, usually secret, to defraud and/or gain an unfair advantage over a third party, competitors, consumers or those with whom they are negotiating.


I am not sure THAT definition applies to this scenario.

Originally Posted By: Merriam-Webster
secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.

That sounds like it but it does not appear to be illegal.

Originally Posted By: Law.com
conspiracy

n. when people work together by agreement to commit an illegal act.

I think that is the definition everyone is looking for. Now the question is, was anything these folks did illegal?
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 03:28 AM

Pretty much everything.
Posted by: Kaine

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 03:51 PM

Trump team should be allowed to ‘correct’ final Mueller report, says Giuliani
Quote:
Rudy Giuliani says President Trump's legal team should be allowed to "correct" special counsel Robert Mueller's final report before Congress or the American people get the chance to read it.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 03:53 PM

Rudy Giuliani has now said that Trump's team should get a chance to "correct" the Mueller report before congress or the public see it.

Outrageous? Maybe. But it's what I'm talking about. With a complicit Justice Department, Congress, and the fecking Supreme Court filled with sycophants this could really happen.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 04:34 PM

Quote:
An Executive Branch that is entirely immune from congressional oversight is not a republic: It is a dictatorship.

And do you imagine that Donald John Trump, his loyal base, Complicit Senate, and Supreme Court filled with sycophants has any problem with a single party government and an authoritarian president?

These guys whack off at night thinking of single party governments and authoritarian presidents. In Trump's case it's pictures of shirtless Vlad Puto.

Republicans have shown that they have no problems at all with racism, bigotry, lies, corruption, rape, murder and mayhem as long as it brings more power to Republicans. Their president can absolutely do no wrong in their eyes!

The most amazing thing about this is that all the things we find abhorrent about Donald Trump and the Republican Party is what Republicans in general admire about them most.
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 04:52 PM

Why have a report if Guiliani wants to essentially issue a different report?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 05:46 PM

Why indeed?
Will things go worse for Trump and the Republican Party if the report is never fully released?

The president has proven time and again that he will go to the very edge.

It's all part of the prelude for The Trainwreck™

Along and along President Trump and the Republican Party are going to meet head on with Reality.

It's going to be glorious.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 06:00 PM

Originally Posted By: rporter314
Why have a report if Guiliani wants to essentially issue a different report?
We've seen how twisted Giuliani's retelling of stories can be. Why would this be any different?
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 06:33 PM

Report: FBI probed whether Trump was secretly working for Russia (AP, via LA Times, subscription). Today Trump went on another Twitter tirade over the NYT report, which says so much. I'm actually encouraged. The FBI was doing its job investigating (it's in the name) what we all saw happening in plain sight. Trump's bizarre affection for Putin and Russia is a national security threat. We've seen the "quo", the FBI just wants to know how much "quid" is involved.
Posted by: rporter314

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/12/19 07:55 PM

Yeah this was from an old investigation. It has resulted in a lot of speculation and not much else. I think, despite the WH tweets, the most important aspect of this was the FBI DID investigate. Imagine if a president were cavorting with the "enemy" and the FBI did nothing!!!!!

So not mentioned in the report ... was the investigation completed? was it quashed? if completed what was the assessment? if completed and assessed, who read the report? was the report quashed?

Do Republicans recognize how much Mr Trump has assaulted the foundations of our republic?
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/13/19 05:13 PM

I think it's pretty apparent that some of those threads were probably shunted off to the Mueller probe, although they would be very careful to segregate the "counterintelligence" leads from criminal ones. Indeed, I suspect that one of the reasons for the pace of the Mueller probe is that they have to nail down speculative leads with "clean" discovery to avoid tainting the legal cases. Those niceties will not be as necessary for the report, however, as it is not a prosecution.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/13/19 09:24 PM

I am completely convinced that the shutdown and collusion are directly connected. Trump needed A BIG distraction from Mueller, and everyone is talking about the shutdown. But, it turns out the the press can walk and chew gum at the same time, so both the New York Times and Washington Post have new exposés this weekend.
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/13/19 09:26 PM

How will the FBI be able to neutralize the threat to national security if the President IS the threat?
Congress ultimately holds the keys to dealing with that and it is clear we are already in a constitutional "crisis of fidelity" where the Constitution is clear on what remedies must be taken, but the majority of Congress is unwilling to swallow that bitter pill.

"The FBI can't neutralize a security threat if the President is the threat."




Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/13/19 09:54 PM

Somebody will probably use a Second Amendment solution, if not against Trump then against McConnell. Not me, and I am not advocating this. (If the FBI wants to find a responsible party, they should look at Sarah Palin. She invented the phrase.) They might want to check out the NRA too, which keeps on telling us guns are the solution to every problem.

I am simply aware that when you piss off millions of people, there are bound to be a few with motive and opportunity. Probably doesn't help that their Secret Service protective details are not getting paid.
Posted by: jgw

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/13/19 11:05 PM

As far as I can tell the FBI Opened its investigation of Trump based on facts that were known. This investigation morphed into the Mueller investigation. Its all still ongoing. The simple fact that this thing has now been going on for almost 3 years is, in itself, pretty interesting. If there was no smoking gun I suspect it would have been over and done with at least a year ago, it wasn't and continues. I also don't think that they keep investigations going on this long without a smoking gun.

My fond hope is that they have the goods and are now doing the paperwork and following any and all leads which, by reports, mean that more and more are being investigated and now Mueller has extended the life of his jury. I think it was about a year ago when Mueller got a bunch of blank indictments (I could be confused about this). This tends to make me, and others, think that they are find a LOT of stuff!

Now, the Dems own the house and are starting their investigations. If Jackass tries to stop Mueller the house will either not let that happen or just hire him, with his team and data, and continue to have at it. I, and probably a majority of American voters, think that Jackass is probably already toast but Mueller wants to make sure their case is airtight. To this end there isn't a single week that goes by without yet another name mentioned. Its also generally agreed that the Mueller thing is close to having at it and then shutting down.

The concern that Jackass, or anybody else, is going to screw with the report is unlikely. The thought that it can be edited or sequestered is unlikely as well. By that time the house investigation will probably have synced with Mueller so the cat will be out of the bag regardless of any actions. If they do have the goods, and the Republicans continue the kowtowing, support and adulation of Jackass they will, most assuredly, join the Jackass in disgrace and public disgust. I suspect its on their minds a lot these days and there are cracks emerging.

Now add in the shutdown. There is a LOT of pressure over this one but its all just part of the general disgust and dismay caused by Jackass and his minions. It continues to build and congress better watch out as well. Jackass is simply too greedy (or busy doing the work assigned by his boss Putin) to do anything about the shutdown and the politicians, so far, haven't the backbone to do anything. Whilst my predictions are not particularly accurate I believe that the end of the whole mess is drawing near.

Then there is the charge that the Dems are responsible for the shutdown. What can they do? They have tried, in good faith, 2 times to deal with this problem, with and without dealing with the Daca folk. Both times Jackass backed out of the deal at the last moment. Why in the world would they have any belief in what the Republicans say. The word of the Jackass is a joke (internationally!) and the Republicans are not noted for being much better as they tend to go along with the actions of their dear leader. Basically, the Dems are holding fast because they really have no choice in the matter.

The best solution is probably to pass legislation that cannot be stopped by the president but the Senate has allowed McConnell to hamstring them and they don't have the backbone to fix that because then it would be on THEM and they really don't have the backbone.

Just saying..............
Posted by: Jeffery J. Haas

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/14/19 03:13 AM

Originally Posted By: pondering_it_all
Somebody will probably use a Second Amendment solution, if not against Trump then against McConnell. Not me, and I am not advocating this. (If the FBI wants to find a responsible party, they should look at Sarah Palin. She invented the phrase.) They might want to check out the NRA too, which keeps on telling us guns are the solution to every problem.

I am simply aware that when you piss off millions of people, there are bound to be a few with motive and opportunity. Probably doesn't help that their Secret Service protective details are not getting paid.


I get what you're saying and yet no matter how much I despise both of them, that would be the worst possible nightmare because for all the idle chatter about a civil war, 99 percent of it really is just that, however if such an unthinkable thing like that were to occur, it just might set it off for real.

Thus it would not solve any problems and would probably create some large and brand new ones.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/14/19 08:38 AM

Agreed: It would be horrible and cause many more problems than it would solve. But out of those millions of pissed off people, there have to be a few who are crazy enough to do it. My point is actually that nobody, not even the President of the US, can get away with pushing people too far. Everybody has a breaking point. For most of us you'd have to murder our children or something similar to get that kind of response, but I know very well that there are people who you just have to look at funny to evoke violence. And they tend to collect guns.
Posted by: Greger

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/16/19 05:38 PM

Originally Posted By: rporter314
Why have a report if Guiliani wants to essentially issue a different report?


It'not Guiliani.

Trump's AG nominee has now said he may not release the Mueller report.

Quote:
But Barr, testifying at his confirmation hearing, said that under his interpretation of the special counsel regulations, he didn’t believe that Mueller’s final report was required to be made public. Barr said he believed Mueller’s report would be “confidential,” but that as attorney general he would issue a public summary of its findings.

Barr also said he believed that the attorney general had some “flexibility and discretion” about what he could disclose to the public after the Mueller investigation concluded.
Posted by: pondering_it_all

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/17/19 12:12 AM

Sure, all those things may be true, but they all are meaningless since the Democrats hold the House and their Oversight Committee can subpoena the whole un-redacted report. They can also (and will, to be sure) subpoena Mueller to testify in an open session. If Republicans were still running the House and Senate, then they might have kept it secret. That era is over.

Some people are saying the Justice Department will redact the report and keep it private. Maybe they can do that, but Mueller will be a private citizen when he is done, not a Justice employee. The House can subpoena him and there's not a damned thing Trump or Justice can do about that.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/28/19 03:29 PM

Trump advisers lied over and over again, Mueller says. The question is, why? (WaPo, subscription)

The sheer volume of lying is, of itself, obstruction. The central question is, was it directed? Andbecause so many people have lied, that is a difficult question to answer. There really is no question anymore that Russia directly interfered in the 2016 election, and that it was "somewhat" effective (and probably dispositive). And it is beyond peradventure that the Trump campaign knew of, and exploited their knowledge of, at least some of that interference, which "happened" to coincide with their predisposition to engage in similar tactics. "If it's what I think it is, I love it!"
I think the Mueller investigating devolves into sussing out enough facts to determine the question of whether the coordination was direct, since everyone with Trump lies all the time about everything. Will the cover-up be effective?

Nixon would have been impeached, and George H.W. Bush might have been, had their investigations not been thwarted (by pardons). Mueller's might yet be, as Republicans have developed habits of impunity (to wit: Nixon, Reagan, Bush, Nunes, Bill Barr) and dissembling, so we may never know the answer. But we do know this: something is rotten in the State of our Union.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/28/19 03:39 PM

To the point about the suppressing of the Mueller report, let me add this: as with Iran-Contra, it's about the timing. If they can delay the outcome until the end of Trump's term, they will have, once again, thwarted justice. Trump may be prosecuted after he leaves office, but at this juncture, it is unlikely that impeachment could be completed in time. In the case of Republican methodology, "Justice delayed is Justice denied." And that's just the way they like it.
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/28/19 09:13 PM

For the record: 18 U.S. Code § 2 - Principals

(a) Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.
(b) Whoever willfully causes an act to be done which if directly performed by him or another would be an offense against the United States, is punishable as a principal.

18 U.S. Code § 3 - Accessory after the fact

Whoever, knowing that an offense against the United States has been committed, receives, relieves, comforts or assists the offender in order to hinder or prevent his apprehension, trial or punishment, is an accessory after the fact.

Except as otherwise expressly provided by any Act of Congress, an accessory after the fact shall be imprisoned not more than one-half the maximum term of imprisonment or (notwithstanding section 3571) fined not more than one-half the maximum fine prescribed for the punishment of the principal, or both; or if the principal is punishable by life imprisonment or death, the accessory shall be imprisoned not more than 15 years.

Now, does this sound like Anyone we know?
Posted by: Greger

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/28/19 09:37 PM

Quote:
William Barr: Concerns Over Trump’s Privacy Could Shield Robert Mueller Conclusions
The likely attorney general said prosecutors need “to be sensitive to the privacy and reputational interests of uncharged third parties.”

Just sayin'...
Posted by: NW Ponderer

Re: Collusion has now been shown. What now? - 01/28/19 10:02 PM

I'll say again, Bill Barr is singularly unqualified to be Attorney General.