The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[Captain Caveman]

Some pushback on this claim:

"for the first time" refers to her personal emails. I think that's the important distinction here.

[El Guapo]

Russia literally targeted Clinton's personal emails for the first time right after Trump's infamous press conference asking them to do so.

No collusion?

Some pushback on this claim:




https://twitter.com/awprokop/status/1017814619669323776

ehhhh that pushback is a little nitpicky. The indictment is clear that it was the first time that they tried to reach this particular set of e-mails. The original tweet could be a little clearer on that, but I wouldn't label it "incorrect".

[El Guapo]

Roger Stone is in serious trouble.

Whichever GOP candidate asked for information from a hack to help his campaign committed a very serious crime.

WikiLeaks is just as scummy and awful an organization as people thought.

Some journalist (probably at Fox News?) peddled Russia-stolen information to besmirch the BLM movement.

This is a big deal.

Stone has been expecting to be indicted for some type. For, uh..."extraneous crimes".

[El Guapo]

This stuff ought to spice up the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings too, I bet.

[LordMortis]

While upstaging meeting the queen is fun, the real fun is announcing this before Trump meets Putin.

FWIW Schumer has already called on Trump to cancel his meeting with Putin. I very much doubt that Trump will, of course, but it's sensible and calling for it seems like smart politics at the least.

Yeah but doesn't Schumer has some sort of eyes I've never heard of but apparently are a pretty piercing dog whistle for people who aren't me.

[Enough]

Yeah, it's still awful. I am just into accuracy/nitpicking as there's no reason to create an opening for calls of fake news. The key is that it was the first time they attacked Clinton's personal email server.

[El Guapo]

I'm listening to it. Bet your bottom dollar that the Fox headline is "no collusion" as there are no Americans named in the indictment.

He did say: "The conspirators communicated with several Americans." But does not say that the Americans knew with whom they were communicating.

I'm guessing those revelations will come.

Actually, he specifically said that the American contacts were unaware they were dealing with foreign agents.

At the very least, they had to know they were dealing with illegally obtained materials. The unnamed GOP congressional candidate was requesting stolen documents! Whether the person knew they were communicating with Russians or not, they're still in some deep shit.

Also, this article from August 2016 casually references that "Guccifer 2.0 is widely believed to be a cover for Russian intelligence." I'm reasonably confident that Gufficer 2.0 never said "I am Russian intelligence" to any of the relevant individuals, but it would be a tough argument for Stone or others to make that they shouldn't have known or strongly suspected.

[Enough]

Definitely sounds like Roger Stone. Especially considering his comments contemporary to that. And I'm hoping that Candidate was none other than Devin Nunes. That'd be amaze-balls.

Trump randomly met with Devin Nunes in late August 2016 per the NYT.

[Captain Caveman]

Also, this article from August 2016 casually references that "Guccifer 2.0 is widely believed to be a cover for Russian intelligence." I'm reasonably confident that Gufficer 2.0 never said "I am Russian intelligence" to any of the relevant individuals, but it would be a tough argument for Stone or others to make that they shouldn't have known or strongly suspected.

Even if these contacts with Russians were "unknowing", there were others that were completely, 100% "knowing" (e.g., the Trump Tower meeting). And these "knowing" meetings never caused the Trump campaign to contact the FBI or anyone else.

Of course Stone knew who he was dealing with.

[El Guapo]

Definitely sounds like Roger Stone. Especially considering his comments contemporary to that. And I'm hoping that Candidate was none other than Devin Nunes. That'd be amaze-balls.

Trump randomly met with Devin Nunes in late August 2016 per the NYT.

Nunes almost has to be involved in this to some degree, even if he's not Boned Candidate A from the indictment. It's hard to explain the full degree to which the House GOP has gone to bat against Trump's investigators without some incriminating activity by House Republicans.

By contrast, the Senate GOP, while being less than fully helpful, hasn't been willing to go on offense for Trump, which makes me think that the Russian hackers were not super active in Senate races.

[El Guapo]

Also, this article from August 2016 casually references that "Guccifer 2.0 is widely believed to be a cover for Russian intelligence." I'm reasonably confident that Gufficer 2.0 never said "I am Russian intelligence" to any of the relevant individuals, but it would be a tough argument for Stone or others to make that they shouldn't have known or strongly suspected.

Even if these contacts with Russians were "unknowing", there were others that were completely, 100% "knowing" (e.g., the Trump Tower meeting). And these "knowing" meetings never caused the Trump campaign to contact the FBI or anyone else.

Of course Stone knew who he was dealing with.

Also (without knowing the relevant statutes), Mueller almost certainly does not need to prove that Stone or others knew that the counterparties were Russian intelligence. Generally "should have known" is sufficient for that sort of thing.

[El Guapo]

[Enough]

Oh and now I am sure we will quickly see Newt Gingrich and the rest of the alt right come out and admit they had it all wrong on Seth Rich?

[El Guapo]

Definitely sounds like Roger Stone. Especially considering his comments contemporary to that. And I'm hoping that Candidate was none other than Devin Nunes. That'd be amaze-balls.

Trump randomly met with Devin Nunes in late August 2016 per the NYT.

Nunes almost has to be involved in this to some degree, even if he's not Boned Candidate A from the indictment. It's hard to explain the full degree to which the House GOP has gone to bat against Trump's investigators without some incriminating activity by House Republicans.

By contrast, the Senate GOP, while being less than fully helpful, hasn't been willing to go on offense for Trump, which makes me think that the Russian hackers were not super active in Senate races.

Also, from Jonathan Chait's column on the indictment:

The indictment charges that the conspirators “received a request for stolen materials from a candidate for the U.S. Congress,” and “sent the candidate stolen documents.” The Wall Street Journal reported a year ago that “Guccifer 2.0,” one of the Russian hackers, communicated with Florida-based Republican operative Aaron Nevins. Nevins is not named in this indictment, but the revelation that a candidate also communicated with Russian hackers indicates yet another point of contact in a conspiracy that went beyond Trump’s campaign.

I have to think that the number of House GOP reps implicated in this is going to grow.

[Captain Caveman]

Which is why I'm fearful that the Mueller probe is more vulnerable now than ever. They'll be pressure to shut it down before the American indictments start raining down.

[Skinypupy]

Which is why I'm fearful that the Mueller probe is more vulnerable now than ever. They'll be pressure to shut it down before the American indictments start raining down.

NEWS: As Rosenstein announces indictments, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows is filing a motion to impeach him for DOJ noncompliance, source tells me

A few more details here, for whatever they're worth.

[El Guapo]

At the same time, quashing the Mueller probe (or removing Rosenstein) *now* seems politically perilous - sustained protests in the street kind of thing. Seems like they would need to wait a few weeks for things to get a little quieter, then try to knife them. BUT at the same time, the longer they wait, the closer it gets to the midterms, and you REALLY don't want to fire everyone up then.

Also FWIW I have read a couple things that were a little dismissive of the implications of Rosenstein getting impeached ...basically that the effective result would be a referral of the matter to...Rosenstein. EDIT: I was mixing up impeachment and contempt. Impeachment seems pretty dumb because it would never pass in the Senate, and the Democrats would LOVE to have a big public show about all this.

Still, would be pretty ballsy to still introduce this on Monday.

[El Guapo]

Ugh, I have to get back to work. Send me a PM if the Marshal of the Supreme Court picks up Trump.

[malchior]

Definitely sounds like Roger Stone. Especially considering his comments contemporary to that. And I'm hoping that Candidate was none other than Devin Nunes. That'd be amaze-balls.

Trump randomly met with Devin Nunes in late August 2016 per the NYT.

Nunes almost has to be involved in this to some degree, even if he's not Boned Candidate A from the indictment. It's hard to explain the full degree to which the House GOP has gone to bat against Trump's investigators without some incriminating activity by House Republicans.

By contrast, the Senate GOP, while being less than fully helpful, hasn't been willing to go on offense for Trump, which makes me think that the Russian hackers were not super active in Senate races.

Is that a function of Senator's being less corruptible (ha!) or the election cycle just not having too many of them under the gun? To be honest I'd definitely go after Senators. Especially in this climate where a Senator is a potential blocking vote. The Russians also could have posited that Republicans vote en bloc so outliers would be pretty obvious after a while.

[malchior]

I'm listening to it. Bet your bottom dollar that the Fox headline is "no collusion" as there are no Americans named in the indictment.

He did say: "The conspirators communicated with several Americans." But does not say that the Americans knew with whom they were communicating.

I'm guessing those revelations will come.

Actually, he specifically said that the American contacts were unaware they were dealing with foreign agents.

At the very least, they had to know they were dealing with illegally obtained materials. The unnamed GOP congressional candidate was requesting stolen documents! Whether the person knew they were communicating with Russians or not, they're still in some deep shit.

Also, this article from August 2016 casually references that "Guccifer 2.0 is widely believed to be a cover for Russian intelligence." I'm reasonably confident that Gufficer 2.0 never said "I am Russian intelligence" to any of the relevant individuals, but it would be a tough argument for Stone or others to make that they shouldn't have known or strongly suspected.

The damning thing to me is that someone like Stone wouldn't deal with a rando with this type of deal. Otherwise, it could easily blow up in his face. It could be a sting even. I have a hard time believing he didn't strongly know who he was dealing with and there is no doubt it would be obviously illegal.

[Smoove_B]

I forget - do we hang traitors? Shoot them? I feel like we need to communicate that sooner than later.

[El Guapo]

Definitely sounds like Roger Stone. Especially considering his comments contemporary to that. And I'm hoping that Candidate was none other than Devin Nunes. That'd be amaze-balls.

Trump randomly met with Devin Nunes in late August 2016 per the NYT.

Nunes almost has to be involved in this to some degree, even if he's not Boned Candidate A from the indictment. It's hard to explain the full degree to which the House GOP has gone to bat against Trump's investigators without some incriminating activity by House Republicans.

By contrast, the Senate GOP, while being less than fully helpful, hasn't been willing to go on offense for Trump, which makes me think that the Russian hackers were not super active in Senate races.

Is that a function of Senator's being less corruptible (ha!) or the election cycle just not having too many of them under the gun? To be honest I'd definitely go after Senators. Especially in this climate where a Senator is a potential blocking vote. The Russians also could have posited that Republicans vote en bloc so outliers would be pretty obvious after a while.

Seems like there are a lot of potential reasons why the Russians would be more involved in the House than the Senate - hard to say more without knowing more about the decision-making process on the Russian end. But one thing that comes to mind is that the Russians already had a long-standing in to the House in the form of Rohrabacher, who was into Russian collusion before it was cool. Making an approach is not without risk - they approach the wrong candidate, and he blows the whistle to the FBI / CIA / the public, and things get more difficult. If they already have a contact that they can trust in Rohrabacher (and possibly others), then Rohrabacher can point them towards who else is reasonably safe to approach. Could just be that they didn't have the same comfort level on the Senate. Or could just be that they only have so much time and resources and just happened to pick the House.

Who knows - all pretty speculative at this point. It's just that there is a LOT more smoke on the House end.

[El Guapo]

I forget - do we hang traitors? Shoot them? I feel like we need to communicate that sooner than later.

“People who go along a treasonous path do not know they are on a treasonous path until it is too late.”

-Former CIA Director John Brennan, on May 23, 2017.

[LordMortis]

I forget - do we hang traitors? Shoot them? I feel like we need to communicate that sooner than later.

First and foremost seize every thing they own and everything they put in trust to other people and then you take their Visas and post them on no travel lists. Then you but them at the mercy of a major metropolitan an inner city federal court in front of a female minority court officer and let them determine how to proceed from there.

[Grifman]

Which is why I'm fearful that the Mueller probe is more vulnerable now than ever. They'll be pressure to shut it down before the American indictments start raining down.

NEWS: As Rosenstein announces indictments, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows is filing a motion to impeach him for DOJ noncompliance, source tells me

A few more details here, for whatever they're worth.

They might could pass this in the House but there's no way they'll get 2/3 in the Senate.

[El Guapo]

Which is why I'm fearful that the Mueller probe is more vulnerable now than ever. They'll be pressure to shut it down before the American indictments start raining down.

NEWS: As Rosenstein announces indictments, House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows is filing a motion to impeach him for DOJ noncompliance, source tells me

A few more details here, for whatever they're worth.

They might could pass this in the House but there's no way they'll get 2/3 in the Senate.

Also...there would need to be a Senate trial, right? Wouldn't that trial but a huge PR bonanza for the Democrats?

[malchior]

As the Strok hearing showed yesterday - it isn't about actually *doing* anything. It is appearance of doing so that matters.

Also...there would need to be a Senate trial, right? Wouldn't that trial but a huge PR bonanza for the Democrats?

Yeah but Freedom Caucus guys are extremists. They don't give a shit about the big picture.

[stessier]

I forget - do we hang traitors? Shoot them? I feel like we need to communicate that sooner than later.

I'm pretty sure we elect them.

[El Guapo]

As the Strok hearing showed yesterday - it isn't about actually *doing* anything. It is appearance of doing so that matters.

Also...there would need to be a Senate trial, right? Wouldn't that trial but a huge PR bonanza for the Democrats?

Yeah but Freedom Caucus guys are extremists. They don't give a shit about the big picture.

I get that, but seems like the kind of thing that Ryan would squash. An impeachment trial of Rosenstein where he talks at length about the Russia investigation and what is known (even just what is publicly known) in the run-up to the mid-terms is like a wet dream for democratic leadership.

[stessier]

Mayor Rudy Giuliani
‏Verified account
@RudyGiuliani
The indictments Rod Rosenstein announced are good news for all Americans. The Russians are nailed. No Americans are involved. Time for Mueller to end this pursuit of the President and say President Trump is completely innocent.

[El Guapo]

Man, Guiliani is just so bad at this.

[malchior]

You're right Guiliani - I'm convinced! WITCHHUNT!

[LordMortis]

Doesn't indictment just mean "charged with some serious shit?" Is Guilani seriously saying, even aside from Trump, "We charged 12 Russians whom will we'll never get to prosecute. It's all better now. Let sleeping dogs lay?"

Speaking of burning all the goodwill you've earned. And take the Mayor off your name, you tool.

Mr./Mrs./Dr./etc. (Surname):
Sometimes you will see or hear former mayors addressed as Mayor (name) but it is not correct, Address a former mayor as Mr./Ms./Dr./etc. (whatever honorific they had before becoming mayor) (Name).
The reason? In a city there is only one mayor at a time. It's not respectful to the current officer holder, and is potentially confusing to be addressing more than one person as Mayor (Name).
Being addressed as Mayor (Name) is a courtesy of the office and is reserved for the current office holder. I know, I know, I know, you hear former mayors addressed as Mayor (Name), but addressing a former mayor as Mayor (Name) is simply a reporter flattering the former official's ego, or the former official seeking to continue to enjoy the courtesies due his or her former lofty post.
[This contrasts with officials of which there is more than one office holder at a time -- e.g, there are many judges, ambassadors, generals, admirals, professors, senators etc. at a time -- and these former office holders DO use their (Special Honorific)+(Name) in every situation for the rest of their lives.]
-- Robert Hickey

[El Guapo]

Also, it's just flat out lying to say that "no Americans are involved". No Americans were indicted, but the indictment clearly lays out involvement by Americans (connected to the Trump campaign).

[milo]

I'm listening to it. Bet your bottom dollar that the Fox headline is "no collusion" as there are no Americans named in the indictment.

Nope, it's better (by which I mean much, much worse) than that:

[msteelers]

I’m not caught up on the thread, but here is an article from last year in regards to a candidate and Guccifer 2.0.

A report claims information hacked from Democrats during the presidential race also played a role in U.S. Rep. Brian Mast's Treasure Coast race, an allegation his office denies.

Mast's former political consultant told the Wall Street Journal he adjusted the Republican candidate's campaign strategy based on Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee data leaked by hacker “Guccifer 2.0" in August, according to a Thursday story.

“I did adjust some voting targets based on some data I saw from the leaks,” consultant Anthony Bustamante is quoted saying in the article.

Bustamante declined to comment for this story.

Mast's office said Bustamante terminated his contract with the campaign June 30, before the documents were made public by the hacker. Bustamante told the Wall Street Journal he continued to advise the campaign informally after June.

On Aug. 12, political operative Aaron Nevins contacted Guccifer, whom U.S. officials believe is linked to Russia, via Twitter asking for data, the Journal reported. Nevins posted some of the 2.5 gigabytes of documents on his blog HelloFla.com.

[El Guapo]

Uh oh, Rip is in some deep trouble:

Spoiler:

This excerpt is a joke, and not actually part of the indictment.

[Holman]

As the Strok hearing showed yesterday - it isn't about actually *doing* anything. It is appearance of doing so that matters.

Also...there would need to be a Senate trial, right? Wouldn't that trial but a huge PR bonanza for the Democrats?

Yeah but Freedom Caucus guys are extremists. They don't give a shit about the big picture.

I get that, but seems like the kind of thing that Ryan would squash. An impeachment trial of Rosenstein where he talks at length about the Russia investigation and what is known (even just what is publicly known) in the run-up to the mid-terms is like a wet dream for democratic leadership.

Exactly. Pretty much the only thing Ryan does well is prevent the Freedom Caucus from throwing napalm on the GOP garbage fire.

[Jeff V]

I forget - do we hang traitors? Shoot them? I feel like we need to communicate that sooner than later.

Can't we do both? Shooting at a target doing the hangman's dance could result in a lot of painful near-misses!

[Kraken]

I forget - do we hang traitors? Shoot them? I feel like we need to communicate that sooner than later.

Since Trump is the C-in-C, I would hope he's subject to a firing squad. At least I think that's the military remedy.