The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[Zaxxon]

[tjg_marantz]

No!

[Daehawk]

Stormy told Trump just the tip and he said thats all he has.

[Smoove_B]

Ex-Trump lawyer tried to pay legal fees for Manafort and Gates:

A top lawyer for President Trump this year sought to help pay legal fees for Paul Manafort and Richard Gates, initially trying to divert money from the White House legal defense fund and later soliciting donors and pledging $25,000 of his own.

In both cases, the president’s advisers objected to the lawyer’s actions over concerns it could appear aimed at stopping the two former aides from cooperating with investigators

I wonder why he'd try to do that?

[GreenGoo]

Drumpf surrounds himself with altruistic people. This is the second time that someone in his circle have offered to pay for someone else's problems.

[Zaxxon]

Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

[Captain Caveman]

Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

Holy hell, Trump is going to fire Rosenstein now, isn't he? It's quite possible the WH may have leaked this as pretext, or at least to change the news cycle.

In any case, this seems... ominous.

[GreenGoo]

As has been pointed out, Drumpf needs as toady in Rosenstein's place to fire Mueller.

Yeah. I'd say pretty "ominous".

[hepcat]

The number of things I've considered ominous over the last two years that haven't borne out far outnumbers those that have. I think the current rate is like 1273:1.

[geezer]

What kind of English is "...he secretly record Trump..." ?

Bad enough they missed dit in the headline, but then the same mistake in the first sentence too? Don't different people usually write the headlines?

[LawBeefaroni]

What kind of English is "...he secretly record Trump..." ?

Bad enough they missed dit in the headline, but then the same mistake in the first sentence too? Don't different people usually write the headlines?

It's unwieldy but I think correct. He suggested he should do it, not that he did do it.

[Sepiche]

Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

Holy hell, Trump is going to fire Rosenstein now, isn't he? It's quite possible the WH may have leaked this as pretext, or at least to change the news cycle.

A lot of the wording in there also makes me think it's an attempt to give them grounds to dismiss Rosenstein. Drumpf is getting visibly more desperate as time goes on, so I expect it's just a matter of time before they do something stupid.

[GreenGoo]

It's unwieldy but I think correct. He suggested he should do it, not that he did do it.

Except in the same sentence with the (should be) same tense there's "discussed the 25th amendment". If "record" is correct, and it absolutely could be, then it should be "discuss" not "discussed". Also, "25th Amendment" should have a "the" in front of it, pretty sure. Either it was dropped because of headline succinctitude or because the author just isn't that good at grammarifying.

Of course I don't actually know all the grammar rules, I just used to read a lot. I know French grammar better than English grammar, and I don't know French grammar.

[LawBeefaroni]

It's unwieldy but I think correct. He suggested he should do it, not that he did do it.

Except in the same sentence with the (should be) same tense there's "discussed the 25th amendment". If "record" is correct, and it absolutely could be, then it should be "discuss" not "discussed". Also, "25th Amendment" should have a "the" in front of it, pretty sure. Either it was dropped because of headline succinctitude or because the author just isn't that good at grammarifying.

Of course I don't actually know all the grammar rules, I just used to read a lot. I know French grammar better than English grammar, and I don't know French grammar.

He suggested (past tense) that he record Trump. At the same time, he discussed (past tense) 25th Amendment strategies. They're both past tense. Makes for a weird sounding sentence but there's nothing grammatically fatal there.

[geezer]

Ah.. I see it now. I was reading the sentence the wrong way. They meant, "Rosenstein suggested [to others that] he [should] secretly record Trump..." whereas I saw it as, "...Rosenstein suggested (meaning inferred or implied) he secretly record[ed] Trump...[at some time in the past]"

Make sense, but I do note that they've changed the headline

Carrion!

[Unagi]

Not sure if they changed it, but the Headline is: Rosenstein Suggested Secretly Recording Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

[LawBeefaroni]

Not sure if they changed it, but the Headline is: Rosenstein Suggested Secretly Recording Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

That's much better.

[Zaxxon]

I do tend to think this will be used as cover to fire Rosenstein. Should be another fun weekend of stoic Presidential tweetitude.

[GreenGoo]

Make sense, but I do note that they've changed the headline

Carrion!

I'd like to point out that even if Lawbeef's correct about the original headline being grammatically correct (which I'm not 100% sure about, even though I understand his reading and see it in the sentence), it is a terrible, confusing sentence that would be a problem in a grade 7 English assignment.

[Captain Caveman]

The Washington Post now has an article up that has a different interpretation than the NYT article. Seems clear Rosenstein was just joking.

[Zaxxon]

Seems clear Rosenstein was just joking.

I'm sure the President will fully grasp this distinction and incorporate it into his measured response.

[Captain Caveman]

Seems clear Rosenstein was just joking.

I'm sure the President will fully grasp this distinction and incorporate it into his measured response.

Yeah, Trump loves a good joke.

If the Post interpretation is correct, the NYT really looks stupid and may be on the hook for what's to come.

[Zaxxon]

If the Post interpretation is correct, the NYT really looks stupid and may be on the hook for what's to come.

Yeah, that's a pretty major fuckup.

[Skinypupy]

If the Post interpretation is correct, the NYT really looks stupid and may be on the hook for what's to come.

Yeah, that's a pretty major fuckup.

Not a good look for the NYT, especially on the heels of the stupid "anonymous insider" stunt.

It will be funny, however, to watch the GOP try to claim this as irrefutable truth and absolute justification for firing Rosenstein...after dismissing literally everything the NYT has published in the past 18 months as FAKE NEWS.

[GreenGoo]

Seems clear Rosenstein was just joking.

I'm sure the President will fully grasp this distinction and incorporate it into his measured response.

[Kraken]

Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

Holy hell, Trump is going to fire Rosenstein now, isn't he? It's quite possible the WH may have leaked this as pretext, or at least to change the news cycle.

In any case, this seems... ominous.

There will be blood after the midterms. Sessions will be gone, then Rosenstein, and then Mueller. Kelly will quit. That's just for starters. I won't be surprised if half of the WH staff turns over, voluntarily or not. We'll have to learn the names of a whole new hive of scum and villains.

[El Guapo]

Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

Holy hell, Trump is going to fire Rosenstein now, isn't he? It's quite possible the WH may have leaked this as pretext, or at least to change the news cycle.

In any case, this seems... ominous.

There will be blood after the midterms. Sessions will be gone, then Rosenstein, and then Mueller. Kelly will quit. That's just for starters. I won't be surprised if half of the WH staff turns over, voluntarily or not. We'll have to learn the names of a whole new hive of scum and villains.

It depends on the midterm outcomes. If the GOP holds both chambers...then yeah, Saturday Night Massacre time (only with a different ending). If the Democrats get at least one chamber....then it gets more complicated.

[Ralph-Wiggum]

If the Post interpretation is correct, the NYT really looks stupid and may be on the hook for what's to come.

Yeah, that's a pretty major fuckup.

Although it sounds like McCabe's own notes mention Rosenstein's "wire" and 25th Amendment comments, without noting any sarcasm. So I can see how people only reading those notes wouldn't be able to tell that Rosenstein meant them as jokes.

[Holman]

What kind of English is "...he secretly record Trump..." ?

Bad enough they missed dit in the headline, but then the same mistake in the first sentence too? Don't different people usually write the headlines?

Just to be an English teacher (and I know we've moved on):

The original headline ("Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment") is subjunctive. It's actually "Rosenstein Suggested that He Secretly Record..." with the "that" elided.

[Captain Caveman]

If the Post interpretation is correct, the NYT really looks stupid and may be on the hook for what's to come.

Yeah, that's a pretty major fuckup.

Although it sounds like McCabe's own notes mention Rosenstein's "wire" and 25th Amendment comments, without noting any sarcasm. So I can see how people only reading those notes wouldn't be able to tell that Rosenstein meant them as jokes.

Seems like rolling with such a potentially incendiary and consequential article would require better sourcing than just second-hand reading of notes.

[El Guapo]

If the Post interpretation is correct, the NYT really looks stupid and may be on the hook for what's to come.

Yeah, that's a pretty major fuckup.

Although it sounds like McCabe's own notes mention Rosenstein's "wire" and 25th Amendment comments, without noting any sarcasm. So I can see how people only reading those notes wouldn't be able to tell that Rosenstein meant them as jokes.

Seems like rolling with such a potentially incendiary and consequential article would require better sourcing than just second-hand reading of notes.

But they're always so careful.

[GungHo]

This whole rosenstein thing is just anonymous sources, you know people with an agenda. Besides he was just joking.

Man, where have I heard THAT before?

To be clear, I have no problem with anonymous sources and I do think he was joking....but sheesh we really are living in carnival-funhouse-weird mirror times.

[malchior]

Rosenstein Suggested He Secretly Record Trump and Discussed 25th Amendment

Holy hell, Trump is going to fire Rosenstein now, isn't he? It's quite possible the WH may have leaked this as pretext, or at least to change the news cycle.

In any case, this seems... ominous.

There will be blood after the midterms. Sessions will be gone, then Rosenstein, and then Mueller. Kelly will quit. That's just for starters. I won't be surprised if half of the WH staff turns over, voluntarily or not. We'll have to learn the names of a whole new hive of scum and villains.

It depends on the midterm outcomes. If the GOP holds both chambers...then yeah, Saturday Night Massacre time (only with a different ending). If the Democrats get at least one chamber....then it gets more complicated.

Winning the House opens an investigatory door but it alone won't stop Trump from pretty much getting whoever he wants confirmed. At least for a year until elections approach again.

As to the story itself - it seems crazy to me that every nook and cranny of our government is just chock full of vipers. They are everywhere. Our country is incredibly sick right now. No wonder no one trusts each other. Every meeting seems to have notes taken (some with context / some without) and then show up months later when convenient to hang people out to dry. It is a terrible way to govern. Why would anyone decent want to step in and serve anymore?

[LawBeefaroni]

[Why would anyone decent want to step in and serve anymore?

Personal enrichment.

[Holman]

[Why would anyone decent want to step in and serve anymore?

Personal enrichment.

And even a corrupt WH is a strong career move.

The men running GWB's administration were former Nixon staffers.

[Max Peck]

If the Post interpretation is correct, the NYT really looks stupid and may be on the hook for what's to come.

Yeah, that's a pretty major fuckup.

Although it sounds like McCabe's own notes mention Rosenstein's "wire" and 25th Amendment comments, without noting any sarcasm. So I can see how people only reading those notes wouldn't be able to tell that Rosenstein meant them as jokes.

Seems like rolling with such a potentially incendiary and consequential article would require better sourcing than just second-hand reading of notes.

One wonders how it feels when your reporting is so bad that Fox News is showing you up...

[Kurth]

CNN reporting Rosenstein is expecting to be fired.

I do not understand the NYT publishing the story late last week about Rosenstein thinking about invoking the 25th Amendment and possibly wearing a wire to record Trump. What did that accomplish besides setting up Trump with an excuse to fire Rosenstein?

[Holman]

Some sites are reporting that Rosenstein has already resigned in anticipation of being fired.

What happens now?

Conflicting reports, though...

NBC's Pete Williams, gold standard in #DOJ reporting, says #Rosenstein en route to White House, won't resign and will force them to fire him. As I am told, Vacancies Act only kicks in if he resigns.

[Chaz]

Rumors are flying all over in the interwebs, but a lot of the rumbling is that he resigned in anticipation of being fired.

So, who's next in line to oversee the Mueller investigation? It's someone who has a history of being completely nonpartisan... Oh wait, it's someone who's basically the avatar of the Federalist Society. Great.

[Smoove_B]

Rumors are flying all over in the interwebs, but a lot of the rumbling is that he resigned in anticipation of being fired.

AP is confirming this:

Matcher from @AP: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein has verbally resigned to Chief of Staff John Kelly in anticipation of being fired by President Trump.