The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:20 pm

https://www.npr.org/2019/03/29/70812877 ... -barr-says

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document ... r-March-29

Barr does a pretty good job of defending himself against the malice and shade thrown his way unlike Trump and his SS mouthpiece. I reserve the right to reserve... Or something...

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Fri Mar 29, 2019 5:50 pm

LordMortis wrote: Fri Mar 29, 2019 4:20 pm https://www.npr.org/2019/03/29/70812877 ... -barr-says

https://apps.npr.org/documents/document ... r-March-29

Barr does a pretty good job of defending himself against the malice and shade thrown his way unlike Trump and his SS mouthpiece. I reserve the right to reserve... Or something...

Sort of. Per my link a page back, it is extremely likely that when he said Mueller's Investigation did not establish (certain crimes), he's not referring to the Counter-Intelligence Investigation or any of the referred Investigations, which is possibly very, very misleading.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Mon Apr 01, 2019 3:23 pm

WaPo

A White House whistleblower told lawmakers that more than two dozen denials for security clearances have been overturned during the Trump administration, calling Congress her “last hope” for addressing what she considers improper conduct that has left the nation’s secrets exposed.

Tricia Newbold, a longtime White House security adviser, told the House Oversight and Reform Committee that she and her colleagues issued “dozens” of denials for security clearance applications that were later approved despite their concerns about blackmail, foreign influence or other red flags, according to panel documents released Monday.

Newbold, an 18-year veteran of the security clearance process who has served under both Republican and Democratic presidents, said she warned her superiors that clearances “were not always adjudicated in the best interest of national security” — and was retaliated against for doing so.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:06 pm

"Whoa whoa whoa.... 'no wrongdoing' is going a bit too far here'"

Zaxxon · Post by **Zaxxon** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:52 pm

I mean, I wouldn't go so far as to say he's innocent. Let's not be ridiculous.

wonderpug · Post by **wonderpug** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:59 pm

The report totally exonerates Trump, at this time of year, at this time of day, in this part of the country, localized entirely within your kitchen?

Yes.

May I see it?

No.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:47 pm

Yeah, I think their spin on the report has been a tremendous blunder.

They would have been smarter to just let it come out and do the spin afterward, but now they're committed to a narrative that screams "Coverup" if Mueller found details that will resonate as unethical.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:50 pm

Holman wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:47 pm Yeah, I think their spin on the report has been a tremendous blunder.

They would have been smarter to just let it come out and do the spin afterward, but now they're committed to a narrative that screams "Coverup" if Mueller found details that will resonate as unethical.

I dunno. The strategy was probably something like use Barr's topline "all clear" summary and hammer the media for botching the story, which worked well enough. Combine that with a pitch of "time to put this aside and govern the country" and hope that the political pressure around the report is now small enough that they can quietly bury it (or at least, bury it without the political cost being crippling), and rely on raw partisanship and polarization in 2020.

Seems like a plausible strategy. It may make the eventual hit (when and if the report gets released) worse, but if the report's bad enough the difference may not matter all that much.

Sepiche · Post by **Sepiche** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:58 pm

El Guapo wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:50 pm
Holman wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:47 pm Yeah, I think their spin on the report has been a tremendous blunder.

They would have been smarter to just let it come out and do the spin afterward, but now they're committed to a narrative that screams "Coverup" if Mueller found details that will resonate as unethical.
I dunno.

I think part of the blunder that that Drumpf's defenders are going to be increasingly unable to deal with in the coming days is why the WH doesn't want to publicly release a report that supposedly completely vindicates the President. It's a simple argument they don't seem to have any sort of answer for.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:12 pm

Sepiche wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:58 pm
El Guapo wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:50 pm
Holman wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 4:47 pm Yeah, I think their spin on the report has been a tremendous blunder.

They would have been smarter to just let it come out and do the spin afterward, but now they're committed to a narrative that screams "Coverup" if Mueller found details that will resonate as unethical.
I dunno.
I think part of the blunder that that Drumpf's defenders are going to be increasingly unable to deal with in the coming days is why the WH doesn't want to publicly release a report that supposedly completely vindicates the President. It's a simple argument they don't seem to have any sort of answer for.

It's obvious that the report clears Trump, but you know how the Dems and fake news media work. They'll cherry pick innocent things out of the report to try to hint at something sinister, when the reality is a full and total exoneration of Trump.

And if you don't think Trump's supporters will eat that up without question, you haven't been paying attention.

Sepiche · Post by **Sepiche** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:39 pm

ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:12 pm And if you don't think Trump's supporters will eat that up without question, you haven't been paying attention.

Maybe, but as arguments go "you're too dumb to understand the Mueller report" is pretty weak, while "if it completely vindicates him, why not release the report?" has the advantage of being logical and straight forward.

And so far Barr and Drumpf's shell games aren't working, even among some of his faithful...
https://www.npr.org/2019/03/29/70771399 ... t-released

Overall, three-quarters said the full Mueller report should be made public. That included a majority of Republicans (54 percent). Just 18 percent overall said Barr's summary is enough.

Post by **ImLawBoy** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:50 pm

Give Trump's messaging time to seep in. There's still likely some residual effect from when Trump was claiming the whole report should be released. Give Fox News a couple of weeks to hammer the message, and the logical merits of each argument will likely be irrelevant.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 6:33 pm

I heard that the Democrats are sore losers who just won't accept that Donald J. Trump is beloved by real Americans, and who are just trying to bog our president down with endless requests for "evidence" in order to stop him from Making America Great Again. Why bother releasing the report, when our President has already been exonerated?

Unagi · Post by **Unagi** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 6:34 pm

Sepiche wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:39 pm
ImLawBoy wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 5:12 pm And if you don't think Trump's supporters will eat that up without question, you haven't been paying attention.
Maybe, but as arguments go "you're too dumb to understand the Mueller report" is pretty weak, while "if it completely vindicates him, why not release the report?" has the advantage of being logical and straight forward.

And so far Barr and Drumpf's shell games aren't working, even among some of his faithful...
https://www.npr.org/2019/03/29/70771399 ... t-released
Overall, three-quarters said the full Mueller report should be made public. That included a majority of Republicans (54 percent). Just 18 percent overall said Barr's summary is enough.

But they are going to release it, right? - it will just be redacted - no ?
And it's hard to argue it shouldn't be redacted.

The nuance is going to be that it will be Heavily redacted, maybe more than half of it. Entire sections. But that nuance will be lost in "are you saying it shouldn't be redacted??"

GreenGoo · Post by **GreenGoo** » Tue Apr 02, 2019 6:55 pm

What I don't understand is why won't he release his long form birth certificate? That more than anything will determine his fitness to be president.

But hey, yeah, a report detailing unethical and illegal activity surrounding the president is almost as good as an actual conspiracy theory.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 10:57 am

Subpoenas incoming.

There are likely more to come as well for the numerous administration figures who've been stonewalling last month's written requests for documents.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:21 pm

Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal has sent a letter to the IRS demanding Trump's tax returns from 2013 to 2018.

EDIT:

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 7:27 pm

Holman wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2019 6:21 pm Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal has sent a letter to the IRS demanding Trump's tax returns from 2013 to 2018.

EDIT:

I suspect that as part of the Mueller Investigation documents HJC will also see them.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:22 pm

Is this the first actual leak from Mueller's team?

(Seen on Twitter:) If they're leaking this after two years of rock-solid discipline, it's got to be serious.

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:42 am

Holman wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:22 pm

Is this the first actual leak from Mueller's team?

(Seen on Twitter:) If they're leaking this after two years of rock-solid discipline, it's got to be serious.

Well some (if not most) of Mueller's team are now former members of the team, so I'm not sure that this is technically a leak from the Special Counsel's office.

But that aside, yeah seems significant. Especially since Mueller's team apparently wrote executive summaries that were intended for public use.

It does seem clear, though, that Barr has not been dealing from the top of the deck. More evidence of his bad faith can be found in his putative reason for abridging Mueller’s conclusions. The special counsel’s report provided summaries of its work. The Times, apparently relying on Justice Department sources, reports that Mueller’s summaries could not be published, because they “contain sensitive information, like classified material, secret grand-jury testimony and information related to current federal investigations that must remain confidential, according to two government officials.”

But the special counsel flatly contradicts this in its leak to the Post. The summaries, says a special counsel source, were deliberately written “so that the front matter from each section could have been released immediately — or very quickly … It was done in a way that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself.”

(Fordham law professor Jed Shugerman spotted this contradiction.) It’s possible, of course, the Justice Department is right and the special counsel is wrong. But it seems far more likely that Barr has, at minimum, spun the report in the most favorable way, in order to create the impression that it has cleared Trump. This has enabled the president and his defenders to spike the football, and present any efforts to examine the actual report as sore losers demanding to play overtime after the game has been decided.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 12:35 pm

NBC: Mueller report includes “detailed accounts of Trump campaign contacts with Russia” and depicts a “campaign whose members were manipulated by a sophisticated Russian intelligence operation.”

TheMix · Post by **TheMix** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:02 pm

See? It's not collusion if you are just completely manipulated without your knowledge!

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 1:48 pm

Holman wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2019 9:22 pm

Is this the first actual leak from Mueller's team?

(Seen on Twitter:) If they're leaking this after two years of rock-solid discipline, it's got to be serious.

IMHO, these aren't leaks. Just secondhand comments on what Barr made public.

Ralph-Wiggum · Post by **Ralph-Wiggum** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:01 pm

A sign of what to expect?

The Department of Justice on Thursday defended Attorney General William Barr's summary of special counsel Robert Mueller's confidential report after two newspapers said Mueller's investigators felt Barr didn't properly convey how damaging their findings were for President Donald Trump.

A Justice Department spokeswoman said "every page" of Mueller's nearly 400-page report provided to Barr on March 22 was flagged as potentially containing material covered under a law that protects confidential grand jury information and "therefore could not be publicly released."

Emphasis mine.

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:14 pm

Oh they 'potentially' were sensitive? That explains his caution...hard to be circumspect when you drop a summary 2 days after the report was delivered.

Isgrimnur · Post by **Isgrimnur** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:17 pm

Someone in the grand jury said, "the." Redact it all.

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:20 pm

We'll see. Right now my biggest eyebrow raise is we are day 14 in to "weeks not months" since Mueller turned over the investigation and it sure doesn't feel like the publication is right around the corner. It might be but it doesn't feel that way. I try and give Barr the benefit of the doubt. Fake News, quite frankly give me plenty of reason to believe they want my clicks and my social media outrage because "sources" but it begins to feel more like Barr is talking to paint picture he wants us to buy in to not tell us what is the case. I hope I'm wrong and my feelings are have no basis beyond my dislike of POTUS.

$iljanus · Post by **$iljanus** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:57 pm

I wonder if there's going to be a Wikileaks style release of the report? One can only hope for a mislaid data stick that happens to make it's way into the public domain via files being bounced among a bunch of overseas servers to make it hard to track down their origin...

malchior · Post by **malchior** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:23 pm

LordMortis wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:20 pmI try and give Barr the benefit of the doubt.

I was giving him the benefit of the doubt after being skeptical. However, this piece reminded me about his background. I'm no longer as willing to give him the benefit of the doubt even understanding he has a balancing game to play. The main problem IMO is he has been a blocker protecting transparency vis a vis bad behavior in the past and it is hard to overlook that.

Holman · Post by **Holman** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:30 pm

$iljanus wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:57 pm I wonder if there's going to be a Wikileaks style release of the report? One can only hope for a mislaid data stick that happens to make it's way into the public domain via files being bounced among a bunch of overseas servers to make it hard to track down their origin...

Wikileaks style is to run it past Putin first.

But right now I'd put it at about 50-50 that very significant and troubling details from the report will be leaked (probably to the Washington Post) before Barr hands over whatever version he attempts to hand over.

The administration seemed to believe that winning one news cycle was all it would take to bury this thing. Half the media was willing to go along, but I kind of suspect that this story is just now reaching the form that history will remember.

malchior wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:23 pm
LordMortis wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:20 pmI try and give Barr the benefit of the doubt.
I was giving him the benefit of the doubt after being skeptical. However, this piece reminded me about his background. I'm no longer as willing to give him the benefit of the doubt even understanding he has a balancing game to play. The main problem IMO is he has been a blocker protecting transparency vis a vis bad behavior in the past and it is hard to overlook that.

Barr covered up Iran-Contra. That was his whole resume.

He had one job this time, and he seems to be botching it.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:31 pm

I'm not suggesting that someone in the DOJ should release the report. But some people are saying that. And that would be quite interesting. Are you listening, Deep State?

El Guapo · Post by **El Guapo** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 9:52 pm

Holman wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:30 pm
$iljanus wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:57 pm I wonder if there's going to be a Wikileaks style release of the report? One can only hope for a mislaid data stick that happens to make it's way into the public domain via files being bounced among a bunch of overseas servers to make it hard to track down their origin...
Wikileaks style is to run it past Putin first.

But right now I'd put it at about 50-50 that very significant and troubling details from the report will be leaked (probably to the Washington Post) before Barr hands over whatever version he attempts to hand over.

The administration seemed to believe that winning one news cycle was all it would take to bury this thing. Half the media was willing to go along, but I kind of suspect that this story is just now reaching the form that history will remember.

malchior wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:23 pm
LordMortis wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 4:20 pmI try and give Barr the benefit of the doubt.
I was giving him the benefit of the doubt after being skeptical. However, this piece reminded me about his background. I'm no longer as willing to give him the benefit of the doubt even understanding he has a balancing game to play. The main problem IMO is he has been a blocker protecting transparency vis a vis bad behavior in the past and it is hard to overlook that.
Barr covered up Iran-Contra. That was his whole resume.

He had one job this time, and he seems to be botching it.

Well, that wasn't his *whole* resume. There was also the whole "writing Trump an unsolicited memo about why the investigations into him were bullshit" part too.

Alefroth · Post by **Alefroth** » Thu Apr 04, 2019 11:19 pm

Let's call it his cover letter.

Paingod · Post by **Paingod** » Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:21 am

Alefroth wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 11:19 pm Let's call it his cover letter.

The interview: I hear you need a cover up. I got that covered. Up. Or back. Then? I don't know. I got no issue with pretending shit ain't there. I'm hired? Hell yeah!

LordMortis · Post by **LordMortis** » Fri Apr 05, 2019 9:35 am

CV Summary maybe?

I keep reading and then forgetting about Iran Contra. I don't know why. I no longer want to give him the benefit of the doubt but I still want to give him the benefit of my desire to get away from the new normal. He's making it hard.

stessier · Post by **stessier** » Fri Apr 05, 2019 11:22 am

White House Says Mueller Report Must Be Kept Private Because It’s So Exonerating It Would Drive Public Mad

Before you resolve the link - real or fake headline?

em2nought · Post by **em2nought** » Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:09 pm

Zarathud wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:31 pm I'm not suggesting that someone in the DOJ should release the report. But some people are saying that. And that would be quite interesting. Are you listening, Deep State?

Glad to see you come round to the idea that the deep state exists.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Fri Apr 05, 2019 2:09 pm

I'm not saying it. Some people are saying it.

It would be interesting. So very interesting.

/trump

Pyperkub · Post by **Pyperkub** » Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:21 pm

em2nought wrote: Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:09 pm
Zarathud wrote: Thu Apr 04, 2019 5:31 pm I'm not suggesting that someone in the DOJ should release the report. But some people are saying that. And that would be quite interesting. Are you listening, Deep State?
Glad to see you come round to the idea that the deep state exists.

They've also asked Russia to release it, FWIW...

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Fri Apr 05, 2019 5:59 pm

This is all so confusing - Cohen's lawyers release memo and make new accusations against Trump:

Michael Cohen's legal team has released a 12-page memo it provided to House Democrats Thursday. The memo outlines evidence of what his team describes as "Trump's involvement in a conspiracy to collude with Russian government intervention in his favor during the 2016 presidential campaign" and "other felony crimes committed by Trump before and after he became president."

I thought Barr already cleared this all up.