The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[malchior]

"Nothing's gonna happen"

Something happens.

"It's not enough because the system is BROKEN".

It's not enough. I will give them credit but also it is not much in the way of real accountability. It may lead to it but I won't hold my breath. It's important when assessing the impact and "brokenness" to consider that Congress just had to fight for *3 years* to get a ruling that affirmed a plain reading of the law. This episode is one of the many ways the administration bent or broke the law. We also just found out the IRS also broke the law and only began to follow the law when they got caught out breaking the law. This was kept secret until now.

Also I contextually consider that this was a relatively small portion of the rampant lawlessness and malfeasance all through the government during the Trump administration. To date, there has been little accountability for that state of lawlessness. If you think this system isn't broken that's your right but it's fairly silly when you *wave hands around* look at the state of things.

[Zarathud]

It also shows Trump lied about being audited, despite a mandatory audit.

[malchior]

It also shows Trump lied about being audited, despite a mandatory audit.

That's right. It's not just Trump. It's a whole host of folks in the administration.

It's also 2022 and the audit of the 2016 return is still uncompleted. Lots of questions in my mind. Questions we may never get answers to with a GOP house. Off the top of my head I have these: Why was the 2016 audit not completed? Why did they not audit 2017, 2018, or 2019? Was he being audited during the 2016 campaign? Who is typically responsible for conducting Presidential audits? Who was responsible for overseeing adherence with the law? Was there any order to not conduct any audits? Were there any whistleblower reports during that period?

[Smoove_B]

[LawBeefaroni]

Not unexpected. But those that need to see it won't believe it.

[Unagi]

Something funky is going on in 2015

[Alefroth]

Maybe a payment from the previous year?

[malchior]

DOJ subpoenaed Trump campaign last month looking for 1/6 information. Glad they were right on top of this.

A wide-ranging subpoena sent to Trump campaign officials last month shows new areas of investigative interest as part of the Justice Department’s extensive Jan. 6 criminal probe, according to a copy reviewed by The Washington Post, and lawyers say a grand jury focused on the day’s events and related fundraising has increased its activities in recent months.

The subpoena was received in early December, according to a former Trump campaign official who provided the document to The Post on the condition of anonymity because a criminal investigation is ongoing. The document seeks more than two dozen categories of information, and includes some questions that were not part of a series of similar subpoenas reviewed by The Post that were sent to several dozen people in September.

[malchior]

Wow this is chutzpah. Manhattan DA Bragg sent letter's to a former prosecutor and his publisher that a book about to be published will impact the investigation he sabotaged last year. It's been well over a year since Bragg ignored the recommendation to indict Trump and the timing out of the previous grand jury but somehow this book is going to impact the case. Come on.

Edit: To those not watching this closely but have interest. One read is that Bragg might even be orchestrating a defense against this book. He invited Michael Cohen in for a 3 hour interview that occurred yesterday. Cohen ran straight right to MSNBC subsequently and talked last night about how he thinks it must be serious...because they talked to him for 3 hours. Mhm...ok. Let's say that's true but the context is important. Most folks were surprised by the book announcement in the press. S&S kept it under tight wraps. We can suspect that Bragg was surprised as well and is afraid to be embarrassed by revelations that his spine is gelatinous.

Washington Post

Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is concerned that a former prosecutor who wrote a book about his time investigating Donald Trump may jeopardize the office’s continuing probe, potentially violating laws and ethics rules in the process, according to a letter to the publisher and author sent Wednesday.

The former investigator, Mark Pomerantz, was put on a special assignment to work the Trump case by Bragg’s predecessor, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., and helped lead the effort until his abrupt resignation in February 2022, weeks into Bragg’s term. Pomerantz and another veteran lawyer, Carey Dunne, quit together in disagreement over how to proceed with the case.

Since then, Pomerantz has criticized Bragg, saying he wrongly stopped a move to quickly indict Trump, while Bragg sought more time to evaluate the evidence. Bragg now says a new book by Pomerantz to be published next month by Simon & Schuster could interfere with that effort.

[Pyperkub]

Lying under Oath...

onald Trump may have severely damaged his case in the defamation lawsuit brought against him by a woman who accused him of rape by expressing "repeated lies" during his deposition, according to an attorney.

Katie Phang, legal analyst and MSNBC host, was reacting to the unsealed transcripts of the testimony Trump gave as part of the suit brought forward by former Elle columnist E. Jean Carroll.

[stessier]

I'm not sure where to put this, but Trump and his lawyer were sanctioned nearly $1 million.

https://mastodon.social/@mmasnick/109719522254200593



And this link has a breakdown of who is getting checks.

https://law-and-politics.online/@Teri_K ... 0896940824

[malchior]

I'd bet real money the lawyers end up footing that entire bill.

[Alefroth]

What are the sanctions for?

[Smoove_B]

Frivolous lawsuit fees. Basically, he has to pay back the legal fees incurred by people defending against his legal nonsense. I fully believe this should be happening all the goddamn time with clowns like TFG. I had a former boss introduce me to the concept 25 years ago and after seeing how well it worked, I was immediately convinced it's an underused response.

[Alefroth]

Thanks. I'd think it'd make lawyers think twice before representing him.

[malchior]

NY Times

I'm totally sure that Durham and Barr investigated this tip from Italian authorities thoroughly and in an above board manner.

Interviews by The Times with more than a dozen current and former officials have revealed an array of previously unreported episodes that show how the Durham inquiry became roiled by internal dissent and ethical disputes as it went unsuccessfully down one path after another even as Mr. Trump and Mr. Barr promoted a misleading narrative of its progress.

Mr. Barr and Mr. Durham never disclosed that their inquiry expanded in the fall of 2019, based on a tip from Italian officials, to include a criminal investigation into suspicious financial dealings related to Mr. Trump. The specifics of the tip and how they handled the investigation remain unclear, but Mr. Durham brought no charges over it.

The rest of the article indicates that are some pretty serious abuses of power potentially buried in the DOJ landfill. It was a cesspool in the Trump administration but luckily a institutionalist interested in burying it succeeded them. We deserve a full accounting of what happened but I don't think we will get one as long as Garland is in charge.

Edit: This is exactly the type of reporting we need but don't see often. It should be yet another major major scandal but nothing will probably happen.

[Smoove_B]

I'm sure this will change everything:

Former President Donald Trump’s legal team turned over more materials with classified markings and a laptop belonging to an aide to federal prosecutors in recent months, multiple sources familiar with the investigation told CNN.

The Trump attorneys also handed over an empty folder marked “Classified Evening Briefing,” sources said.

The previously undisclosed handovers – from December and January – suggest the protracted effort by the Justice Department to repossess records from Trump’s presidency may not be done.

...

A Trump aide had previously copied those same pages onto a thumb drive and laptop, not realizing they were classified. The laptop, which belonged to an aide, who works for Save America PAC, and the thumb drive were also given to investigators in January.

Special counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, which is pursuing possible criminal charges related to Trump’s handling of national security records and obstruction of justice, had subpoenaed Trump last May for all classified records in his possession.

[Grifman]

[malchior]

A couple of folks including Conway thought this was a fait accompli *last year* on some issues so this is a good sign they are attacking with their best strategies. Lord knows we need it.

[Pyperkub]

A Judge has called out and rejected! Trump's delay tactics, at least WRT the E. Jean Carroll lawsuit:

“Until February 10, 2023, about ten weeks before this case is set to be tried, Mr. Trump has refused to provide his DNA,” Senior U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan wrote in a 21-page memorandum opinion. “Moreover, he has employed litigation tactics the effect and probable purpose of which have been to delay Ms. Carroll’s actions against him an object that is significant in view of the fact that Ms. Carroll now is 79 years old.”

In 2019, Carroll went public with allegations that Trump raped her in the dressing room of a Bergdorf Goodman in the mid-1990s. Trump denied it to reporters by claiming: “She’s not my type,” sparking Carroll’s original lawsuit for defamation.

[Alefroth]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... -rcna70397

A special grand jury report on whether then-President Donald Trump and his allies tried to unlawfully interfere in the 2020 election results in Georgia says the grand jurors believe some witnesses may have lied under oath.

[Isgrimnur]

[Pyperkub]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald ... -rcna70397

A special grand jury report on whether then-President Donald Trump and his allies tried to unlawfully interfere in the 2020 election results in Georgia says the grand jurors believe some witnesses may have lied under oath.

I'd bet that if Mueller were put under Oath, he'd state that he believed Trump lied under Oath in his written responses there too.

[Alefroth]

I wouldn't take that bet.

[Pyperkub]

I wouldn't take that bet.

Wise man - as it seems as if at least half of the crap which he spews is a lie or misinformation, so based on sheer volume...

[Grifman]

[Pyperkub]

"REcommending" Indictments <> Indicting.

[Grifman]

"REcommending" Indictments <> Indicting.

I’m pretty sure I already understood that

[Isgrimnur]

[Pyperkub]

"REcommending" Indictments <> Indicting.

I’m pretty sure I already understood that

I posted the Caddyshack "Well... We're waiting" gif in that twitter thread

[malchior]

Those interviews and specifically the one on CNN yesterday with the GA foreperson are a huge Deathwatch moment. I'm not saying it wasn't news but it certainly wasn't wise to put this person on the air acting like that when the stakes are this high. I wonder if I'll be around to read a book about how unserious this nation became. Probably not because people somehow can't see what a shitshow we have become. Boiled frogs and all.

Here is a sample if you didn't get a taste of it.

[Kurth]

Those interviews and specifically the one on CNN yesterday with the GA foreperson are a huge Deathwatch moment. I'm not saying it wasn't news but it certainly wasn't wise to put this person on the air acting like that when the stakes are this high. I wonder if I'll be around to read a book about how unserious this nation became. Probably not because people somehow can't see what a shitshow we have become. Boiled frogs and all.

Here is a sample if you didn't get a taste of it.

Holy shit that is awful. Potential criminal indictments against a former president isn't funny, but she's giggling and joking and talking about what a hoot it would have been if Trump was subpoenaed just so she would have had the opportunity to swear him in. It's like the foreperson of the jury in this case is a shallow, ignorant, flighty middle school girl.

But it is what it is, right? I don't see how you can blame CNN and other news agencies for shining a light on the fact that someone who is playing an integral role in potentially steering the course of our democracy is a fucking idiot. When you say, "it was[] news but it certainly wasn't wise to put this person on the air," I think it exposes the fundamental issue I have with some (by no means all) of the "Deathwatch" commentary.

From where I sit, it's not the job of the news media to drive things to a certain outcome, and that's how I read your commentary here when you criticize this as being unwise news. I certainly agree that if the goal of the news media is to form public opinion so it's more supportive of indictment and criminal charges against Trump, then this coverage certainly wasn't wise. But I don't think that's their job. In my mind, it's either news, or it's not, and whether it furthers or hinders a particular outcome shouldn't be part of the equation.

[malchior]

But it is what it is, right? I don't see how you can blame CNN and other news agencies for shining a light on the fact that someone who is playing an integral role in potentially steering the course of our democracy is a fucking idiot. When you say, "it was[] news but it certainly wasn't wise to put this person on the air," I think it exposes the fundamental issue I have with some (by no means all) of the "Deathwatch" commentary.

That's why I say it's news. It is but I can't help but remember that old saying, all the news that's fit to print. Apparently that's anything now. Apparently we shouldn't expect the press to exercise any judgement. I personally don't think it is necessary to potentially undermine this investigation or add to the fraught political tension with side shows. In other words, there is little public interest being served by exposing every nook and cranny of this increasingly stupid system.

From where I sit, it's not the job of the news media to drive things to a certain outcome, and that's how I read your commentary here when you criticize this as being unwise news.

It's not about driving specific outcomes but again they need to serve the public interest. That is journalism ethics 101. That is what most of my criticism is. The complete lack of ethics. They knew what they were doing when they pointed a camera at this idiot. Part of the reason people often say they don't trust the media is that they selectively publish information. However, in reality the opposite is true, they often publish sensational stories, with little context, and without limits. They show very little wisdom.

Edit: Also to an extent they should have considered the danger the foreperson is putting themselves in because they sure as shit don't seem to realize the shit storm they stepped into.

CNN then ran coverage all day about how bad this was for the prosecution. They created their own little news cyclone doing damage to the public interest throughout the day. They are completely out of control from an ethics point of view but we don't live in an ethical world anymore.

I certainly agree that if the goal of the news media is to form public opinion so it's more supportive of indictment and criminal charges against Trump, then this coverage certainly wasn't wise. But I don't think that's their job. In my mind, it's either news, or it's not, and whether it furthers or hinders a particular outcome shouldn't be part of the equation.

FWIW I agree they shouldn't be pushing for/against an indictment. That's not the problem. Wouldn't you agree that there are limits and expectations we should hold for the use of this awesome power they have to shape our society and how it functions?

[Carpet_pissr]

Are we sure she isn't a paid actor? This smacks very much of some amateurish fake youtube channel situation/writing/acting.

Jesus.

[Zarathud]

Jury of your peers. Our Peers are Fucking Idiots desperate for attention.

[Isgrimnur]

Jury of your peers. Our Peers are Fucking Idiots desperate for attention.

[malchior]

Oh boy, this Washington Post article is concerning. It gives us a hint of the fact that FBI agents may be protecting Trump. And that wouldn't be in isolation. We saw this in SDNY. We saw this in other investigations. The piece is making it sound like they were worried about the politics but they've shown over and over deference to Trump and conservatives.

But two senior FBI officials who would be in charge of leading the search resisted the plan as too combative and proposed instead to seek Trump’s permission to search his property, according to the four people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a sensitive investigation.

...

Starting in May, FBI agents in the Washington field office had sought to slow the probe, urging caution given its extraordinary sensitivity, the people said.

Some of those field agents wanted to shutter the criminal investigation altogether in early June, after Trump’s legal team asserted a diligent search had been conducted and all classified records had been turned over, according to some people with knowledge of the discussions.

The idea of closing the probe was not something that was discussed or considered by FBI leadership and would not have been approved, a senior law enforcement official said.

...

On one side, federal prosecutors in the department’s national security division advocated aggressive ways to secure some of the country’s most closely guarded secrets, which they feared Trump was intentionally hiding at Mar-a-Lago; on the other, FBI agents in the Washington field office urged more caution with such a high-profile matter, recommending they take a cooperative rather than confrontational approach.

...

The FBI agents’ caution also was rooted in the fact that mistakes in prior probes of Hillary Clinton and Trump had proved damaging to the FBI, and the cases subjected the bureau to sustained public attacks from partisans, the people said.

Prosecutors countered that the FBI failing to treat Trump as it had other government employees who were not truthful about classified records could threaten the nation’s security. As evidence surfaced suggesting that Trump or his team was holding back sensitive records, the prosecutors pushed for quick action to recover them, according to the people familiar with the discussions.

...

It’s unclear how the investigation may have been reshaped if the two sides had settled their disputes differently. Had the criminal investigation been closed in June, as some FBI field agents discussed, legal experts said it’s unlikely agents would have yet recovered the items found in the FBI’s raid of Trump’s residence.

[Max Peck]

The FBI Desperately Wants to Let Trump Off the Hook

The way conservatives tell it, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is a hive of anti-Trump villainy, filled with agents looking for any excuse to hound the former president with investigative witch hunts. But the thing to understand about Donald Trump’s legal troubles is that they exist not because federal agents are out to get him, but despite the fact that the FBI is full of Trump supporters who would really like to leave him alone.

This morning, The Washington Post reported that FBI investigators clashed with federal prosecutors over the decision to search the former president’s residence, where highly classified documents were found despite Trump’s insistence that he had none.

“Some of those field agents wanted to shutter the criminal investigation altogether in early June,” the Post reported, adding that FBI agents were “simply afraid” and “worried taking aggressive steps investigating Trump could blemish or even end their careers.” The FBI did not exhibit this worry in 2016, when it publicly announced that it was reopening the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified documents, an announcement that, even with all the other mistakes her campaign made, likely cost Clinton the election. That decision was made in part because then-Director James Comey feared that pro-Trump FBI agents would leak the details if he did not announce them publicly. The federal investigation into the Trump campaign, by contrast, was properly kept confidential until after the election. As one agent told the reporter Spencer Ackerman in 2016, “The FBI is Trumpland.”

President Joe Biden is also under investigation for his mishandling of classified documents, but for now the two situations are distinguished by Biden’s attorneys discovering and voluntarily handing those documents over, as opposed to lying about having them and then insisting that they were his to keep. Neither man, however, should be above prosecution if the circumstances call for it.

A simple but obvious fact has been lost over the past few years, amid Trump’s direct attacks on the FBI, and liberal defenses of the FBI against those attacks: FBI agents are cops. Law-enforcement officers, including the FBI, have long been disproportionately conservative, but in the past few decades, like the rest of the nation, they have also become far more polarized by party, a reality reflected in the rhetoric and positioning of advocacy groups such as the Fraternal Order of Police. There are liberal and moderate cops, but they are not close to comprising a majority. Simply put, the FBI is full of people who would prefer not to investigate Donald Trump. He remains under federal investigation only because of his own inability to stop criming.

[Zarathud]

The GOP method of operation is to accuse their opponents of their own sins, and then make up outrageous claims to motivate their base.

[Unagi]

Seriously.

There is a well above zero chance that someone in the GOP has sexually abused children in satanic rituals in the basement of a pizza parlor.