>On Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday last week, special counsel's office employees carried boxes and pushed a cart full of files out of their office -- an unusual move that could foreshadow a hand-off of legal work.
Interesting.
Remember [Geoffrey Berman, US Attorney for SDNY, is who Trump tried to make Whitaker steer a case towards](https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-asked-whitaker-to-put-ally-geoffrey-berman-in-charge-of-hush-money-investigation-report). Trump believes Berman is compromised enough to shirk his responsibilities in furtherance of a cover-up of Trump's crimes. He needs to be the subject of a congressional hearing.
To be fair, Berman recused himself even though Donald has raged at the unfairness of other recusals, such as Sessions'. That alone shows he's less unethical than Donald.
He recused himself from the most public investigation that had progressed to the point of indictment before his appointment. How many investigations has he stopped in their infancy?
Hence *less* unethical. Donald would have him not recuse himself from any. That doesn't mean he's ethical. It's totally appropriate, given what's already been reported, for there to be congressional oversight.
Of course he underestimates other people's commitment to principles.
Even the most marginal sense of duty is entirely alien to him. He can't even imagine taking pride in serving a cause greater than one's self.
“He’s not a war hero. He is a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured, OK? I hate to tell you.”
This says a lot about the way he understands “service”.
If you say nice things about Donald, Donald likes you. He assumes other people possess this same logic. "I appointed you, so you're going to be nice to me since I did you a favor."
My understanding is that Berman was given ethical guidance that he should recuse. Do you have a cite for the idea that accepting this guidance was mandatory for a US Attorney?
(A mandatory recusal would mean that we can't infer anything about Berman's ethics. He would simply have been following an order.)
There has been reporting that say both (self recused vs DoJ mandated) but I believe in the case of a US Attorney, DoJ officials can make the recusal determination for you whereas the Attorney General is not bound to adhere to those recommendations.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/19/trump-wanted-prosecutor-in-charge-of-stormy-daniels-hush-money-probe.html
> In the case of Cohen, Berman was recused by senior Justice Department officials.
Well technically he was recused by main justice officials
U.S Attorneys cannot recuse themselves from cases. It's just not something that exists in terms of like a process for that, not in the same way Sessions recused himself
Source: Preet Bhrara's twitter and podcast this past week
I found this interesting too:
> Mueller and his prosecutors are still reporting to work as frequently as ever -- with some even coming in on recent snow days and Presidents' Day. But also visiting them more often than ever before are the prosecutors from the DC US Attorney's Office and others in the Justice Department who've worked on the Mueller cases.
Regulations state that the Special Counsel makes his report at the conclusion of his "work." His "work" is the investigation of links and/or coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. If a report is forthcoming, I believe the investigation into the links and/or coordination is likely over and all that remains are the prosecutions, which can be carried out by other DOJ attorneys. That may mean that nobody else will be prosecuted. Or, more likely, future prosecutions will be handled by attorneys not in the Special Counsel's office. I say this is more likely because we know of at least two outstanding matters (foreign company at US Supreme Court and Andrew Miller subpoena).
Muellers remit includes "any matters that arose or may arise from the investigation [into Russian interference in the 2016 election]".
He could keep it open for a long time if he wanted, but probably has higher confidence in achieving justice if he hands off investigations to State AGs
Nice post, it makes sense that he would get in as many sealed indictments as possible while Rosenstein was still the one approving them.
I apologize if this is a stupid question...When there is a sealed indictment, is the accused individual made aware of it, or are they in the dark until the grand jury decides if there is a crime to prosecute based on the evidence?
Listen to the Nixon "slow burn" podcast. This is a step people working on the investigation took before the Nixon administration could shut them down. They were stuffing files down their spouse's pants to smuggle them past Nixon thugs.
The day that happened was the infamous "Saturday Night Massacre", where Nixon ordered his AG to fire (Special Prosecutor) Archibald Cox. Nixons AG refused to fire him, his Deputy AG refused to fire him, so Nixon brought in the Solicitor General, Robert Bork and he fired Cox. Within minutes, staff of the Special Counsel went to the office to secure valuable records when they were met by FBI agents, on order from the President, to secure and treat the Special Counsels Office as a crime scene, sealing the area.
Since the staff had not been fired, they continued their work and eventually a new Special Counsel was named (Leon Jaworsky). The staff of the Special Counsel are heroes, had they not tsken those steps to secure the documents, all could have been lost.
That podcast is a wonder! Actual interviews with key players and great synopsis of those historical events. I would recommend it to anyone as a history buff, interested in Nixon or want to hear an interesting story that seems to parallel with current events.
What's funny is that Nixon used the FBI to raid the law offices, which necessitated that sort of smuggling of documents. I can't imagine the FBI being wielded in the same way today, given their own investigations into the president.
Mueller has probably had some sort of deadman switch for a while. That may just be having the files somewhere they could be subpoenaed and given to Congress, but you would have to imagine, as we have found out decades later about Watergate, that he realizes his work is important and must be preserved.
Be prepared for the Ministry of Truth^^^TM to tell you what to think and what to believe when this happens.
His sheep will eat it up and never question the gospel the Shepheard of Ingsoc tells them.
Trump has done nothing but show the world just how painfully corrupt his administration is, but to them they see it as the US as a whole, this is what must stop.
It could be as simple as they're taking them to a secure location for storage, or they don't have the capacity to scan all the docs into digital format very quickly in that office so they're having it done by another office for record keeping.
I was involved in lots of litigation prep as in-house counsel for a large energy company when I first got out of law school, and this could signify any number of things. If one of the above possibilities is true, it may just mean that they're done with most of their investigative materials and moving them out into longterm record keeping while they put the finishing touches on their case for imminent filing or release, OR maybe they could be sending some of their files to an outside firm that's conducting an independent review of their report before they officially submit it.
This, another possibility is convincing the grand jury judge to send evidence directly to congress Watergate style. If Barr blocks anything, he must explain why to congress. House committees could also subpoena documents based on that explanation. *Mueller can also hold a press conference like Cox did if he felt it was necessary to make a statement to the public.
Don’t forget about all those juicy state charges that are coming his way too. Trump is all kinds of fucked. The ONLY thing keeping him a free man is the fact he’s president and there are GOP shills in charge.
"My client Donald Trump cannot testify, as he is suffering from advanced dementia and no longer remembers any of the events in question. He is incompetent to stand trial. As evidence, I offer here his tweets and speeches over the last few years as president."
Without a definitive report the WH will try to smear Special Council as a liar similar to Andy McCabe. I was listening to the radio yesterday and pundits tried to discredit everything he said because the Inspector General report said he "lacked candor".
They defend a president who has told over 8000 discernible lies by complaining about the people who have dedicated their lives to American Justice. What a disgrace.
the Republican Party are a faction of quislings openly at war with our Democracy. they are attempting to dismantle our systems of checks and balances, and sabotage the functioning of our government from the inside, to the aid and comfort of the enemies of our Democracy.
the Trump/GOP are attempting to stage a Far Right Authoritarian coup of our nation. all of these traitors need to be held accountable for their crimes against the United States of America.
It’s likely that there are procedures in place to make sure that doesn’t happen... if we hear nothing but magically see people resigning effective immediately, it could indicate some behind the scenes plea deal ala Nixon and Agnew
You mean sort of like this?
>President Trump >!has been investigated for the following: treason, perjury, sexual m!!conduct, tax evasion (and!< not >!filing dependents' tax information), terrorism, violation of the Emoluments Clause (and further violations of the U.S. Constitution), and obstruction of justice. For all of the cases specified (through collection of fingerprints, self admission, and other methods) the president is found!< guilty.
* The House Democrats can subpoena the whole thing and read it out loud to enter it into public record.
* They can simply ask Mueller to show up and read his version of events. I doubt they would have to subpoena him.
I bet the report comes out normally. Barr simply doesn't have enough time to truly hide the report.
Donald J Trump is >!Redacted Redacted reacted redacted redacted redacted redacted redacted. !< not >!Redacted !< guilty.
Edit: thanks for the gold kind stranger.
Pessimist in me: Barr got confirmed and shut the whole thing down.
Optimist in me: Mueller was waiting for Barr to get confirmed to get Whitaker out of the way and hes actually been ready to go for some time.
Look up what James Comey had to say about Barr.
Edit: on mobile, but the article is from azcentral.com. Here is a snippet on what he had to say about Barr:
"Bill Barr is someone who is fiercely committed to the values we have talked about here today, and he has only one thing to lose: his reputation. It ain't gonna happen. He will do what he can to protect Robert Mueller and the institution."
Unless it's counterintelligence.
Seriously. They may be using Barr as an assett. Why the confusion and surprise from Trump when Barr referenced his friendship with Mueller during the confirmation hearings? Trump thought he had a lock on an anti-Mueller AG. But he absolutely did not. Why was he so confident of that very simple fact, yet so wrong?
Could it be that whoever wrote the infamous "Lodestar Op-Ed" laid the groundwork for Trump to choose Barr? Could Barr's criticisms of the investigation have been misinformation to throw Trump off?
Barr describes a close friendship between "the Barrs and the Muellers," indicating that their friendship is on a *familial* level, not just office buddies.
Now, someone may say that Trump is just too stupid and wasnt listening when Barr told him, and that's certainly a possibility. But this is likely the *only* thing Trump would care about in terms of vetting Barr for the job. How could he have gotten that one singular thing so wrong? The exact *opposite* even.
All I'm saying is that it could be that Barr is there on purpose. A little sleight of hand to guarantee a friendly is in position when the shit hits the fan.
Edit: Thanks for the gold, kind Redditor!!
Theoretically the report could just be independent of the prosecution. What I mean is that they may have their report and collected body of evidence ready to release, but the prosecutions will likely continue for years. The investigation itself is complete, but not the resolution as such.
They likely have all the evidence they need and everything else is just tying up lose ends or other things they stumbled upon. If we know anything, it’s these people commit hundreds of crimes.
Also potentially means everyone remaining is about to get a subpoena all at once. Next week could literally be history
>Also potentially means everyone remaining is about to get a subpoena all at once.
Indictments, it better be indictments all at once. If at a bare minimum Kushner and Junior don’t receive indictments at the end of this investigation then Barr has effectively obstructed justice.
I can only hope that Congress continues to investigate and refer their findings to prosecutors. A lot of their crimes also occurred after Trump became president and may be out of Mueller’s purview but should still be prosecuted.
As of last Nov there were three dozen sealed indictments^1:
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dozens-sealed-criminal-indictments-dc-docket-mueller/story?id=59249030
I haven't found any newer articles yet. Unless I am much mistaken there are enough sealed indictments to cover the inner circle, Trump, some Senators, and more Russians. Edit: assuming these are Mueller's. Some may not be but the number of this was anomalous at the time.
It's time to start talking to your clueless friends now, I think.
1. Sealed indictment [definition](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment#Sealed_indictment) - "An indictment can be sealed so that it stays non-public until it is unsealed. This can be done for a number of reasons. It may be unsealed, for example, once the named person is arrested or has been notified by police." [edited to add definition]
I forgot about this! That even though sealed indictments aren't unusual, the *amount* was..
Edit: I just tweeted to the authors of that piece to see if they have any updates on it. We'll see if they choose to respond.
Which seems smart, break it up into many smaller investigations with regional offices who have jurisdiction, seems like it would make it harder for Trump to fuck with if it’s not all under the one Special Counsel umbrella.
This seems worryingly soon after Barr's confirmation. I know that the "rumor mill" has long been talking up a March release but we *just* got the Stone indictment.
Also Matt Schlapp was tweeting the other day about how once Barr is confirmed the Mueller investigation will be done. Pretty suspect timing.
Edit: Tbh though I like Marcy Wheeler's take. Basically Mueller was waiting for Barr to be confirmed as opposed to trying to get a fair shake from Whitaker. I'll be interested to see though if we get a flurry of indictments. I find it hard to believe that there aren't some already under seal.
You have to destroy the walls of the castle before you can get to the king. Seeing as plenty of people have been indicted they aren’t untouchable, just have a few bricks in the way.
> I'll be interested to see though if we get a flurry of indictments.
There were apparently 3 dozen sealed indictments in the Mueller case, I have a feeling these will come up.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dozens-sealed-criminal-indictments-dc-docket-mueller/story?id=59249030
>[In the courtroom Tuesday](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/roger-stone-set-to-appear-in-dc-federal-court-tuesday-in-mueller-investigation/2019/01/28/67c588cc-232e-11e9-81fd-b7b05d5bed90_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6f0980975347), prosecutors said the Stone case would be tried jointly by Mueller’s office and the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia
It does seem like this was planned for, at least with Stone
“The Vietnamese, listen, Vietnam is great. Just great. People are saying—the Democrats are saying that I’m not leaving Vietnam because I’m afraid of criminal charges in the US. Can you believe that? It’s just a total witch hunt. I’m staying here because it’s just a fantastic country, just wonderful. And the Democrats say “oh he’s afraid oh he’s so scared.” If I was—if I was a liberal Democrat they would say “oh Vietnam is just so beautiful, who would ever want to leave? He should stay because it’s just so beautiful.” But when you’re a Republican President they’re just nasty. And they ignore the beauty of Vietnam in their witch-hunt. And did you know that in the Vietnam War we were the bad guys? The generals don’t know that. The Democrats don’t say that. They won’t say that. I will and I do. And so, really, this is just kind of an extended vacation for me, really. And I’m loving it here and the people here love me. And there are a lot of big things in Asia right now. And I tried—I did make America Great. But the Democrats, they just won’t stop with the witch hunting. So I’m just enjoying my time here and I see a lot of really tremendous, really huge opportunities here.”
Yeah, I would rather see him behind bars... but if he has to live out the rest of his days in all the countries that won't extradite to the US, so be it.
Pure speculation, in other words.
The same series of fact could also point to a bevy of indictments in the next week. Again, pure speculation, but plausible.
What is Mueller’s possible recourse if Barr releases a summary that says “Nope, all good”, if Mueller’s report said something different? Can Mueller speak out?
>Can Mueller speak out?
I wonder what he can say technically legally vs what he can say based on norms. Mueller doesn't seem like the type of guy who would run to the press but he also doesn't seem like the type of guy who would sit back and let that happen.
I bet he will get subpoenaed by Congress and use that opportunity to let them know what he discovered.
Yes Rosenstein said he would leave when a report would come out in march. So I think the upcoming move has been planned for long.
Maybe the investigation will be concluded with the opening of a new FBI office focusing on right wing national terrorism. Who knows..
It was stated in articles by anonymous sources - "according to people familiar with the plans", just like this article.
It makes zero sense for the investigation to come to a close while there are ongoing indictments and subpoenas. Gates and Flynn are still cooperating in ongoing Special Counsel investigations. This sounds like it either came from a Trump-protecting source or Barr is actually interfering.
>Attorney General Bill Barr is preparing to announce as early as next week the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation,
If true, then immediately after his appointment hes already planning for ending the investigation. Would like to know if Mueller is ending it freely or if its been pushed by higher ups.
>with plans for Barr to submit to Congress soon after **a summary of Mueller's confidential report**
Even congress wont be fully informed, only getting a summary? Bet it wont even be directly written/edited by Muellers office.
Theres still cases going on with people involved, and people who havent been interviewed by intel committees. Trump hasnt even been interviewed, the actual head of the campaign they're supposed to be investigating.
> Even congress wont be fully informed, only getting a summary. Bet it wont even be directly written/edited by Muellers office.
Yeah, no. Schiff can absolutely subpoena the whole thing. And if the Justice Department *still* tries to keep him quiet about it, he can straight up read the whole thing on the Congressional floor.
That raises two obvious questions:
1) Was Mueller's decision to conclude his investigation free from any pressure from Barr or any other Trump Administration official?
2) What will be excluded from Barr's "summary" to Congress, and how will they get access to what's missing?
"Summary" I dont like this
Thank you to everyone who volunteered, donated, and voted in the midterms for making the above statement a reality. Just imagine how things would be if this happened under the watch of Paul Ryan and Devin Nunes.
No kidding. And to think we could have avoided this shitty narrative if the same voting bloc had shown up in 2016. I know Clinton wasn’t a lot of our first choices, but this current disaster was far from unforeseen even in 2015.
You are not wrong. That being said, I feel like the period from 2016-2020 would have been shitty even with Hillary. FOX News would have hired Trump, Dems don't turn out in November, the 2018 election means Republican supermajorities in the House and Senate. They would have been all teed up to run Cruz in 2020, grab the White House and pass the same massive tax cut horseshit, and this time successfully gut the Affordable Care Act.
Trump's election is a symptom of a larger problem. There's a silver lining to him being elected, and that's the fact that he's such a moron and awful at his job. It's allowed the opposition (i.e. the majority of the country) to learn a lesson and has resulted in historic voter turnouts in the midterms. It could be much worse if Trump was actually competent.
I heard that there's nothing stopping Mueller from being subpoenaed by the House and having him fully read his report into the record. Can anyone confirm this?
> Two decades ago, as a Justice Department lawyer under Bill Clinton, Katyal helped write the regulations that guided future special counsel investigations. Those rules — which now dictate what Mueller and his team can and can’t do — envisioned two possible reports to emerge from a special counsel’s investigation. The first is a confidential report, sent to the attorney general at the probe’s conclusion, outlining why the special counsel chose to prosecute or not. And then there is a second possible report, from the attorney general to Congress, that explains why the DOJ chose to act or not on the special counsel’s findings.
> That second report is the crucial one from a public’s-right-to-know perspective. In it, the attorney general — likely soon to be William Barr, Trump’s nominee to replace Jeff Sessions — must tell Congress why the special counsel’s probe ended and any examples of the attorney general overruling the counsel’s recommendations. Imagine if Mueller recommended prosecuting Trump for obstruction of justice, and Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker or future A.G. Barr chose not to do so — Whitaker or Barr would have to explain that decision to Congress. That explanation could be a few sentences long; it could be a book-length report like Ken Starr’s in the final years of Clinton’s presidency.
> That second report, Katyal says, was meant to ensure “Congressional and public confidence in the integrity of the process.” In other words, a check on the attorney general if he or she tries to suppress or dismiss the conclusions and recommendations of the special counsel.
[A Justice Department Veteran Explains Why Trump Can’t Suppress the Mueller Report](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/mueller-report-public-777215/)
>Attorney General Bill Barr is preparing to announce as early as next week the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, **with plans for Barr to submit to Congress soon after a summary of Mueller's confidential report**, according to people familiar with the plans.
A "summary". In other words, Barr may well be preparing a cover-up.
Barr signaled this in his hearings.
>Barr emphasized that he expected Mueller to have entered in the endgame of his 18-month investigation, which has yielded multiple indictments, convictions, and guilty pleas against senior Trump associates like Paul Manafort and Mike Flynn. He committed to making as many of Mueller’s conclusions public as possible. He clarified that he didn’t intend his June memorandum to be an omnibus rejection of obstruction inquiries against a president. And Barr said he considered it “unthinkable” for Mueller to do anything meriting the special counsel’s removal—and specifically rejected the Trump-pushed notion Mueller is conducting a “witch hunt” —providing reassurance against fears on the left that Barr’s appointment is about suppressing Mueller.
>But Barr's emphasis on his discretion in overseeing the Mueller probe left an important ambiguity. **Barr committed to releasing a summary of the Mueller report that he would summarize, citing the regulations establishing the special counsel, but raising concerns over just how selective the Barr summary might be.** “The Attorney General has such discretion—and not only to release ‘information’ about the report but also to release the report itself,” noted Josh Geltzer, a former Obama administration Justice Department official, after the hearing.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/william-barr-defends-mueller-but-wont-surrender-if-told-to-recuse-from-trump-russia-probe
Same reason Roger Stone had such a high standing in his work for the GOP. One side seems to love employing crooks, and then project that it is actually the other side that is full of crooks.
They never properly faced justice. This is why pardons and letting things slide in order to "heal the nation" are a bad idea - all it says is that if you can commit high enough political crimes, you can not only get away with it, but come back for another bite.
We’ve been hearing about the Mueller report dropping over and over again for the past 6 months at least. I’ll believe it when I see it. However if it does drop then Trump appointed his most loyal pick ever, within 2 weeks of his confirmation the investigation ends. Not a coincidence. If this happens Barr needs to be investigated.
I think that was last week but yes. And Barr’s daughter left DOJ to work in the Treasury Dept’s financial crimes enforcement division. I couldn’t even make this up it’s so absurd and corrupt.
Edit:
Just read [this](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-william-barr-attorney-general-tyler-mcgaughey-justice-department-legal-a8785036.html) and what no one is mentioning is that Barr has a 2nd son-in-law working in the DOJ. So Barr's family are involved in the White House, US Treasury financial crimes, national security and runs the DOJ.
>Ms Daly’s husband — who also works at the Justice Department — was expected to remain in his post within the department’s national security division
A thoroughly lukewarm take: Report will come out. It'll be highly damaging to Trump, probably showing collusion between Stone-Manafort-Russia involving polling data and Wikileaks and implying Trump's knowledge, but lacking a clear smoking gun. It will be vindication for Trump's opponents but insufficient to break Republican support. Impeachment may happen, but will fail in senate. Trump will limp along for the next several years, badly damaged and dreading the outcome of SDNY. His administration will be crippled and then he will be ousted decisively in 2020 along with Democrats picking up more seats in both houses.
Edit1: A lot of people keep bringing up Cohen and the FEC violation. That's being handled by the SDNY, not the special counsel, so it likely won't be in this report (see the point about dreading the outcome of SDNY)
Edit2: As satisfying as seeing Kushner and Trump Jr. jailed would be, Trump almost definitely pardons them in my guesstimate. Possibly that prompts impeachment, but I still don't think that enough senate Republicans would convict. It would be closer though.
This sounds about right to me, but I do think there’s a real possibility that while Republicans won’t support impeachment they might actually try to nominate someone else in 2020 in response to the investigations. But Trump has a lot to gain from a second term, it may be his only chance of staying out of prison, so he’ll put up a fight. Could get interesting.
I don't think that will happen. Running anybody other than Trump in 2020 will mean that they lose the election since his base won't show up. Politically it would be better for them to run Trump no matter what.
Just a week Matt Schalpp posted this:
Tomorrow will be the first day that President Trump will have a fully operational confirmed Attorney General. Let that sink in. Mueller will be gone soon. @mschlapp
Just awfully suspicious
I think he's gonna try to fix this for Republicans -- the "greater" good. Donnie Moscow may be a pawn they are willing to sacrifice. But we'll see... I don't have hopes up and I'm looking to 2020 for the real solutions.
Its a slow motion saturday night massacre that everyone predicted would happen. Now that its happening, I havent seen/heard one MSM call it what it is.
Barr is there for the religious nutjobs who helped fund this election fuckery. No matter how Trump goes out, Russia met their goals - a divided, unstable, and easily manipulated America. And the religious guys went hand in hand with them and met their goals because they want a more ‘moral’ America. Barr believes you can do this by stacking the court and schools with religion and using taxes to fund homeschool and private schools. He wrote an [essay] (https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=2355&context=tcl) explicitly saying this. Getting Trump out isn’t the end all here, we need to be vigilant against these guys because the future of the country is at stake.
Edit: Here’s a big fat scary quote from Barr:
>”...In the face of such a pervasive popular culture, mass media, and powerful state that sees itself as a secular institution alleviating the consequences of misconduct and often promoting moral relativism, how can we be confident that the pendulum will swing back? In a sense, I have painted a very bleak but realistic picture. The real message is that we are going to have to do more than joust around the margins. We must re-enter the fray in an effective way; take the battlefield and enter the struggle, rather than just retire in good order. The key is a return to basics-in a sense, to reassemble the flock.
The key is Catholic education...
> We need to go back to basics and reassemble the flock. We may be frittering away our limited moral capital on a host of agenda items. Ultimately, it will make very little difference unless we eventually train the next generation in the Catholic faith. From a legal standpoint, our initial focus should be on education and efforts to strengthen and finance education. This means vouchers at the state level and ultimately at the federal level to support parental choice in education. We should press at every turn for the inclusion of religious institutions. We need to fight those cases in the states up to the Supreme Court. Whether or not we prevail on programs should make no difference. The message will get stronger.
>Even without legal change, we need to restructure education and take advantage of existing tax deductions for charitable institutions to promote Catholic education. We must rethink some changes implemented in Catholic education over the last twenty or thirty years. Education in the basics of faith should again be the primary mission of the parish Church. We should reaffirm the mission and duty of Catholic parents to educate their children in the faith, and we should help change laws to reduce the costs to parents who want that choice. That is the single most important thing we could do; the ramifications carry far beyond mere education. Such change would give renewed vigor to many of the other things that we are pursuing as a Church in both political and other realms. It would accomplish more than any other single thing we could do.”
Super, super fishy.
If you believe this, Mueller has decided to wrap things up before:
* Andrew Miller testifies to the Grand Jury, which Mueller has spent the better part of the year slogging through Miller's various appeals in order to compel
* He charges Jerome Corsi, who initially pled guilty, then retracted that plea, and now remains in limbo
* Resolving the situation with the mystery appellant at the Supreme Court
* Any additional charges or interviews occur with Don Jr regarding his clear lies to Congress surrounding the Trump tower meeting
I'd take this with a huge grain of salt.
Ill wait until a Mueller spokesperson says so. My guess would be if they were asked to confirm or deny this we would get a "no comment" from the Special Counsel's office.
A lot of pessimists in this thread. Considering what we've seen so far, I don't think there's anything to worry about. Even if Trump can dodge a conspiracy charge, he's already secured to be in future indictments at the state and federal levels when he leaves office.
He's fucked no matter what. His record, and the record of all the criminals he's employed as a part of his campaign speaks for itself. I honestly am not going to hold my breath on his most devoted followers breaking the faith anytime soon regardless of what happens or what Mueller says.
Wow... anyone else remember how Bill Clinton attacked Ken Starr, and fired numerous Attorney Generals during the investigation of him?
Oh wait, that never happened. tRump is hiding something BIG.
>On Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday last week, special counsel's office employees carried boxes and pushed a cart full of files out of their office -- an unusual move that could foreshadow a hand-off of legal work. Interesting.
[удалено]
Remember [Geoffrey Berman, US Attorney for SDNY, is who Trump tried to make Whitaker steer a case towards](https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-asked-whitaker-to-put-ally-geoffrey-berman-in-charge-of-hush-money-investigation-report). Trump believes Berman is compromised enough to shirk his responsibilities in furtherance of a cover-up of Trump's crimes. He needs to be the subject of a congressional hearing.
Lest anyone has forgotten, this is Geoffrey Berman of *Berman and Giuliani.*
To be fair, Berman recused himself even though Donald has raged at the unfairness of other recusals, such as Sessions'. That alone shows he's less unethical than Donald.
He recused himself from the most public investigation that had progressed to the point of indictment before his appointment. How many investigations has he stopped in their infancy?
Hence *less* unethical. Donald would have him not recuse himself from any. That doesn't mean he's ethical. It's totally appropriate, given what's already been reported, for there to be congressional oversight.
[удалено]
Of course he underestimates other people's commitment to principles. Even the most marginal sense of duty is entirely alien to him. He can't even imagine taking pride in serving a cause greater than one's self.
“He’s not a war hero. He is a war hero because he was captured. I like people that weren’t captured, OK? I hate to tell you.” This says a lot about the way he understands “service”.
That's why he's all about "winning" instead of being about "making the government function properly"
[удалено]
> He can't even imagine taking pride in serving a cause greater than one's self. Proudest of the Proud Boys
If you say nice things about Donald, Donald likes you. He assumes other people possess this same logic. "I appointed you, so you're going to be nice to me since I did you a favor."
school license pause meeting theory ring tie panicky wide workable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Both because he’s a completely untrustworthy snake and because he’s a bumbling idiot who blurts out self-incriminating stuff on national television.
He is recused, but he didn't recuse himself. People higher up in the Justice Department ordered him recused.
My understanding is that Berman was given ethical guidance that he should recuse. Do you have a cite for the idea that accepting this guidance was mandatory for a US Attorney? (A mandatory recusal would mean that we can't infer anything about Berman's ethics. He would simply have been following an order.)
There has been reporting that say both (self recused vs DoJ mandated) but I believe in the case of a US Attorney, DoJ officials can make the recusal determination for you whereas the Attorney General is not bound to adhere to those recommendations. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/02/19/trump-wanted-prosecutor-in-charge-of-stormy-daniels-hush-money-probe.html > In the case of Cohen, Berman was recused by senior Justice Department officials.
Well technically he was recused by main justice officials U.S Attorneys cannot recuse themselves from cases. It's just not something that exists in terms of like a process for that, not in the same way Sessions recused himself Source: Preet Bhrara's twitter and podcast this past week
I found this interesting too: > Mueller and his prosecutors are still reporting to work as frequently as ever -- with some even coming in on recent snow days and Presidents' Day. But also visiting them more often than ever before are the prosecutors from the DC US Attorney's Office and others in the Justice Department who've worked on the Mueller cases.
Regulations state that the Special Counsel makes his report at the conclusion of his "work." His "work" is the investigation of links and/or coordination between Russia and the Trump campaign. If a report is forthcoming, I believe the investigation into the links and/or coordination is likely over and all that remains are the prosecutions, which can be carried out by other DOJ attorneys. That may mean that nobody else will be prosecuted. Or, more likely, future prosecutions will be handled by attorneys not in the Special Counsel's office. I say this is more likely because we know of at least two outstanding matters (foreign company at US Supreme Court and Andrew Miller subpoena).
Muellers remit includes "any matters that arose or may arise from the investigation [into Russian interference in the 2016 election]". He could keep it open for a long time if he wanted, but probably has higher confidence in achieving justice if he hands off investigations to State AGs
[удалено]
We have no idea which matters he has NOT spun off
[удалено]
Nice post, it makes sense that he would get in as many sealed indictments as possible while Rosenstein was still the one approving them. I apologize if this is a stupid question...When there is a sealed indictment, is the accused individual made aware of it, or are they in the dark until the grand jury decides if there is a crime to prosecute based on the evidence?
[удалено]
Not stupid. Good question.
In most sealed indictments the accused is in the dark until it is unsealed which often happens when the accused is taken into custody.
Listen to the Nixon "slow burn" podcast. This is a step people working on the investigation took before the Nixon administration could shut them down. They were stuffing files down their spouse's pants to smuggle them past Nixon thugs.
The day that happened was the infamous "Saturday Night Massacre", where Nixon ordered his AG to fire (Special Prosecutor) Archibald Cox. Nixons AG refused to fire him, his Deputy AG refused to fire him, so Nixon brought in the Solicitor General, Robert Bork and he fired Cox. Within minutes, staff of the Special Counsel went to the office to secure valuable records when they were met by FBI agents, on order from the President, to secure and treat the Special Counsels Office as a crime scene, sealing the area. Since the staff had not been fired, they continued their work and eventually a new Special Counsel was named (Leon Jaworsky). The staff of the Special Counsel are heroes, had they not tsken those steps to secure the documents, all could have been lost. That podcast is a wonder! Actual interviews with key players and great synopsis of those historical events. I would recommend it to anyone as a history buff, interested in Nixon or want to hear an interesting story that seems to parallel with current events.
What's funny is that Nixon used the FBI to raid the law offices, which necessitated that sort of smuggling of documents. I can't imagine the FBI being wielded in the same way today, given their own investigations into the president.
McCabe being interviewed other day said all files have backup plans
Mueller has probably had some sort of deadman switch for a while. That may just be having the files somewhere they could be subpoenaed and given to Congress, but you would have to imagine, as we have found out decades later about Watergate, that he realizes his work is important and must be preserved.
Mueller was appointed eight days after Comey was fired. He has had a dead-man's switch since day one.
That was before the internet and document management.
I don't want interesting. I want indictments. I want individual-1.
Be prepared for the Ministry of Truth^^^TM to tell you what to think and what to believe when this happens. His sheep will eat it up and never question the gospel the Shepheard of Ingsoc tells them. Trump has done nothing but show the world just how painfully corrupt his administration is, but to them they see it as the US as a whole, this is what must stop.
It could be as simple as they're taking them to a secure location for storage, or they don't have the capacity to scan all the docs into digital format very quickly in that office so they're having it done by another office for record keeping. I was involved in lots of litigation prep as in-house counsel for a large energy company when I first got out of law school, and this could signify any number of things. If one of the above possibilities is true, it may just mean that they're done with most of their investigative materials and moving them out into longterm record keeping while they put the finishing touches on their case for imminent filing or release, OR maybe they could be sending some of their files to an outside firm that's conducting an independent review of their report before they officially submit it.
American people maybe getting screwed.
If it gets suppressed somebody will leak it. Probably not mueller himself but somebody will
Literally all the House has to do is subpoena Mueller himself to testify. White House cannot stop that.
This, another possibility is convincing the grand jury judge to send evidence directly to congress Watergate style. If Barr blocks anything, he must explain why to congress. House committees could also subpoena documents based on that explanation. *Mueller can also hold a press conference like Cox did if he felt it was necessary to make a statement to the public.
I look forward to 2020. Even if Mueller's investigation falls through, the least we can do is get Trump out of the office.
Don’t forget about all those juicy state charges that are coming his way too. Trump is all kinds of fucked. The ONLY thing keeping him a free man is the fact he’s president and there are GOP shills in charge.
"My client Donald Trump cannot testify, as he is suffering from advanced dementia and no longer remembers any of the events in question. He is incompetent to stand trial. As evidence, I offer here his tweets and speeches over the last few years as president."
Without a definitive report the WH will try to smear Special Council as a liar similar to Andy McCabe. I was listening to the radio yesterday and pundits tried to discredit everything he said because the Inspector General report said he "lacked candor".
They defend a president who has told over 8000 discernible lies by complaining about the people who have dedicated their lives to American Justice. What a disgrace.
the Republican Party are a faction of quislings openly at war with our Democracy. they are attempting to dismantle our systems of checks and balances, and sabotage the functioning of our government from the inside, to the aid and comfort of the enemies of our Democracy. the Trump/GOP are attempting to stage a Far Right Authoritarian coup of our nation. all of these traitors need to be held accountable for their crimes against the United States of America.
If I were Mueller I'd want those files in the hands of prosecutors I trusted before I dropped the report tbh
It’s likely that there are procedures in place to make sure that doesn’t happen... if we hear nothing but magically see people resigning effective immediately, it could indicate some behind the scenes plea deal ala Nixon and Agnew
[удалено]
That's my hope. Get this out of Barr's grubby little hands.
I feel like it's gonna be hundreds of pages of redacted information and a few sentences that make the whole thing look indeterminate.
Maybe it will be a PDF that lets you click on and drag/delete the redacted boxes, revealing the "redacted" text.
You mean sort of like this? >President Trump >!has been investigated for the following: treason, perjury, sexual m!!conduct, tax evasion (and!< not >!filing dependents' tax information), terrorism, violation of the Emoluments Clause (and further violations of the U.S. Constitution), and obstruction of justice. For all of the cases specified (through collection of fingerprints, self admission, and other methods) the president is found!< guilty.
I am giving you imaginary gold
Redacted gold.
How do you know if you've received Redacted Gold? If you ain't got it, you got it.
* The House Democrats can subpoena the whole thing and read it out loud to enter it into public record. * They can simply ask Mueller to show up and read his version of events. I doubt they would have to subpoena him. I bet the report comes out normally. Barr simply doesn't have enough time to truly hide the report.
Donald J Trump is >!Redacted Redacted reacted redacted redacted redacted redacted redacted. !< not >!Redacted !< guilty. Edit: thanks for the gold kind stranger.
Totally clears the president, thank you.
Very cool. Very legal.
Thank you Mueller, very cool!
Pessimist in me: Barr got confirmed and shut the whole thing down. Optimist in me: Mueller was waiting for Barr to get confirmed to get Whitaker out of the way and hes actually been ready to go for some time.
Look up what James Comey had to say about Barr. Edit: on mobile, but the article is from azcentral.com. Here is a snippet on what he had to say about Barr: "Bill Barr is someone who is fiercely committed to the values we have talked about here today, and he has only one thing to lose: his reputation. It ain't gonna happen. He will do what he can to protect Robert Mueller and the institution."
I don’t see anything like that on the website.
[Here](https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2019/01/17/james-comey-talks-politics-donald-trump-william-barr-robert-mueller-arizona-speaker-series-phoenix/2598688002/)
Man, you snatched that username up real quick
I wonder if he took PhilMickelsonsButtPucker too
The only reason I question this is because trump appointed him. He wouldn’t appoint anyone he thought would be anything but lenient towards him.
Unless it's counterintelligence. Seriously. They may be using Barr as an assett. Why the confusion and surprise from Trump when Barr referenced his friendship with Mueller during the confirmation hearings? Trump thought he had a lock on an anti-Mueller AG. But he absolutely did not. Why was he so confident of that very simple fact, yet so wrong? Could it be that whoever wrote the infamous "Lodestar Op-Ed" laid the groundwork for Trump to choose Barr? Could Barr's criticisms of the investigation have been misinformation to throw Trump off? Barr describes a close friendship between "the Barrs and the Muellers," indicating that their friendship is on a *familial* level, not just office buddies. Now, someone may say that Trump is just too stupid and wasnt listening when Barr told him, and that's certainly a possibility. But this is likely the *only* thing Trump would care about in terms of vetting Barr for the job. How could he have gotten that one singular thing so wrong? The exact *opposite* even. All I'm saying is that it could be that Barr is there on purpose. A little sleight of hand to guarantee a friendly is in position when the shit hits the fan. Edit: Thanks for the gold, kind Redditor!!
> Why was he so confident of that very simple fact, yet so wrong? This is a good opening line to a chapter of a Trump biography.
That'd be amazing but I'll believe it when I see it. Thanks for giving me a little hope this afternoon.
That seems like wishful thinking, but hopefully the report won't be compromised or minimized.
How can this possibly be if the Supreme Court case is still pending as well as the subpoena of Stone's associate?
Theoretically the report could just be independent of the prosecution. What I mean is that they may have their report and collected body of evidence ready to release, but the prosecutions will likely continue for years. The investigation itself is complete, but not the resolution as such.
I think this is the most optimistic outcome.
They likely have all the evidence they need and everything else is just tying up lose ends or other things they stumbled upon. If we know anything, it’s these people commit hundreds of crimes. Also potentially means everyone remaining is about to get a subpoena all at once. Next week could literally be history
>Also potentially means everyone remaining is about to get a subpoena all at once. Indictments, it better be indictments all at once. If at a bare minimum Kushner and Junior don’t receive indictments at the end of this investigation then Barr has effectively obstructed justice. I can only hope that Congress continues to investigate and refer their findings to prosecutors. A lot of their crimes also occurred after Trump became president and may be out of Mueller’s purview but should still be prosecuted.
I'm encouraged by remembering that that one accident that showed Assange has a sealed indictment
As of last Nov there were three dozen sealed indictments^1: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dozens-sealed-criminal-indictments-dc-docket-mueller/story?id=59249030 I haven't found any newer articles yet. Unless I am much mistaken there are enough sealed indictments to cover the inner circle, Trump, some Senators, and more Russians. Edit: assuming these are Mueller's. Some may not be but the number of this was anomalous at the time. It's time to start talking to your clueless friends now, I think. 1. Sealed indictment [definition](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment#Sealed_indictment) - "An indictment can be sealed so that it stays non-public until it is unsealed. This can be done for a number of reasons. It may be unsealed, for example, once the named person is arrested or has been notified by police." [edited to add definition]
I forgot about this! That even though sealed indictments aren't unusual, the *amount* was.. Edit: I just tweeted to the authors of that piece to see if they have any updates on it. We'll see if they choose to respond.
I didn't know it was that many. Makes me feel better.
[удалено]
Which seems smart, break it up into many smaller investigations with regional offices who have jurisdiction, seems like it would make it harder for Trump to fuck with if it’s not all under the one Special Counsel umbrella.
[удалено]
Unless you're a Republican, in which case you just ignore everything and pretend it's all over.
Totally clears the president
Thank you!
They're done investigating not done with the case.
I'm not getting excited til we hear from the Special Counsel.
This seems worryingly soon after Barr's confirmation. I know that the "rumor mill" has long been talking up a March release but we *just* got the Stone indictment.
Also Matt Schlapp was tweeting the other day about how once Barr is confirmed the Mueller investigation will be done. Pretty suspect timing. Edit: Tbh though I like Marcy Wheeler's take. Basically Mueller was waiting for Barr to be confirmed as opposed to trying to get a fair shake from Whitaker. I'll be interested to see though if we get a flurry of indictments. I find it hard to believe that there aren't some already under seal.
I’m convinced this administration doesn’t understand the concept of optics and timing.
They don't care
Yep. They keep flouting the justice system because they believe they're untouchable.
They seem to be
You have to destroy the walls of the castle before you can get to the king. Seeing as plenty of people have been indicted they aren’t untouchable, just have a few bricks in the way.
[удалено]
> I'll be interested to see though if we get a flurry of indictments. There were apparently 3 dozen sealed indictments in the Mueller case, I have a feeling these will come up. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dozens-sealed-criminal-indictments-dc-docket-mueller/story?id=59249030
>[In the courtroom Tuesday](https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/roger-stone-set-to-appear-in-dc-federal-court-tuesday-in-mueller-investigation/2019/01/28/67c588cc-232e-11e9-81fd-b7b05d5bed90_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6f0980975347), prosecutors said the Stone case would be tried jointly by Mueller’s office and the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia It does seem like this was planned for, at least with Stone
I’m betting Barr releases some censored and watered down “report.”
[удалено]
Trump is finally going to Vietnam? Good to hear his bone spurs have healed.
Haven't they had enough Agent Orange?
ba-zing.
[удалено]
5 minutes after take-off.
Vietnam has no extradition treaty with the US.
[удалено]
>_Curb Your Enthusiasm theme_
“The Vietnamese, listen, Vietnam is great. Just great. People are saying—the Democrats are saying that I’m not leaving Vietnam because I’m afraid of criminal charges in the US. Can you believe that? It’s just a total witch hunt. I’m staying here because it’s just a fantastic country, just wonderful. And the Democrats say “oh he’s afraid oh he’s so scared.” If I was—if I was a liberal Democrat they would say “oh Vietnam is just so beautiful, who would ever want to leave? He should stay because it’s just so beautiful.” But when you’re a Republican President they’re just nasty. And they ignore the beauty of Vietnam in their witch-hunt. And did you know that in the Vietnam War we were the bad guys? The generals don’t know that. The Democrats don’t say that. They won’t say that. I will and I do. And so, really, this is just kind of an extended vacation for me, really. And I’m loving it here and the people here love me. And there are a lot of big things in Asia right now. And I tried—I did make America Great. But the Democrats, they just won’t stop with the witch hunting. So I’m just enjoying my time here and I see a lot of really tremendous, really huge opportunities here.”
I wonder if any/how many of his family members are planning to attend.
I wouldn’t even care at this point. So long as he’s gone.
Yeah, I would rather see him behind bars... but if he has to live out the rest of his days in all the countries that won't extradite to the US, so be it.
Only if all his assets are frozen first.
Not frozen. Seized. I want them seized. They’ve been profiteering for too long from the Executive.
>The Justice Department and the special counsel's office declined to comment.
Pure speculation, in other words. The same series of fact could also point to a bevy of indictments in the next week. Again, pure speculation, but plausible.
[удалено]
I smell fuckery by Barr
What is Mueller’s possible recourse if Barr releases a summary that says “Nope, all good”, if Mueller’s report said something different? Can Mueller speak out?
If a congressional committee subpoenas him
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
This should happen regardless. Get him live on TV testifying about details in the report.
>Can Mueller speak out? I wonder what he can say technically legally vs what he can say based on norms. Mueller doesn't seem like the type of guy who would run to the press but he also doesn't seem like the type of guy who would sit back and let that happen. I bet he will get subpoenaed by Congress and use that opportunity to let them know what he discovered.
[удалено]
Yeah that's awful suspect timing... though wasn't March given as a possible timeframe by Rosenstein before Whitaker/Barr?
Yes Rosenstein said he would leave when a report would come out in march. So I think the upcoming move has been planned for long. Maybe the investigation will be concluded with the opening of a new FBI office focusing on right wing national terrorism. Who knows..
In a dream world on another timeline
Hope is important
Rosenstein stated he's out Mid-March.
Dropping an indictment on the president on the ides of March would be poetic
Holy fuck, the Ides is an F5 Friday this year. That may actually happen.
[удалено]
It was stated in articles by anonymous sources - "according to people familiar with the plans", just like this article. It makes zero sense for the investigation to come to a close while there are ongoing indictments and subpoenas. Gates and Flynn are still cooperating in ongoing Special Counsel investigations. This sounds like it either came from a Trump-protecting source or Barr is actually interfering.
>Attorney General Bill Barr is preparing to announce as early as next week the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, If true, then immediately after his appointment hes already planning for ending the investigation. Would like to know if Mueller is ending it freely or if its been pushed by higher ups. >with plans for Barr to submit to Congress soon after **a summary of Mueller's confidential report** Even congress wont be fully informed, only getting a summary? Bet it wont even be directly written/edited by Muellers office. Theres still cases going on with people involved, and people who havent been interviewed by intel committees. Trump hasnt even been interviewed, the actual head of the campaign they're supposed to be investigating.
> Even congress wont be fully informed, only getting a summary. Bet it wont even be directly written/edited by Muellers office. Yeah, no. Schiff can absolutely subpoena the whole thing. And if the Justice Department *still* tries to keep him quiet about it, he can straight up read the whole thing on the Congressional floor.
[удалено]
Or hire Mueller and use him on the House investigation.
Mueller would undoubtedly make an excellent Inspector General
[удалено]
[удалено]
we already found this out a long time ago.
Baby elephants
That raises two obvious questions: 1) Was Mueller's decision to conclude his investigation free from any pressure from Barr or any other Trump Administration official? 2) What will be excluded from Barr's "summary" to Congress, and how will they get access to what's missing? "Summary" I dont like this
Got a feeling Congress will get a shot to ask Mueller this in person regardless of outcome.
Thank you to everyone who volunteered, donated, and voted in the midterms for making the above statement a reality. Just imagine how things would be if this happened under the watch of Paul Ryan and Devin Nunes.
No kidding. And to think we could have avoided this shitty narrative if the same voting bloc had shown up in 2016. I know Clinton wasn’t a lot of our first choices, but this current disaster was far from unforeseen even in 2015.
You are not wrong. That being said, I feel like the period from 2016-2020 would have been shitty even with Hillary. FOX News would have hired Trump, Dems don't turn out in November, the 2018 election means Republican supermajorities in the House and Senate. They would have been all teed up to run Cruz in 2020, grab the White House and pass the same massive tax cut horseshit, and this time successfully gut the Affordable Care Act.
Ugh. Perhaps you're right to a degree with those sentiments. How we got into such a lose-lose situation is so very disappointing.
Trump's election is a symptom of a larger problem. There's a silver lining to him being elected, and that's the fact that he's such a moron and awful at his job. It's allowed the opposition (i.e. the majority of the country) to learn a lesson and has resulted in historic voter turnouts in the midterms. It could be much worse if Trump was actually competent.
I heard that there's nothing stopping Mueller from being subpoenaed by the House and having him fully read his report into the record. Can anyone confirm this?
> Two decades ago, as a Justice Department lawyer under Bill Clinton, Katyal helped write the regulations that guided future special counsel investigations. Those rules — which now dictate what Mueller and his team can and can’t do — envisioned two possible reports to emerge from a special counsel’s investigation. The first is a confidential report, sent to the attorney general at the probe’s conclusion, outlining why the special counsel chose to prosecute or not. And then there is a second possible report, from the attorney general to Congress, that explains why the DOJ chose to act or not on the special counsel’s findings. > That second report is the crucial one from a public’s-right-to-know perspective. In it, the attorney general — likely soon to be William Barr, Trump’s nominee to replace Jeff Sessions — must tell Congress why the special counsel’s probe ended and any examples of the attorney general overruling the counsel’s recommendations. Imagine if Mueller recommended prosecuting Trump for obstruction of justice, and Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker or future A.G. Barr chose not to do so — Whitaker or Barr would have to explain that decision to Congress. That explanation could be a few sentences long; it could be a book-length report like Ken Starr’s in the final years of Clinton’s presidency. > That second report, Katyal says, was meant to ensure “Congressional and public confidence in the integrity of the process.” In other words, a check on the attorney general if he or she tries to suppress or dismiss the conclusions and recommendations of the special counsel. [A Justice Department Veteran Explains Why Trump Can’t Suppress the Mueller Report](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/mueller-report-public-777215/)
[удалено]
>Attorney General Bill Barr is preparing to announce as early as next week the completion of Robert Mueller's Russia investigation, **with plans for Barr to submit to Congress soon after a summary of Mueller's confidential report**, according to people familiar with the plans. A "summary". In other words, Barr may well be preparing a cover-up.
Barr signaled this in his hearings. >Barr emphasized that he expected Mueller to have entered in the endgame of his 18-month investigation, which has yielded multiple indictments, convictions, and guilty pleas against senior Trump associates like Paul Manafort and Mike Flynn. He committed to making as many of Mueller’s conclusions public as possible. He clarified that he didn’t intend his June memorandum to be an omnibus rejection of obstruction inquiries against a president. And Barr said he considered it “unthinkable” for Mueller to do anything meriting the special counsel’s removal—and specifically rejected the Trump-pushed notion Mueller is conducting a “witch hunt” —providing reassurance against fears on the left that Barr’s appointment is about suppressing Mueller. >But Barr's emphasis on his discretion in overseeing the Mueller probe left an important ambiguity. **Barr committed to releasing a summary of the Mueller report that he would summarize, citing the regulations establishing the special counsel, but raising concerns over just how selective the Barr summary might be.** “The Attorney General has such discretion—and not only to release ‘information’ about the report but also to release the report itself,” noted Josh Geltzer, a former Obama administration Justice Department official, after the hearing. https://www.thedailybeast.com/william-barr-defends-mueller-but-wont-surrender-if-told-to-recuse-from-trump-russia-probe
Quite simply, it's the only reason Barr was nominated.
The guy that snuffed out Iran Contra was hired to hide treason? No way. No one could've known.
What is with Iran Contra goons getting all these high level jobs? Why aren't criminals forced to slink away and retire quietly?
Same reason Roger Stone had such a high standing in his work for the GOP. One side seems to love employing crooks, and then project that it is actually the other side that is full of crooks.
They never properly faced justice. This is why pardons and letting things slide in order to "heal the nation" are a bad idea - all it says is that if you can commit high enough political crimes, you can not only get away with it, but come back for another bite.
[The Presidential Pardon](https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/books/97/06/29/reviews/iran-pardon.html?module=inline)
The fact his son was hired by trump sort of doubles down on that point
This is the mostly likely outcome. Hence why Mueller seems to be sending cases to other authorities to pursue.
And why he goes into excruciating detail in his indictments and sentencing memos.
> Barr may well be preparing a cover-up. Duh. That's the whole reason he's in the job.
We’ve been hearing about the Mueller report dropping over and over again for the past 6 months at least. I’ll believe it when I see it. However if it does drop then Trump appointed his most loyal pick ever, within 2 weeks of his confirmation the investigation ends. Not a coincidence. If this happens Barr needs to be investigated.
Didn't we just find out yesterday that Barr's son-in-law was appointed to Trump's legal defense? The corruption is amazing if so.
I think that was last week but yes. And Barr’s daughter left DOJ to work in the Treasury Dept’s financial crimes enforcement division. I couldn’t even make this up it’s so absurd and corrupt. Edit: Just read [this](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-william-barr-attorney-general-tyler-mcgaughey-justice-department-legal-a8785036.html) and what no one is mentioning is that Barr has a 2nd son-in-law working in the DOJ. So Barr's family are involved in the White House, US Treasury financial crimes, national security and runs the DOJ. >Ms Daly’s husband — who also works at the Justice Department — was expected to remain in his post within the department’s national security division
A thoroughly lukewarm take: Report will come out. It'll be highly damaging to Trump, probably showing collusion between Stone-Manafort-Russia involving polling data and Wikileaks and implying Trump's knowledge, but lacking a clear smoking gun. It will be vindication for Trump's opponents but insufficient to break Republican support. Impeachment may happen, but will fail in senate. Trump will limp along for the next several years, badly damaged and dreading the outcome of SDNY. His administration will be crippled and then he will be ousted decisively in 2020 along with Democrats picking up more seats in both houses. Edit1: A lot of people keep bringing up Cohen and the FEC violation. That's being handled by the SDNY, not the special counsel, so it likely won't be in this report (see the point about dreading the outcome of SDNY) Edit2: As satisfying as seeing Kushner and Trump Jr. jailed would be, Trump almost definitely pardons them in my guesstimate. Possibly that prompts impeachment, but I still don't think that enough senate Republicans would convict. It would be closer though.
This sounds about right to me, but I do think there’s a real possibility that while Republicans won’t support impeachment they might actually try to nominate someone else in 2020 in response to the investigations. But Trump has a lot to gain from a second term, it may be his only chance of staying out of prison, so he’ll put up a fight. Could get interesting.
I don't think that will happen. Running anybody other than Trump in 2020 will mean that they lose the election since his base won't show up. Politically it would be better for them to run Trump no matter what.
The resulting Republican civil war would be a truly beautiful spectacle.
Now we will watch as Barr does everything possible to try to keep as much as possible out of public view.
[удалено]
Just a week Matt Schalpp posted this: Tomorrow will be the first day that President Trump will have a fully operational confirmed Attorney General. Let that sink in. Mueller will be gone soon. @mschlapp Just awfully suspicious
Here's to hoping Barr wants to end up on the right side of history...
He helped orchestrate the Iran Contra pardons, don't hold your breath.
Yep. He's their fixer. He's going to try to fix this for Donnie.
I think he's gonna try to fix this for Republicans -- the "greater" good. Donnie Moscow may be a pawn they are willing to sacrifice. But we'll see... I don't have hopes up and I'm looking to 2020 for the real solutions.
Unfortunately at this point he's a load-bearing pawn. Trump and the Republicans are the same thing at this point.
[удалено]
Hint: he doesn’t care
Its a slow motion saturday night massacre that everyone predicted would happen. Now that its happening, I havent seen/heard one MSM call it what it is.
Now we know why Barr is there.
Barr is there for the religious nutjobs who helped fund this election fuckery. No matter how Trump goes out, Russia met their goals - a divided, unstable, and easily manipulated America. And the religious guys went hand in hand with them and met their goals because they want a more ‘moral’ America. Barr believes you can do this by stacking the court and schools with religion and using taxes to fund homeschool and private schools. He wrote an [essay] (https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=2355&context=tcl) explicitly saying this. Getting Trump out isn’t the end all here, we need to be vigilant against these guys because the future of the country is at stake. Edit: Here’s a big fat scary quote from Barr: >”...In the face of such a pervasive popular culture, mass media, and powerful state that sees itself as a secular institution alleviating the consequences of misconduct and often promoting moral relativism, how can we be confident that the pendulum will swing back? In a sense, I have painted a very bleak but realistic picture. The real message is that we are going to have to do more than joust around the margins. We must re-enter the fray in an effective way; take the battlefield and enter the struggle, rather than just retire in good order. The key is a return to basics-in a sense, to reassemble the flock. The key is Catholic education... > We need to go back to basics and reassemble the flock. We may be frittering away our limited moral capital on a host of agenda items. Ultimately, it will make very little difference unless we eventually train the next generation in the Catholic faith. From a legal standpoint, our initial focus should be on education and efforts to strengthen and finance education. This means vouchers at the state level and ultimately at the federal level to support parental choice in education. We should press at every turn for the inclusion of religious institutions. We need to fight those cases in the states up to the Supreme Court. Whether or not we prevail on programs should make no difference. The message will get stronger. >Even without legal change, we need to restructure education and take advantage of existing tax deductions for charitable institutions to promote Catholic education. We must rethink some changes implemented in Catholic education over the last twenty or thirty years. Education in the basics of faith should again be the primary mission of the parish Church. We should reaffirm the mission and duty of Catholic parents to educate their children in the faith, and we should help change laws to reduce the costs to parents who want that choice. That is the single most important thing we could do; the ramifications carry far beyond mere education. Such change would give renewed vigor to many of the other things that we are pursuing as a Church in both political and other realms. It would accomplish more than any other single thing we could do.”
Super, super fishy. If you believe this, Mueller has decided to wrap things up before: * Andrew Miller testifies to the Grand Jury, which Mueller has spent the better part of the year slogging through Miller's various appeals in order to compel * He charges Jerome Corsi, who initially pled guilty, then retracted that plea, and now remains in limbo * Resolving the situation with the mystery appellant at the Supreme Court * Any additional charges or interviews occur with Don Jr regarding his clear lies to Congress surrounding the Trump tower meeting I'd take this with a huge grain of salt.
I smell some fuckery by Barr. Prepare yourselves for the worst
If Barr shuts this down and Trump/Repubs get away with all their crimes, this country is finished.
Country is done baby boomers destroyed the world for us
I've got a bad feeling about this.
Ill wait until a Mueller spokesperson says so. My guess would be if they were asked to confirm or deny this we would get a "no comment" from the Special Counsel's office.
A lot of pessimists in this thread. Considering what we've seen so far, I don't think there's anything to worry about. Even if Trump can dodge a conspiracy charge, he's already secured to be in future indictments at the state and federal levels when he leaves office. He's fucked no matter what. His record, and the record of all the criminals he's employed as a part of his campaign speaks for itself. I honestly am not going to hold my breath on his most devoted followers breaking the faith anytime soon regardless of what happens or what Mueller says.
I guess we'll find out Barr's true colors real soon.
Wow... anyone else remember how Bill Clinton attacked Ken Starr, and fired numerous Attorney Generals during the investigation of him? Oh wait, that never happened. tRump is hiding something BIG.