I’ve lost power here at my cabin in the woods and can’t ascertain the cause or get any estimate on when it will be restored. As a result, my laptop computer will soon be useful as a paperweight, and little else. So, this will be brief. The Wall Street Journal has reported that Special Counsel Bob Mueller has impaneled a grand jury to look into the Trump/Russia case.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller has impaneled a grand jury in Washington to investigate Russia’s interference in the 2016 elections, a sign that his inquiry is growing in intensity and entering a new phase, according to people familiar with the matter.
The grand jury, which began its work in recent weeks, signals that Mr. Mueller’s inquirywill likely continue for months. Mr. Mueller is investigating Russia’s efforts to influence the 2016 election and whether President Donald Trump’s campaign or associates colluded with the Kremlin as part of that effort.
I wish there were more specificity than telling us that the grand jury began its work “in recent weeks,” but I guess that means that it didn’t start today and it didn’t start as long as a month ago. It could explain Trump’s recent freakout over Mueller which has resembled how a wolverine reacts when trapped in a burlap bag.
Also important to note in this brief piece, Congress hardly has the president’s back. Obviously, they just delivered a veto-proof Russian sanctions bill on the president’s desk that didn’t offer the usual waivers. But, also:
The developments unfolded amid a new sign of concern by Congress that Mr. Mueller’s independence needs to be protected. Sens. Thom Tillis (R., N.C.) and Chris Coons (D., Del.) introduced legislation Thursday making it harder for Mr. Trump to fire Mr. Mueller. Under the legislation, a special counsel could challenge his or her removal, with a three-judge panel ruling within 14 days on whether the firing was justified.
If the panel found no good cause for the firing, the special counsel would immediately be reinstated. The legislation follows a similar effort from Sens. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) and Cory Booker (D., N.J.)
“The introduction of two bills with two different bipartisan pairs strengthens the message that there is broad concern about this,” said Mr. Coons, who said that Mr. Tillis approached him on the Senate floor about teaming up on legislation.
When Republicans from states like North Carolina are walking up to Democrats on the Senate floor and asking for help in nailing the president’s behind to the wall, you know things are serious.
When I know I can write about this and complete my thoughts before my battery goes dead, I’ll have more to say. I’ll leave you with this:
“This is yet a further sign that there is a long-term, large-scale series of prosecutions being contemplated and being pursued by the special counsel,” said Stephen I. Vladeck, a law professor at the University of Texas. “If there was already a grand jury in Alexandria looking at Flynn, there would be no need to reinvent the wheel for the same guy. This suggests that the investigation is bigger and wider than Flynn, perhaps substantially so.”
Thomas Zeno, a federal prosecutor for 29 years before becoming a lawyer at the Squire Patton Boggs law firm, said the grand jury is “confirmation that this is a very vigorous investigation going on.”
This is the best hoax ever.
You write:
I agree wholeheartedly.
Better than Watergate, even.
Why?
Trump is more dangerous than Nixon, that’s why.
And Putin is more dangerous than Brezhnev.
They could have been comparing cookie icings, discussing their relationships to the ruling aliens who are trying to subjugate the whole earth or anything and everything in between. The “truth” does not matter here, only power.
If the Deep State controllers can get rid of Trump peacefully, more power to them. And I mean that quite literally.
But…both sides of this hustle are rotten to the core.
Try to remember that.
And forget it at your own peril.
AG
P.S. Yes…sigh…I knew you were being sarcastic, Booman.
I’m not, though.
What would a non ‘Deep State’ investigation into the possibility of obstruction of justice and collusion with Russian election tampering look like?
+1 to this question
It would have some hard evidence.
AG
Would the hard evidence come before the investigation? Or would the hard evidence result from the investigation?
You ask:
There have been months and months worth of unsubstantiated allegations in the media…obviously (to all but the stupidest, most eyes-wide-closed fools) plants and leaks from the Deep State. The soft “evidence” plus the Deep State operatives in place up and down the system have overwhelmed the media and the legal system, and I personally no longer have any objective trust in anyone…including Mueller and the entire so-called justice system of the U.S.
I think that the electoral fix failed twice leading up to this present bullshit brouhaha. Once in the Republican primaries and once in the presidential election. (It worked in the DNC non-personing of Bernie Sanders, however.) Now that fix is being run on a larger scale.
As I have said here many times, this isn’t about whether Trump colluded with the Russians. If a chosen winner had “colluded” with Russians or other supposedly hostile foreign agencies…as is quite likely the case with HRC’s campaign, among other things…there would have been no “HOTTEST THING EVER!!!” efforts to pin that collusion. It’s dirty business as usual, from Kissinger right on through Oliver Stone and beyond.
There is probably hard evidence available on every politician motherfucker who has risen to the top of this steaming pile of shit we call “Washington DC” over the past 50 years. Collusion with Israel, with Saudi Arabia, with hostile warlords of every stripe across the globe…collusion with hostile forces in pace inside of this government and society. The Deep State decides “which” hard evidence it wants to leak and then does so through its satrapy of media outlets.
You want to believe the (already dead) American Dream of impartial justice?
I got an impartial bridge to sell you.
Wake the fuck up.
The controllers have the system by the short hairs. Resistance is futile. Only collapse will save us now.
Back in the U.S.S.R., part 3.
Soon running at your local soup kitchen.
Watch.
You asked for it; you got it.
Enjoy.
AG
Well, perhaps, but what I’m wondering is this: Would the hard evidence come before the investigation? Or would the hard evidence result from the investigation?
Keep asking. You’ll just get more stuff about Deep State controllers and how even asking your question reveals your stupidity.
it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
I am not ready to give up on Mueller yet.
“both sides of this hustle”
Kindly define the membership of each side, as specifically as possible. “Deep State” doesn’t count as specific.
Thank you.
You write:
If you don’t know, I can’t tell you. You are beyond help.
And if you do know…then you’re just using more cheap lawyers’s tricks.
Either way…
AG
In other words, AG, the hustle here is you hustling us.
Maybe the deep state is like dark matter, and there are no specifics, its only known by its effects.
If you want to use dark matter to explain something, you better have a good understanding of the effects, and the limits of what can be known.
But thats never been AGs way ofcourse, AG prefers to use placeholders not to explain something honestly, but to attack his enemies.
So the only way he could possibly react is agressively and pretending “they” are stupid and ignorant, and dishonest hustlers ofcourse.
Maybe AG has got great points to make, but they will be buried under such a thick layer of shit that noone will ever know what he wants to make clear.
As you can see i am talking about you AG, its because trying to talk with you doesnt seem to be worthwile. If you disagree and feel i am wrong, perhaps you should prove me wrong and not react in your idiosyncratic way.
Well the senate just went on recess. Will this news push the donald to fire Sessions and appoint a new AG?
FWIW – Kelly says no, but we’re talking about Trump and DC that are not known for consistency on matters much beyond war.
i thought the Dems had promised to refuse to adjourn, to prevent recess appointment.
If the House and Senate are determined to adjourn, doesn’t look as if the minority can prevent it. McConnell could keep the Democratic majority Senate in session because the GOP House didn’t adjourn (everybody just went home). But it’s possible that there is some more obscure rule that does allow the minority to prevent an adjournment.
WaPo – from WSJ report
Hmm. Around the time Trump began public freaking about Mueller’s investigation? Did someone leak that to the WH? (Everybody can justify leaks that serve their own interests.)
If a subpoena has been or is being issued for Don Jr. to appear, expect Trump to freak further. With good reason because Jr.’s not too bright, has had few if any real world experiences, and has always been dependent on daddy and lawyers to tell him what to say. He’s like a GJ prosecutor’s dream witness.
My sense was that Trump acted like a wolverine trapped in a burlap bag, as Martin put it, until he settled on a strategy of, if push comes to shove, offering blanket pardons. When he realized he had that power, he settled down.
Though I’m an attorney, I have no direct professional knowledge of that aspect of constitutional law. However, everything I’ve read tells me he’s on solid ground in pardoning pretty much anyone except himself. Perhaps the Supremes might weigh in against pardoning one’s own children, but I doubt it since other presidents have offered pardons with clear conflicts of interest in view. Such actions have been consistently viewed as political and thus subject to political consequences (e.g. Ford losing to Carter).
When it comes to self pardons, a president is on far thinner ice. There’s quite a bit of common law going back centuries that would seem to suggest that’s not cool. However, the Supreme Court has been unmasked since 2000 as a fundamentally political institution so I have no confidence it would be ruled against the Doofus-in-Chief.
I’m not an attorney and have no knowledge at all, but if there are state charges, he can’t pardon those, right? If Mueller uncovers wrongdoing, is it appropriate for him to share with state authorities? And what about charges brought against corporations and such? Can a president pardon entire business entities?
I’m no attorney either, but I would think that crimes can’t be committed by corporations, but by individuals within that corporation. But the corporation could be sued on civil action. So no, you can’t pardon a corporation, because you can’t charge a corporation with a crime.
I have no idea if a POTUS can offer some sort of immunity to a corporation, but I think congress could.
Corporations can be charged with crimes – they can be held responsible for the actions of employees acting on the company’s behalf. So, perhaps a corporation could be pardoned, although I have no idea if there is any case law or interpretive guidance on this subject. I don’t think it would be prohibited by the text of the Constitution.
You’re correct. A president lacks authority to pardon state crimes. Basic federalism. I suppose the Supremes could cut new law on that issue but they’d be really stepping out, declaring an authority for themselves that wouldn’t be much less audacious than in Marbury v. Madison.
The major question for Democrats:
Will Mueller’s grand jury leak like Kenneth Starr’s grand jury?
Finally got my power back, five minutes ago.
Not to mention:
This:
And the details within this:
Quite a day. Prediction: will take days for the media to unpack.
Also, for those with a sweet-tooth for the conspiracy walking-tour:
Happy days.
Hoax?
Witch hunt! Witch hunt! Get your terms straight!
In Conserva-speak, “hoax” is usually reserved for references to junk science, like “climate change”…
So there is an investigation going, if all of those being investigated were clean of breaking laws they would not care.Part of an investigation is to watch how those around it react to progressive news of said investigation. Their chosen actions speak bounds.