Author Topic: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed  (Read 385 times)

Common Sense

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #15 on: October 30, 2017, 07:18:58 PM »
And Papadopoulos pleads guilty.

Its going to get bad. Real bad. But Trump has big $$$ lawyers and I think they'll be able to skirt him around it for awhile. But this is just bad our country.
"It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something." - POTUS #32

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #16 on: October 31, 2017, 03:05:27 AM »
I have come to rely on Lawfare for straight legal analysis irrespective of political affiliation. This quick and dirty assessment suggests there is much more to come.

Quote
The first big takeaway from Monday morning’s flurry of charging and plea documents with respect to Paul Manafort Jr., Richard Gates III and George Papadopoulos is this: The president of the United States had as his campaign chairman a man who had allegedly served for years as an unregistered foreign agent for a puppet government of Vladimir Putin, a man who was allegedly laundering remarkable sums of money even while running the now-president’s campaign, a man who allegedly lied about all of this to the FBI and the Justice Department.

The second big takeaway is even starker: A member of President Trump’s campaign team admits that he was working with people he knew to be tied to the Russian government to “arrange a meeting between the Campaign and the Russian government officials” and to obtain “dirt” on Hillary Clinton in the form of thousands of hacked emails—and that he lied about these activities to the FBI. He briefed President Trump on at least some of them.

...Mueller’s opening bid is a remarkable show of strength. He has a cooperating witness from inside the campaign’s interactions with the Russians. And he is alleging not mere technical infractions of law but astonishing criminality on the part of Trump’s campaign manager, a man who also attended the Trump Tower meeting.

Any hope the White House may have had that the Mueller investigation might be fading away vanished Monday morning. Things are only going to get worse from here.

Robert Mueller’s Show of Strength: A Quick and Dirty Analysis
https://lawfareblog.com/robert-muellers-show-strength-quick-and-dirty-analysis
« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 03:31:03 AM by Solon »
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #17 on: October 31, 2017, 12:20:44 PM »
Among print, TV, and podcast takes on yesterday's events, I have have identified two views that offer suggestions for the Trump response that merit some consideration.

1. One view argues that Manafort, et. al. should just bide their time for the present in full confidence that the president will pardon them. None of them will ever serve a day in jail. Instead of spilling their guts, they should just keep their mouths shut about any and everything illegal or constitutionally questionable that they observed or in which they participated. Manafort aged 68, for example, if convicted of the charges against him, would die in prison. Even if he were charged by the NY Attorney General where most of his money laundering took place, once pardoned of federal charges, he could take the fifth amendment against incrimination and probably plea bargain the charges down to a suspended sentence. Spiro Agnew's lawyer argues this scenario in Time magazine because he followed a similar one for his client in the early 1970s.

This is risky for Manafort and Gates for several reasons. While it is likely that Trump will pardon them eventually, it is by no means certain that NY will prove as malleable as Maryland. As part of his federal plea bargain, Agnew agreed to resign as Vice President. Manafort and Gates have no such position to offer. The NY Attorney General, a Democrat anxious to add Republican scalps to his war belt before pursuing higher office, would be a tough opponent and an unsympathetic jury is a sure bet. An illicit $75 million is a lot of weight to carry into a courtroom of average people. 

2. Another view is that Trump should have the assistant Attorney General fire Mueller now. If anyone resists him, dismiss them all until he finds a willing actor. Congressional Republicans are a cowardly bunch led by worms who only care about their tax cuts. The have put party over country since Obama days and, given Trump's current popularity with the base and a few dissidents aside, the worms will never impeach, much less convict. That could change if Dems win one or more Congressional houses in 2018. The early indictments are only the tip of the iceberg and the more brought by Mueller the more spine some Republicans will grow and the greater probability that public support will erode. Now is the time to strike while they remain invertebrates and the base is behind them. 

This one seems the likely choice to me. There is a blizzard of criminal charges coming down the pike. At the very least Trump will be charged with obstruction of justice. Whether prosecution is delayed until he leaves the presidency is a legal matter beyond my knowledge. At present he has nothing to fear from the Republican Congress. Efforts to push a bill forward that would require a three judge panel to oversee and adjudicate any dismissal of Mueller is going nowhere. The base is rabid for Trump and the party is bending to his command (re: standing ovation at recent Congressional lunch). Moreover, Trump's overall public support is eroding. It is likely to continue to fall which could affect the base as well. Why wait until it is so dismal that Congress begins to grow a spine? While Trump would have to repeat the Saturday Night Massacre (look up Watergate, children), he would face no fight from the party, even when the media went bonkers. Power is in his hands and Trump should use it. The constitutional crisis has no where to go. Trump has full pardon power, he can dismiss appointees with impunity, and the deed will have to be done by an acting Assistant Attorney General or someone down the line in the Justice Department. True, it will tear the country apart, but what the hell does Trump care. He is a god. He is the president.


 
« Last Edit: October 31, 2017, 12:35:20 PM by Solon »
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Steven

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 381
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #18 on: October 31, 2017, 02:30:05 PM »
I just hope that if someone is found guilty they go to jail.

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #19 on: October 31, 2017, 05:08:56 PM »

Here is an explanation of "collusion" as used in the current Russia investigation. The Lawfare people, Bejamin Wittes and Susan Hennessey, writing in Foreign Policy (they have a collaboration now) provide a thorough examination of the term as currently applied and how it can be used to describe both legal and illegal activities. On the other hand, it may be more info than you want to know.

Quote
First, we can dispense with collusion as a strict legal term. Jarrett is actually correct that, from a statutory standpoint, collusion is a legal term of art only in the realm of antitrust. No one is accusing Trump and Putin of price fixing.

In the general public conversation, however, the term collusion is being used in a broader colloquial sense to mean forms of secret cooperation between the Trump camp and Russia. Collusion has become the favored term, thus far, more because of this colloquial appropriateness than because it gives any guidance about what is and is not lawful conduct. Especially as more concrete allegations emerge, using the term collusion denotes some general form of secret, or otherwise improper, cooperation. When used in that sense, the term conveys a mood of impropriety and illegality but might cover both legal and illegal conduct.

It may seem absurd that it could be possible to collaborate with a foreign intelligence service in its efforts to interfere with a U.S. election by coaxing the release of stolen emails without violating any law. But it’s not that absurd. There are plenty of activities that might be highly inappropriate and politically consequential but do not violate any criminal law. After all, if the actor seeking the information were the New York Times, not a shadowy group of Republican political operatives, we’d call it journalism.

At the same time, it’s also easy to imagine activities that fall within the colloquial meaning of collusion that would actually be criminal. So it’s worth considering whether there’s a more precise legal taxonomy, other than “collusion,” to discuss the situation at hand.

Former FBI Director James Comey, in his congressional testimony announcing the investigation, used a different word: “coordination.” This word is more precise in some respects, but it also does not necessarily convey illegality. There is, after all, no crime of “coordination” either. Coordination, of course, does not even need to be secret. And neither, most particularly, does “cooperation.” Indeed, the public evidence of at least tacit cooperation between the Trump campaign and the Russians is overwhelming and requires no investigation to prove.

Recall, after all, that Trump overtly and publicly called on Russia to obtain Clinton’s emails multiple times. In a July 27, 2016 news conference, Trump said, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.” Later the same day, he tweeted, “If Russia or any other country or person has Hillary Clinton’s 33,000 illegally deleted emails, perhaps they should share them with the FBI!” Throughout the campaign, Trump celebrated WikiLeaks and sought to make the emails, hacked and released by a hostile foreign intelligence service, a campaign issue. In short, he quite openly invited and encouraged Russian help, and he flagrantly relied on the fruits of Russian efforts. The only real question is whether these were parallel, symbiotic activities taken cooperatively by independent actors with common interests in a particular outcome or whether there was some kind of active coordination behind the cooperation.

So if collusion is not, in and of itself, a crime, and cooperation and even secret coordination are not either — at least not without more evidence — what are the possible crimes here?

One possibility, of course, is that the Fox pundits are right and there were no crimes — that the underlying investigation really is predominantly a counterintelligence matter and nothing more. The possibility that Americans cooperated with Russian intelligence in a covert action against their own country and ended up at the highest echelons of government is, to be sure, a matter of grave counterintelligence and national security concern even if their “collusion” or “coordination” or “cooperation” actually violated no criminal law. So the investigation could primarily be noncriminal in character.

But there are also areas of criminal law that any responsible prosecutor would want to examine as evidence of collusion or coordination begins to emerge — and examine with specific and granular reference to facts that are not yet known to the public or maybe even to the investigators themselves.

For example, the law of conspiracy covers agreements to engage in future crimes; an agreement to commit a crime, combined with some overt step toward committing it, is itself a crime. Then there is solicitation, which is the attempt to induce another to commit a crime. And there is clearly underlying criminal activity in the instances of Trump-Russia cooperation we already know about: Violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act certainly took place when the DNC computers were hacked, and laws were certainly broken when large volumes of emails were stolen, too. Helping thieves dispose of stolen property is generally criminal, as is — generally speaking — knowing receipt of stolen property, though journalism again offers something of an exception to this rule when the property in question is forms of information.

There are other areas of law, too. Normally, we evaluate efforts to coordinate with or assist foreign intelligence services under the rubric of espionage — though that typically involves giving information to the foreign power, not helping the foreign power distribute it to others. While there’s no indication that happened here, investigators are always interested in both information flows and money flows when foreign intelligence services have relationships with Americans in positions of power. Moreover, many such relationships with foreign governments, to avoid criminal liability, require disclosures under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, which the Trump campaign team seems not to have contemporaneously filed. And, of course, anyone who tries to hide collusion or coordination by lying about it to investigators commits a crime in doing so.

At the moment, there simply aren’t enough facts to make any kind of judgment regarding anyone’s criminal conduct. So for the time being, we suspect that special counsel Robert Mueller’s team is more interested in assembling facts than in reaching any conclusions regarding what sort of collusion or coordination would be actionable under what sort of law.

The key point, for present purposes, is that collusion, in and of itself and to the extent it took place, is a political problem, not a legal one. The president will not have to answer for collusion as such in any court. His legal problem, rather, will arise — if it ever arises — only once we know the manner of any collusion and how that activity maps onto the criminal code. Either way, Trump may have to answer to the country if the evidence shows he was willing to do business with an adversary foreign intelligence service to release dirt on a domestic political opponent. Disloyalty of that sort may well be a crime in the eyes of the president’s fellow citizens, if not under the letter of the law.

If Donald Trump Is a Crook, What Kind Is He?
https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/06/what-kind-of-crook-is-donald-trump/amp/
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Common Sense

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #20 on: November 01, 2017, 05:05:58 PM »
"If Donald Trump Is a Crook, What Kind Is He?"

A selfish one who believes, as he was brought up to think, that his actions have no repercussions. And if there is bad ending it will surely be suffered by others.
"It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something." - POTUS #32

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #21 on: November 03, 2017, 06:29:05 AM »
The Daily Beast has an interesting story on another major Trump booster who has disappeared in recent months. Shouldn't he be out front leading the chants..."Lock her up?"
No "collusion" here folks, move along. We can all be certain that Flynn had no idea he was promoting Russian interference in our election. He just liked the messages. Well...maybe.

Quote
Former White House National Security Adviser Michael Flynn followed five Twitter accounts based out of the Russian-backed “troll factory” in St. Petersburg—and pushed their messages at least three times in the month before the 2016 election.

Over 2,750 troll accounts based out of the Kremlin-backed Internet Research Agency were made public by House investigators on Wednesday. The accounts, some of which had previously been identified by The Daily Beast as Russian-generated, were pulled from Twitter due to their ties to the troll factory over the past three months.

The Daily Beast had previously discovered Flynn, Donald Trump Jr., Trump campaign manager Kellyanne Conway, and Trump campaign digital director Brad Parscale retweeted Ten_GOP several times in the month before the election.

The news that Flynn also pushed Russian propaganda comes at an unwelcome time for the former three-star general and head of the Defense Intelligence Agency. Flynn is one of the people under investigation by Robert Mueller’s widespread probe into Russian influence in the 2016 campaign.

Michael Flynn Followed Russian Troll Accounts, Pushed Their Messages in Days Before Election
https://www.thedailybeast.com/michael-flynn-followed-russian-troll-accounts-pushed-their-messages-in-days-before-election?via=newsletter&source=DDAfternoon
« Last Edit: November 03, 2017, 06:30:58 AM by Solon »
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #22 on: November 03, 2017, 08:09:15 AM »
Mueller is winning the PR war...without saying a word. A whopping 58% approve of his handling of the Trump-Russia investigation; 28% disapprove.

Quote
More than twice as many Americans approve as disapprove of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of possible coordination between Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign and the Russian government, a new Washington Post-ABC News poll finds, indicating that the conservative effort to discredit the probe has fallen flat as the case has progressed toward its first public charges.

A 58 percent majority say they approve of Mueller’s handling of the investigation, while 28 percent say they disapprove, the Post-ABC poll finds. People’s views depend in large part on their political leanings, but overall, Americans are generally inclined to trust Mueller and the case he has made so far.

National Security
Post-ABC poll: Most Americans approve of Trump-Russia probe, and nearly half think Trump committed a crime
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/post-abc-poll-most-americans-approve-of-trump-russia-probe-and-nearly-half-think-trump-committed-a-crime/2017/11/02/9ccb3ccc-bfd6-11e7-97d9-bdab5a0ab381_story.html?utm_term=.5ce8776d9d55&wpisrc=nl_rainbow&wpmm=1

On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #23 on: November 03, 2017, 08:18:43 AM »
There is now documentary evidence that Trump and Sessions lied to the public when they claimed they knew of no one from the campaign who had contact with the Russians.
While Trump was not under oath...yet, Sessions was...on several occasions...before Congressional Committees. Uh..Oh.

Quote
Standing before reporters in February, President Trump said unequivocally that he knew of nobody from his campaign who was in contact with Russians during the election. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has told the Senate the same thing.

Court documents unsealed this week cast doubt on both statements and raised the possibility that Mr. Sessions could be called back to Congress for further questioning.

The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, unsealed his first charges Monday in a wide-ranging investigation into Russian attempts to disrupt the presidential election and whether anyone close to Mr. Trump was involved. Records in that case show that George Papadopoulos, a foreign policy adviser, had frequent discussions with Russians in 2016 and trumpeted his connections in front of Mr. Trump and Mr. Sessions.

For months, journalists have revealed evidence that associates of Mr. Trump met with Russians during the campaign and the presidential transition. But the court documents represent the first concrete evidence that Mr. Trump was personally told about ties between a campaign adviser and Russian officials.

Trump and Sessions Denied Knowing About Russian Contacts. Records Suggest Otherwise.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/02/us/politics/trump-jeff-sessions-russia.html?emc=edit_nn_20171103&nl=morning-briefing&nlid=515863&te=1&_r=0
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #24 on: November 05, 2017, 03:18:51 PM »

Commerce Secretary Has Lucrative Ties to Putin Allies

The proper question seems to be: Who among Trump campaign and administration officials do NOT have some connection (usually financial) to Russia? Wilbur's problem is that the guy he is connected to is under sanction by the US government. Dealing with him is illegal. Of course, Wiilbur works for Trump, so no problem. He's just like the boss.

Quote
After becoming commerce secretary, Wilbur L. Ross Jr. retained investments in a shipping firm he once controlled that has significant business ties to a Russian oligarch subject to American sanctions and President Vladimir V. Putin’s son-in-law, according to newly disclosed documents.

The shipper, Navigator Holdings, earns millions of dollars a year transporting gas for one of its top clients, a giant Russian energy company called Sibur, whose owners include the oligarch and Mr. Putin’s family member. Despite selling off numerous other holdings to join the Trump administration and spearhead its “America first” trade policy, Mr. Ross kept an investment in Navigator, which increased its business dealings with Sibur even as the West sought to punish Russia’s energy sector over Mr. Putin’s incursions into Ukraine.

...Mr. Ross’s stake in Navigator has been held by a chain of companies in the Cayman Islands, one of several tax havens where much of his wealth, estimated at more than $2 billion, has been tied to similar investment vehicles. Details of these arrangements surfaced in a cache of leaked files from Appleby, one of the world’s largest offshore law firms, which administered some 50 companies and partnerships in the Caymans and elsewhere connected to Mr. Ross.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/05/world/wilbur-ross-russia.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Common Sense

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 471
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #25 on: November 05, 2017, 05:23:25 PM »
Wilbur's problem is that the guy he is connected to is under sanction by the US government. Dealing with him is illegal. Of course, Wiilbur works for Trump, so no problem. He's just like the boss.

Which is just bad, bad, baadddddd.  >:(
"It is common sense to take a method and try it. If it fails, admit it frankly and try another. But above all, try something." - POTUS #32

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #26 on: November 06, 2017, 10:12:36 AM »
Trump, Jr. just was just crucified by his Russian acquaintance, Natalia Veselnitskaya, with whom he met in the infamous June 2016 Trump Tower meeting along with Manafort and Kushner.

Quote
...it would appear to constitute a direct allegation that Donald Trump Jr. actively requested Russian assistance in harming Hillary Clinton, as opposed to having been merely receptive to such assistance.

The Bloomberg reporters interviewed the Russian lawyer, Natalia Veselnitskaya, in Moscow for 2½ hours. She claims that Donald Trump Jr. — who attended the meeting with Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort — said that if Trump won, he’d be open to pushing for changes to a U.S. law that targets Russian officials. That is interesting, because it alleges that Donald Trump Jr. offered to be more friendly with Russia in exchange for potential assistance with the campaign. But there’s also this:

Veselnitskaya also said Trump Jr. requested financial documents showing that money that allegedly evaded U.S. taxes had gone to Clinton’s campaign. She didn’t have any and described the 20-minute meeting as a failure.

Donald Trump Jr.’s lawyer did not deny the claims, instead declining to comment.
What did Donald Trump Jr. ask for at that meeting? The Russian lawyer just spoke out.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2017/11/06/what-did-donald-trump-jr-ask-for-at-that-meeting-the-russian-lawyer-just-spoke-out/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-e%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.e47caeb595a6

Trump Jr. Hinted at Review of Anti-Russia Law, Moscow Lawyer Says
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-11-06/trump-jr-said-anti-russia-law-may-be-reviewed-moscow-lawyer-says

Mueller will need a lot more than the comments of an untrustworthy Russian to prosecute Donnie boy, but it's buried forever the idea that this investigation is about to go away or that it's just fake news. A criminal act by the president's son is alleged in the interview (an exchange of lifting sanctions for dirt on Clinton) and he will be hard pressed to avoid prosecution if there is corroboration from other sources. Now we know why Kushner ran from the room "after a few minutes." He may have run too late. Manafort's negotiating power just rose significantly. Indicting him first rather than Flynn makes a lot more sense from the perspective of this story.


« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 07:03:10 PM by Solon »
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #27 on: November 07, 2017, 09:14:17 AM »
Will the lying ever stop? Carter Page may well wind up in the same place as Papadopoulos. After claiming that no more than a cursory greeting with any Russian government official occurred during his visit to Moscow, an email surfaced that contradicted that claim. Documents are the basis for indictments. "Faulty" memories offer no defense.

Trump and his stooges continually claim that despite the smoke of Russian collusion there is no fire. We don't know yet if that is true, yet slowly but surely the Trump team is falling to smoke inhalation.

Quote
Carter Page, a foreign policy adviser to President Trump’s campaign whose visit to Moscow during the election has drawn scrutiny, sent an email to fellow Trump aides during his trip describing “a private conversation” with a senior Russian official who spoke favorably of the Republican candidate, according to records released late Monday by congressional investigators.

Page also wrote that he had been provided “incredible insights and outreach” by Russian lawmakers and “senior members” of Russian President Vladi­mir Putin’s administration during the trip.

The email appeared to contradict earlier statements by Page, who had said he had only exchanged brief greetings with the senior Russian official, Deputy Prime Minister Arkady Dvorkovich, after he delivered a speech at a Russian university.

In his July 2016 note, Page wrote that Dvorkovich had “expressed strong support for Mr. Trump and a desire to work together toward devising better solutions in response to a vast range of current international problems.”

Trump adviser sent email describing ‘private conversation’ with Russian official
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-adviser-sent-email-describing-private-conversation-with-russian-official/2017/11/06/b39d4c84-c33b-11e7-84bc-5e285c7f4512_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_page-1055pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.ad60d7ebf429
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #28 on: November 10, 2017, 10:30:17 AM »
The Wall Street Journal has a shocker today. Writers report that the special counsel is investigating whether former Trump National Security Adviser Mike Flynn was involved in a plan to kidnap a Muslim cleric living in the U.S. and deliver him to Turkey for millions of dollars.

Quote
Under the alleged proposal, Mr. Flynn and his son, Michael Flynn Jr., were to be paid as much as $15 million for delivering Fethullah Gulen to the Turkish government, according to people with knowledge of discussions Mr. Flynn had with Turkish representatives. … He is now facing military, congressional and criminal investigations into allegations that he improperly concealed his financial ties to Turkey and Russia, and into whether the ties played any role in his decisions as the president’s adviser.

Mueller Probes Flynn’s Role in Alleged Plan to Deliver Cleric to Turkey
https://www.wsj.com/articles/mueller-probes-flynns-role-in-alleged-plan-to-deliver-cleric-to-turkey-1510309982?mod=djemalertNEWS&mg=prod/accounts-wsj


Benjamin Wittes‏Verified account
@benjaminwittes

Just let this sink in over your morning coffee: Robert Mueller is investigating whether the incoming National Security Adviser—during the presidential transition—was planning a kidnapping and rendition.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2017, 10:37:40 AM by Solon »
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken

Solon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1329
    • View Profile
Re: Mueller"s Russia Investigation: First Indictments Filed
« Reply #29 on: November 11, 2017, 01:21:09 PM »
If there is evidence that Flynn or his son were engaged in any way in a kidnap plot, or even discussed such a possibility, they would be subject to state prosecution. Evidence of this kind would prevent a presidential pardon from protecting Flynn or his son from any sentence imposed by a state court. Such evidence would definitely make it worth Flynn's time to cooperate with the special counsel. Given that Fethullah Gulen is a Pennsylvania resident, presumably the Attorney General of Pennsylvania would be the one to pursue the case. I previously mentioned that Manafort was subject to New York state prosecution too. Both of the preeminent figures in the early stages of the Russia investigation appear to face charges at the state level for which the president will not be able to pardon them. That could be critical for getting to the truth about whether there was or was not cooperation between the Trump campaign and the Russians to interfere in the election.   
On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last, and the White House will be occupied by a downright fool and a complete narcissistic moron.
...H. L. Mencken