The special counsel overseeing the investigation into Russia’s role in the 2016 election is interviewing senior intelligence officials as part of a widening probe that now includes an examination of whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice, officials said.Officials said. What they didn't say directly is they are coming for Trump, though the message is unmistakable.
The move by Special Counsel Robert Mueller to investigate Trump’s own conduct marks a major turning point in the nearly year-old FBI investigation, which until recently focused on Russian meddling during the presidential campaign and on whether there was any coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Investigators have also been looking for any evidence of possible financial crimes among Trump associates, officials said.
I made no bones about my views on Trump during the campaign. I did not support him. Once he was elected president, that had to end, so I've treated Trump in the same manner I've treated his predecessors -- criticize when deserved, but praise when earned. Trump's opponents in Washington and elsewhere don't see things that way. They want him gone and they don't care how it happens.
Let's get real. The special counsel in this case is conducting an investigation that has one purpose -- to overturn the results of an election and disqualify the winner, by turning actions the president has every right to do into a process crime. We do not have the rule of law in this country. We only have the rule of those who deem they should rule. Donald Trump is not part of this cohort. Robert Mueller is. And we're now going to find out who is right.
This is ugly now. It's going to get a lot uglier. And if you think you can reason with the people staging this coup, forget it. The norms do not apply. This is an exercise in raw power.
12 comments:
Perhaps a somewhat nicer way of putting it is that if the sources are to be trusted, Mueller is doing the same thing Patrick Fitzgerald did in Plame-gate; finding that there is no underlying crime to investigate, but using his office to go on a fishing expedition for crimes to punish. In other words, he's hoping to "create" a crime.
Perhaps a somewhat nicer way of putting it
Huh?
Maybe I wasn't so nice after all, except for noting that you have to figure out your conclusion from the evidence instead of just stating it outright. :^)
who is supposed to investigate and prosecute leakers? why arent they doing it? does Trump even have the people around him who understand that he is in a fight and what kind of fight it is?
Trump is a fighter by nature. he can fight this, the ugly way if need be... but he needs to have somebody explain shit to him.
and... he needs to keep holding rallies. keep his base fired up and fighting.
Greg Jarrett notes that special counsels with known biases--say they've been friends with James Comey for a decade or so--are required to recuse themselves. So what you do is let Mueller do his best, then prosecute him. Sauce for the goose....and then you figure out who leaked and prosecute them. And then you prosecute Comey for not revealing suspected obstruction of justice to the DOJ.
Seems to me that two can play at this game, and it could be a LOT of fun.
How do you imagine that would happen, Bubba? Sessions appears to be terrified of Mueller. And while you wait for Mueller to screw up, he can do a crapload of damage.
I think the better approach is for Sessions to start indicting Democrats now — I’d begin with Loretta Lynch, which would keep Comey busy, then go right after the Clinton capos. And I’d definitely go after Schumer. Make 'em hurt and put 'em on defense.
It would certainly presume courage which you're assuming Sessions doesn't have, and I'm not certain he does have. For that matter, so does your plan. No?
I think the law is clear, though. Mueller's position requires recusal once a close friend is a particularly interesting participant. Comey fits that. So either he steps down, or he's fair game.
Regarding Lynch and Schumer, I agree they're both corrupt, most likely, but I can't put my finger on actionable evidence yet. Maybe you have.
Investigate told you find it.
Yes, my idea would require courage I'm not sure Sessions possesses. My goal would be to send a warning shot to Trump's tormentors, however. As for Lynch, the evidence is littered throughout her tenure at the Justice Department. And with Schumer, as Gino says, seek and ye shall find. If nothing else, a thoroughgoing exposure of Schumer's ties to Comey, and Preet Bharara, would help people understand what's going on.
Right now, the Democrats are feeling no pain for what they are doing. The only thing they respect is force. Trump, and by extension Sessions, can bring the pain. They'd better damned well do it soon.
On the light side, if Sessions does perchance find his stones, maybe "Ace Commenter Brian"'s warning that Trump poses an existential threat to our republic could be found to be true. The trick is that the republic would be seen as the bureaucratic state, which is not exactly what I think Brian was getting at.
Investigate Schumer's ties to Tony Weiner... And if he had any sexting with under age girls..
As much as I'd love to see Schumer out of the Senate, I think it would be sufficient if the DOJ started prosecuting obvious corruption like Fast & Furious, the IRS Scandal, Hilliary's server, and the like. The fact that a lot of obvious things are "sliding" indicates to me that the fix is in somehow.
Post a Comment