Bill Of Impeachment: Article I, Obstruction Of Justice

[Lord Jim]

In other Russiagate news this week:

Mueller’s Team Traveled to Interview Ex-Spy Involved in Dossier

WASHINGTON — Members of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team traveled to interview the former British intelligence officer who authored a dossier alleging collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, a source close to the ex-spy tells NBC News.

Few other details were forthcoming about the interview, but Mueller's interest in Christopher Steele puts a new focus on the 35-page dossier he compiled, which includes salacious sexual allegations that then-president-elect Donald Trump denied. CNN first reported Thursday that the interview with Mueller's team and Steele took place.

The dossier asserts that the Trump campaign engaged, as the document puts it, in a "well-developed conspiracy of cooperation," with Russian intelligence agencies as they sought to interfere in the 2016 presidential election.

Sen. Richard Burr, the chairman of the Senate intelligence committee, said this week that "we have been incredibly enlightened in our ability to rebuild backwards the Steele dossier up to a certain date." Two committee sources told NBC News the intelligence committee has verified part of the dossier, but they won't say which parts.

U.S. officials have said that the FBI also has verified aspects of the dossier. It's unclear what those are.

More:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigat ... er-n808221

Senate Intel Heads Say Trump-Russia Collusion Is Still Open Question

WASHINGTON — After interviewing more than 100 witnesses and reviewing a thousand times as many pages of documents, the Senate Intelligence Committee has not ruled out that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election and has a lot more probing to do, committee leaders said Wednesday.

"The issue of collusion is still open," the committee's Republican chairman, Richard Burr of North Carolina, told a room full of reporters in the Capitol.

In a noteworthy aside, Burr also suggested that Senate investigators had corroborated some parts of a dossier written by a former British intelligence agent that makes damaging allegations against President Donald Trump and his campaign. Burr did not say which aspects of the dossier the committee may have verified or how much.

More:

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/nation ... on-n807401

[Lord Jim]

Donnie sure seems to be determined to keep Mueller and Co. busy...

He's opened up a whole new avenue for investigation into the Obstruction Of Justice piece of the investigation:

Trump met with US attorney candidates with connections to law firms of close confidantes

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump personally interviewed two candidates with connections to the law firms of close Trump confidantes for influential US attorney positions in Manhattan and Brooklyn, an unusual move that has prompted one senator to threaten their potential confirmations.

Geoffrey Berman, an attorney at the firm that currently employs Rudy Giuliani as a leading partner, met with Trump about a position atop the Southern District of New York, which covers Manhattan, two sources familiar with the meeting said. Ed McNally, a partner at the New York law firm founded by Trump's personal attorney Marc Kasowitz interviewed for the Eastern District of New York, overseeing Brooklyn, the sources said.

The two men appeared over the summer on a list of top candidates for the positions that was sent to officials involved in the vetting process before a formal nomination, according to another source familiar with the vetting.

US attorney candidates rarely -- if ever -- meet with the presidents who will nominate them. The New York posts in particular are drawing scrutiny because the Trump Organization and its headquarters at Trump Tower fall largely under the jurisdiction of the southern district, giving the local US attorney the authority to investigate cases related to the President's vast dealings.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal called the move to personally interview the candidates "alarming" and "troubling" in an interview with CNN Thursday.

"What's most alarming about the President interviewing these particular candidates for US attorney positions is that these chief federal prosecutors are going to decide whether to indict Trump campaign advisers or staff if there's collusion between the Trump campaign and Russians proven and possibly consider criminal charges against the President himself," the Connecticut Democrat said.

There is a "potential coercive and intimidating aspect of" the meetings, Blumenthal added, saying he has spoken to fellow senators about "potentially blocking any nominees who have been interviewed by the President."

CNN previously reported that Trump's nominee to head the US attorney's office in Washington, Jessie Liu, met with the President before being nominated, according to a questionnaire she submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Liu was confirmed to the position by the Senate last month.

Preet Bharara, the former US attorney in Manhattan who was publicly fired by Trump in March, said that the move to personally interview candidates "does not look good."

"I understand that he's personally interviewed the potential applicants for US attorney in Manhattan and Brooklyn and one in Washington, DC -- which happen to be places where Donald Trump has property and assets and companies -- and not interviewed personally US attorneys for other positions," Bharara said in an interview with CNN's Wolf Blitzer on "The Situation Room" Wednesday. "I think that reasonably raises a number of questions."[It sure does, especially given this President's track record for making improper requests of government officials. These three should all be interviewed by the SC's office.]

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/19/politics/ ... index.html

[Sue U]

Trump runs the government like a Mafia don from The Godfather. "I will do this favor for you in appointing you to this position. Someday, I may ask a favor from you in return."

[RayThom]

Trump runs the government like a Mafia don from The Godfather. "I will do this favor for you in appointing you to this position. Someday, I may ask a favor from you in return."

Or, from the same Mafia don -- "keep your friends close but your enemies closer."

[Darren]

Turns out collusion and obstruction, paging FBI director Robert Mueller, is an issue especially when it smells like pay-for-play.

[ex-khobar Andy]

Trump supporters keep reminding us that Hillary is not the president. Has that changed? I need to pay more attention to these things.

[Big RR]

As many others, notably Nixon, found out, it is the lying, stonewalling, and obstructions that gets you in the end. For a many like Trump where that is business as usual, it should be entertaining.

[Lord Jim]

Don't focus on this stuff; focus on the Kennedy assassination...

Ol' Paul is providing so much work for lawyers he ought to get a Certificate of Appreciation from the American Bar Association:

Manhattan U.S. attorney adds to probes of ex-Trump aide Manafort: reports

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan is investigating Paul Manafort for potential money laundering, according to media reports, adding to other federal and state probes targeting President Donald Trump’s former campaign manager.

The U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York launched the probe in conjunction with federal special counsel Robert Mueller, the Wall Street Journal reported late on Tuesday. Bloomberg separately reported that subpoenas had been issued in the case.

Representatives for Manafort did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the reports. The Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office, led by acting U.S. attorney Joon Kim, had no comment.

The probe marks the latest investigation of Manafort that comes amid the ongoing larger examination of alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race and possible collusion by the Trump campaign and associates.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1CU2GI

Talking Points Brought to Trump Tower Meeting Were Shared With Kremlin

Natalia V. Veselnitskaya arrived at a meeting at Trump Tower in June 2016 hoping to interest top Trump campaign officials in the contents of a memo she believed contained information damaging to the Democratic Party and, by extension, Hillary Clinton. The material was the fruit of her research as a private lawyer, she has repeatedly said, and any suggestion that she was acting at the Kremlin’s behest that day is anti-Russia “hysteria.”

But interviews and records show that in the months before the meeting, Ms. Veselnitskaya had discussed the allegations with one of Russia’s most powerful officials, the prosecutor general, Yuri Y. Chaika. And the memo she brought with her closely followed a document that Mr. Chaika’s office had given to an American congressman two months earlier, incorporating some paragraphs verbatim.

The coordination between the Trump Tower visitor and the Russian prosecutor general undercuts Ms. Veselnitskaya’s account that she was a purely independent actor when she sat down with Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, and Paul J. Manafort, then the Trump campaign chairman. It also suggests that emails from an intermediary to the younger Mr. Trump promising that Ms. Veselnitskaya would arrive with information from Russian prosecutors were rooted at least partly in fact — not mere “puffery,” as the president’s son later said.

In the past week, Ms. Veselnitskaya’s allegations — that major Democratic donors were guilty of financial fraud and tax evasion — have been embraced at the highest levels of the Russian government. President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia repeated her charges at length last week at an annual conference of Western academics. A state-run television network recently made them the subject of two special reports, featuring interviews with Ms. Veselnitskaya and Mr. Chaika.

The matching messages point to a synchronized information campaign. Like some other Russian experts, Stephen Blank, a senior fellow with the nonprofit American Foreign Policy Council in Washington, said they indicate that Ms. Veselnitskaya’s actions “were coordinated from the very top.”

More:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/us/p ... ussia.html

Unfortunately for Il Boobce, I doubt that Bob Mueller is much interested in the Kennedy assassination, or kneeling NFL players, or any other shiny objects...

[Econoline]

[RayThom]

Law & Order: MIU
If you want, skip to 4:55.

[RayThom]

Who will it be?
I'm thinking it's going to be Manafort. With no military background I think he will fold like a cheap card table.


FYI: He and I share the same birthday... same year, too. APRIL FOOLS!!!

[Econoline]

[Lord Jim]

[Guinevere]

From the writer David Gerrold, who is a friend of a friend on FB:

I have seen two contradictory theories about what's in the sealed indictments.

One theory has it that if you're going to shoot at the king, you have to get him with the first shot.

Maybe.

The other theory has it that you go after the underlings, looking for the ones who will roll over and make a deal, implicating the higher ups.

The second theory is more believable because that's how Nixon was brought down.

Again, there are two contradictory theories.

One is that the Republicans in congress will stand by their man, because while he's acting like a public embarrassment, they're busy working behind the scenes, ripping out the wiring of government.

The other is that the Republicans in congress are looking for an escape before he destroys the party.

The problem with all these theories is that they're theories. And while history can give us evidence from the past, it cannot predict the future.

Trump is a "black swan." (That is, if all you know are white swans, you don't believe in black swans — if one shows up, your whole reality is suddenly broken. A "black swan" is a technical term used to describe a surprise, usually unpleasant.)

So ... Trump is a black swan. Or an orange swan. Or a shit-flinging orange macaque. He doesn't fit any previous paradigms. He won the nomination, despite all the reasons why he shouldn't. He ended up in the White House despite all the reasons why he shouldn't.

So, whatever happens next, I doubt it's going to be predictable based on the evidence of the past, because the evidence of the past is based on white swans — not orange shit-flinging macaques.

At the moment, the robber barons and fascist hijackers of the Republican party have no need to shoot the swan. (Cue Barbra Streisand asking, "Whattaya gonna do? Shoot the swan?" in her Fanny Brice accent.)

But — if the macaque goes far enough off the rails to be a threat to the well-being of the robber barons and the neo-fascists, what happens next is not immediately predictable.

We can observe, we can speculate, we can make wild guesses — we can offer uninformed opinions, of which there is no shortage — we can occasionally identify the Kool-Aid drinkers and the Russian trolls — but ultimately, unless and until we get hard evidence, we're not going to KNOW.

One thing is clear to me. All the separate elements of this coup, whether deliberately planned or stumbled into by the various subgroups who do not believe in the Constitution — or some combination of those plus Russian meddling — our democracy is in serious danger.

And before this is over, a lot of people who are still trying to pretend that everything is going to be all right are going to have to take sides — either keep pretending that this is the new normal — or resist.

There is a theory, occasionally tested, that no government can survive if 20% of the population is committed to resistance. We've seen how the fright wing has created 20% that no longer believes in the Constitution. Now it's time for the rest of us to create a reality in which that 20% does not get to outvote the rest of us.

Our Constitution is flawed — but it contains within it the mechanisms for repairing those flaws. We've amended it nearly thirty times. We may have to amend it again to protect the rights of the people. But whatever the future holds, the better outcome is not going to happen by accident. We're going to have to demand it.

[Guinevere]

From Twitter just now -- and picked up by ABC News:

ABC News: Robert Mueller's team met behind closed doors today w an unknown group of attorneys & chief judge of US District Court in DC

Quite the interesting group. My guess (ok and also my hope) is they are discussing sealed indictments since in many federal courts filing under seal is disfavored and requires approval of the court.

Looks like I was probably right about the sealed indictment/s. Now I'm also wondering if Mueller would be so bold as to consider the indictment of a sitting president. Probably fantasy, but certainly an enticing one. Like everyone else, I'm going to be sitting on pins and needles tomorrow morning until we learn who is named.

[Darren]

From Twitter just now -- and picked up by ABC News:

ABC News: Robert Mueller's team met behind closed doors today w an unknown group of attorneys & chief judge of US District Court in DC

Quite the interesting group. My guess (ok and also my hope) is they are discussing sealed indictments since in many federal courts filing under seal is disfavored and requires approval of the court.

Looks like I was probably right about the sealed indictment/s. Now I'm also wondering if Mueller would be so bold as to consider the indictment of a sitting president. Probably fantasy, but certainly an enticing one. Like everyone else, I'm going to be sitting on pins and needles tomorrow morning until we learn who is named.

Gerrold has a lot of good points. Lots of money seems to sway people into ignoring the regulations. I'm glad the financial details and the involvement are being exposed. The devil is the details as always. The really odd bit is that the Russian dossier was supposedly first financed by a Republican interest. Looking back at the primaries that's not necessarily a surprise. As an aside I wonder if the Panama Papers disclosure is tied in.

[Guinevere]

I've been saying for 20 years now, pretty much since I finished law school, that the best thing we can do for democracy is campaign finance reform. Of course, the MOTU, particularly those wearing black robes who were chosen by the Republicans, will not let that happen.

[Darren]

I've been saying for 20 years now, pretty much since I finished law school, that the best thing we can do for democracy is campaign finance reform. Of course, the MOTU, particularly those wearing black robes who were chosen by the Republicans, will not let that happen.

I agree with that along with term limits. I'd rather the cozy relationships that allow Congress to be bought and sold not get started.

[Guinevere]

My theory is that if you have campaign-finance reform, the ability for non-millionaires and citizen legislators to run for office, you have true competition of the seats and so you probably don't need term limits.

Look at the interest in running for office that is happening now. I think there is a lot of pent-up energy in the nation, of every political stripe, to get more involved. At the end of the day, that is a very good thing for democracy, and I would like all the barriers to participation to be removed (including the ability to vote in elections, too).

[Crackpot]

Term limits do nothing but put politicians in the pockets of those that will be paying thier bills once thier limit has been reached.