U.S. Politics: The Ideas of Mueller

[Mexal]

4 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

We’re getting into every few hours territory.

Anyways, I think it’s incredibly salacious. He owes people massive amounts of money, leaving him open to being easily blackmailed. That’s a major story on its own, but when you factor in everything else that’s going wrong around this president, it’s downright terrifying. Just imagine if he owes some Russian oligarchs $500m, and his means of paying that off is to be friendly with Russia despite the fact that their attacking our elections. You can create numerous examples with this line of thinking and it leaves our country completely vulnerable to so many hostile individuals.

I agree. But if you can't tie the "what is this all about" to a tangible "it is about this and X is influencing him because of it" then it won't become a story for more than a minute.

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

They're not bad, but they're not Dems retake the House numbers. And if that doesn't happen, Mueller gets fired, probably the day after the election. 

We'll see. They've projected anywhere from +5-8 to retake the house and with what we're seeing on average in the specials (+15), it's hard to really be annoyed that in March, it's fluctuating between +6-10. I'm not pessimistic yet.

[Mexal]

I give you. Jared Kushner, Secretary of State. So many coincidences.

Quote

UNTIL HE WAS stripped of his top-secret security clearance in February, presidential adviser Jared Kushner was known around the White House as one of the most voracious readers of the President’s Daily Brief, a highly classified rundown of the latest intelligence intended only for the president and his closest advisers.

Kushner, who had been tasked with bringing about a deal between Israel and Palestine, was particularly engaged by information about the Middle East, according to a former White House official and a former U.S. intelligence professional.

In June, Saudi prince Mohammed bin Salman ousted his cousin, then-Crown Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, and took his place as next in line to the throne, upending the established line of succession. In the months that followed, the President’s Daily Brief contained information on Saudi Arabia’s evolving political situation, including a handful of names of royal family members opposed to the crown prince’s power grab, according to the former White House official and two U.S. government officials with knowledge of the report. Like many others interviewed for this story, they declined to be identified because they were not authorized to speak about sensitive matters to the press.

In late October, Jared Kushner made an unannounced trip to Riyadh, catching some intelligence officials off guard. “The two princes are said to have stayed up until nearly 4 a.m. several nights, swapping stories and planning strategy,” the Washington Post’s David Ignatius reported at the time.

What exactly Kushner and the Saudi royal talked about in Riyadh may be known only to them, but after the meeting, Crown Prince Mohammed told confidants that Kushner had discussed the names of Saudis disloyal to the crown prince, according to three sources who have been in contact with members of the Saudi and Emirati royal families since the crackdown. Kushner, through his attorney’s spokesperson, denies having done so.

“Some questions by the media are so obviously false and ridiculous that they merit no response. This is one. The Intercept should know better,” said Peter Mirijanian, a spokesperson for Kushner’s lawyer Abbe Lowell.

On November 4, a week after Kushner returned to the U.S., the crown prince, known in official Washington by his initials MBS, launched what he called an anti-corruption crackdown. The Saudi government arrested dozens of members of the Saudi royal family and imprisoned them in the Ritz-Carlton Riyadh, which was first reported in English by The Intercept. The Saudi figures named in the President’s Daily Brief were among those rounded up; at least one was reportedly tortured.

 

Quote

One of the people MBS told about the discussion with Kushner was UAE Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed, according to a source who talks frequently to confidants of the Saudi and Emirati rulers. MBS bragged to the Emirati crown prince and others that Kushner was “in his pocket,” the source told The Intercept.

Indeed, Kushner has grown so close to the Saudi and Emirati crown princes that he has communicated with them directly using WhatsApp, areasonably secure messaging app owned by Facebook and popular in the Middle East, according to a senior Western official and a source close to the Saudi royal family.

 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

3 hours ago, Fragile Bird said:

I have to admit, I got thoroughly sick of listening to Dershowitz on CNN. I believe they had a falling out.

It's been quite bizarre watching him capping up for Trump for the last year plus while saying he doesn't support him. Also there's this:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/03/dershowitzs-audition-to-be-trumps-lawyer-not-going-well.html

1 hour ago, IamMe90 said:

I honestly don't know that Trump will have the restraint to wait the 8 months until after the midterms to fire Mueller. He will likely do it in an irrational fit of vindictive emotion and not in any strategic manner. Everything about his tweets and other actions taken recently within the DOJ suggest that he will not wait that long. This ironically may actually galvanize the base in the midterms and allow for Mueller's reappointment or Trump's impeachment if that galvanization has a significant enough impact on the midterm results. Only time will tell, though...

I agree.A lot of his major actions tend to come from fits of rage. Just look at the recent tariffs. 

32 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The problem with firing Mueller is that it requires a lot of moving parts. I absolutely believe that if he could, he'd make a hasty decision - but it's difficult to do all of these things 'quickly':

• Fire Rosenstein
• Hire someone or appoint someone who will commit to firing Mueller
• Get them approved by the Senate (if a new appointment)
• Actually fire Mueller

All of this requires a lot of signoff from other agencies and people. It's not nearly as hasty as what he can do with, say, Tillerson. 

Technically he can bypass the Senate and appoint one of his cabinet members for 210 days. The only question is who is willing to end their career and disgrace their legacy to protect Trump?

34 minutes ago, Fragile Bird said:

He can order the AG to fire him. In this case it would actually be Rosenstein, since Sessions has recused himself, but he can always fire Sessions and appoint someone who agrees Mueller should be fired.

 Out of curiosity, is their a mechanism that allows Sessions to unrecuse himself?

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

32 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I agree. But if you can't tie the "what is this all about" to a tangible "it is about this and X is influencing him because of it" then it won't become a story for more than a minute.

I guess, but if it had gotten more attention, other news outlets would have likely done some digging. It just seems odd to me because breaking this story wide open is the kind of thing that can make someone's career if they find some really bad dirt. 

24 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I give you. Jared Kushner, Secretary of State. So many coincidences.

 

 

Guess that's how they're going to pay off the 666 building...

[DMC]

9 hours ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

I apologize for my temper tantrum yesterday. That news just really ticked me off. 

No need to apologize - the news should piss off anybody that believes in separation of powers.  I was just saying let's wait to see how the GOP congressional leadership reacts.  Haven't been able to find much in that regard, but there's this:

Quote

Publicly, a spokesman for House Speaker Mike Turzai, R-Allegheny, said the GOP will "explore" the resolutions. 

Drew Crompton, chief of staff to Senate President Pro Tempore Joseph Scarnati, R-Jefferson, told The Huffington Post that "it would be inappropriate to comment because the chamber would have to preside over an impeachment trial."

Privately, it's another matter. 

A senior House Republican source said Wednesday that GOP leaders currently have no plans to take up the resolutions. Because, whatever their public grumbling, they privately - and sensibly - realize this is a fool's errand that would do far more harm than good.

 

1 hour ago, Paladin of Ice said:

a new Public Policy Poll focused on Pennsylvania, Arizona, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Tennessee found that health care was getting significant focus, with the majority of people wanting to improve it and opposing Republican plans, and in all cases Democratic Senate candidates are leading Republicans.

Those are encouraging numbers, especially in Tennessee.  I think you have to consider Sinema and and Rosen slight favorites at this point - although recently Heller got a boost with Danny Tarkanian dropping out of the primary.  Gravis has had a couple recent encouraging polls as well - Nelson up 44-40 on Scott in Florida, and McCaskill up 42-40 on Hawley in Missouri.  I would have expected McCaskill to start out in an outside the margin hole.

Also, don't look now, but Cindy Hyde-Smith was appointed to Thad Cochran's seat in Mississippi.  Fellow Republican Chris McDaniel has already announced he's running for the seat, along with Democrat Mike Espy.  There will be no primary, but there would be a runoff in no one gets over 50%.  An Espy-McDaniel runoff could almost, maybe, slightly be a pickup opportunity.

Finally, things continue to look consistently encouraging in the House.  The Cook Report updated their ratings last week, and all 9 changes moved in the Democratic direction.  There was a tenth shift - the Pennsylvania 18th went from tossup to likely R, but this is because the special election finished and they're now looking at changes under the new map.  The old 18th will be the new 14th, which is actually more Republican (PVI of +14 compared to +11), and will almost certainly be Rick Saccone's consolation prize (he just registered for the primary).  As these trends continue, it becomes increasingly difficult to see how the GOP will prevent the Dems from taking back the House.

[Mexal]

More corruption... It's systematic. 

Quote

A cooperating witness in the special counsel investigation worked for more than a year to turn a top Trump fund-raiser into an instrument of influence at the White House for the rulers of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, according to interviews and previously undisclosed documents.

Hundreds of pages of correspondence between the two men reveal an active effort to cultivate President Trump on behalf of the two oil-rich Arab monarchies, both close American allies.

High on the agenda of the two men — George Nader, a political adviser to the de facto ruler of the U.A.E.; and Elliott Broidy, the deputy finance chairman of the Republican National Committee — was pushing the White House to remove Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson, backing confrontational approaches to Iran and Qatar and repeatedly pressing the president to meet privately outside the White House with the leader of U.A.E.

Mr. Tillerson was fired last week, and the president has adopted tough approaches toward both Iran and Qatar.

Mr. Nader tempted the fund-raiser, Mr. Broidy, with the prospect of more than $1 billion in contracts for his private security company, Circinus, and he helped deliver deals worth more than $200 billion with the United Arab Emirates. He also flattered Mr. Broidy about “how well you handle Chairman,” a reference to Mr. Trump, and repeated to his well-connected friend that he told the effective rulers of both Saudi Arabia and U.A.E. about “the Pivotal Indispensable Magical Role you are playing to help them.”

Mr. Nader’s cultivation of Mr. Broidy, laid out in documents provided to The New York Times, provides a case study in the way two Persian Gulf monarchies have sought to gain influence inside the Trump White House. Mr. Nader has been granted immunity in a deal for his cooperation with the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, according to people familiar with the matter, and his relationship with Mr. Broidy may also offer clues to the direction of that inquiry.

 

[Mexal]

3 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

I guess, but if it had gotten more attention, other news outlets would have likely done some digging. It just seems odd to me because breaking this story wide open is the kind of thing that can make someone's career if they find some really bad dirt. 

I'm sure Mother Jones is digging. They're pretty good at investigating.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

11 minutes ago, Mexal said:

I'm sure Mother Jones is digging. They're pretty good at investigating.

Perhaps Mueller will too. I've always maintained that his shady business practices are what will bring him down.

 

[Yukle]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

Technically he can bypass the Senate and appoint one of his cabinet members for 210 days. The only question is who is willing to end their career and disgrace their legacy to protect Trump?

I'm wondering if that'll actually be the case. There don't seem to be many people who put their reputations before Trump as it is; they're all seen as corrupt now by everyone except his (fairly small compared to the USA at large) base.

For whatever reason, time and time again Trump throws people under the bus and people keep volunteering to jump next. He even has lawyers working for him despite a well-known history of not paying up. His current lawyer was never reimbursed for $130,000 paid to Stormy Daniels and still works for him. Maybe his charisma is compelling, or he is excellent at getting idiots to follow him, but Trump has an endless supply of people to do his bidding.

[Mexal]

7 minutes ago, Yukle said:

I'm wondering if that'll actually be the case. There don't seem to be many people who put their reputations before Trump as it is; they're all seen as corrupt now by everyone except his (fairly small compared to the USA at large) base.

For whatever reason, time and time again Trump throws people under the bus and people keep volunteering to jump next. He even has lawyers working for him despite a well-known history of not paying up. His current lawyer was never reimbursed for $130,000 paid to Stormy Daniels and still works for him. Maybe his charisma is compelling, or he is excellent at getting idiots to follow him, but Trump has an endless supply of people to do his bidding.

Luckily for his lawyers, Trump isn't actually paying for them. The RNC and Trump's 2020 campaign are paying.

[lokisnow]

I imagine the lawyers and law firms expect they will out live Trump and anticipate the trustees of his estate will pay up promptly with or without a court order.

***

with the appointment of Hyde - Smith to Mississippi, that brings the US senate to 23 women, an all time high. 22 earlier with Frankens appointee replacement, also an all time high.

if Hyde smith and Espy both advance out of the jungle primary, Mississippi citizens will be forced to elect either a woman or an African American to the senate.

[Mexal]

No one saw this coming. No one at all.

 

[Fragile Bird]

11 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Um......

Speaking of which, he’s totally going to fire Mueller.

Also:

Signs that he’s crack or didn’t write this? Or both?

I guess CNN did not break off with Dershowitz, because Anderson Cooper interviewed him tonight about this tweet. The tweet, he says, is taken out of context. He says he has always been against the appointment of special prosecutors, because their job is to find a crime has been committed, even if there is no evidence of a crime having been committed. For example, a special prosecutor couldn't find anything with regard to the Whitewater scandal, but did find an affair with an intern, itself not illegal, but Clinton lied about it.

Dershowitz wrote an article, from which the tweet was lifted, saying that the US is the only country in the world that does so. Instead, he says, the US should use the kind of independent commission used in Great Britain and Israel. We use the same system in Canada, creating what are called Royal Commissions to investigate serious issues. What Dershowitz doesn't mention, however, is the fact that often the report of the commission is tabled in parliament, tossed around like a football, and then quietly shelved because the recommendations are very expensive to carry out. Sometimes the commission reports aren't even made public.

However, you have to admit that lying under oath or to the FBI does seem to form the basis for a lot of charges.

Dershowitz, however, said at this point in time Mueller should not be fired but should carry on his investigation. He just didn't think he should have been appointed in the first place. And Trump's tweet is misleading.

[Fragile Bird]

The Austin bomber left a twenty minute confession on his cell phone. I guess we'll find out why he did it.

[Martell Spy]

Quote

Former FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe, who was symbolically and summarily fired by Attorney General Jeff Sessions hours before his official retirement last week, authorized a criminal investigation into Sessions in the aftermath of his misleading testimony during his confirmation hearing in January 2017, ABC News reported Wednesday. The investigation of Sessions for perjury was previously unknown to the public, although according to ABC’s reporting, several top Republican and Democratic lawmakers were briefed on the investigation last year by McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

Last Year, Andrew McCabe Launched a FBI Perjury Investigation Into Jeff Sessions. This Year, Sessions Fired Him.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/last-year-mccabe-launched-perjury-investigation-into-sessions-this-year-sessions-fired-him.html

[Martell Spy]

Quote

 

I think sometimes you count on the institutions themselves. For instance, we know the president has been a lot slower to acknowledge the extent of Russian efforts, whether they succeeded or not, to impact the election. But none of the people around him have been that way. Pompeo, for instance, has been very forthright about this.

I think we don’t think he will go there. And I’m not sure, frankly, that a law is going to make much difference. There are executive powers here that are pretty firmly established. But I think the message has been sent pretty directly, and I mean pretty clearly. Look, I don’t know a single Republican, OK I’m sure there’s some, but most of them have said, “Look, don’t mess with the Mueller probe.”

 

A Republican Congressman on Why His Party Won’t Pass a Law Protecting Mueller’s Job

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/rep-tom-cole-on-why-republicans-wont-pass-a-law-protecting-mueller.html

[DMC]

3 hours ago, Mexal said:

We'll see. They've projected anywhere from +5-8 to retake the house and with what we're seeing on average in the specials (+15), it's hard to really be annoyed that in March, it's fluctuating between +6-10. I'm not pessimistic yet.

I really don't think the insistence that the Dems need to win by +10 or more to retake the House merits a response at this point.  It contradicts every major election prognosticator, not to mention flies in the face of the median-bias in the 2016 elections (R +5.5), the Cook PVI of the median district (R +3*), prior midterm elections, and basic common sense. 

*BTW, this median district - the NJ 7th held by Leonard Lance - is rated as a tossup by Cook and Lean Republican by Sabato.

As for the 538 number, yeah that's a major overreaction to what is in all likelihood a minor blip.  Dems were up by 9.4 as recently as two days ago, and have consistently ranged from about 7 to 9 points since February 20.  The quick downturn is clearly the result of Dems dropping 4 points in the newest Quinnipiac and Ipsos polls, as well as the inclusion of the McLaughlin & Associates poll which consistently polls well under the average.  Has anything changed in the past week to suggest such a shift?  Not that I can think of.  Without any corresponding explanation it's hard not to assume this is just random error until further polling demonstrates a trend.

4 hours ago, Kalbear said:

The problem with firing Mueller is that it requires a lot of moving parts. I absolutely believe that if he could, he'd make a hasty decision - but it's difficult to do all of these things 'quickly':

• Fire Rosenstein
• Hire someone or appoint someone who will commit to firing Mueller
• Get them approved by the Senate (if a new appointment)
• Actually fire Mueller

Not necessarily.  Remember the Saturday Night Massacre is dubbed such because both the AG and the Deputy AG resigned and Robert Bork, as Solicitor General and Acting AG, fired Cox all in one day.  Now, the 98 Vacancies Act has happened since then, but Trump has already flouted its procedures, including the firing and replacement of Sally Yates, and it's unclear if Trump can just fire Rosenstein and simply order his acting replacement to quash Mueller's investigation.  It's quite possible Trump capitalizes on that lack of clarity, acts immediately to find someone willing to fire Mueller, and deals with the consequences later.  Politically, that's probably the smart move - he's almost certainly going to have to deal with court challenges anyway if he removes Mueller, no matter how he goes about it.

[Yukle]

2 hours ago, Mexal said:

Luckily for his lawyers, Trump isn't actually paying for them. The RNC and Trump's 2020 campaign are paying.

That's a good point.

I reckon the Democrats should make that a much clearer point in their attacks: Donate to the RNC or campaign and all you're doing is paying for Trump's lawyers.

I can't believe the RNC has so little spine that they can't even protest that.

[GAROVORKIN]

41 minutes ago, Yukle said:

That's a good point.

I reckon the Democrats should make that a much clearer point in their attacks: Donate to the RNC or campaign and all you're doing is paying for Trump's lawyers.

I can't believe the RNC has so little spine that they can't even protest that.

The RNC won't challenge Trump because of their fear  of alienating his supporters who at this time , make up a rather sizable chunk of the  Republican voting base. 

[Gorn]

10 hours ago, Yukle said:

For whatever reason, time and time again Trump throws people under the bus and people keep volunteering to jump next. He even has lawyers working for him despite a well-known history of not paying up. His current lawyer was never reimbursed for $130,000 paid to Stormy Daniels and still works for him. Maybe his charisma is compelling, or he is excellent at getting idiots to follow him, but Trump has an endless supply of people to do his bidding.

The lawyer, Michael Cohen, is incredibly wealthy in his own right and very shady: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/remember-michael-cohen-is-a-very-rich-dude

While the TPM article doesn't quite spell it out, it is fairly obvious that he is one of Trump's connections for laundering money from Eastern Europe.

ETA: Here's another good TPM article about Cohen which goes into more detail: https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/who-will-rid-me-of-this-meddlesome-stormy-the-michael-cohen-story. He's also childhood friend with this upstanding citizen from Trump's orbit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Felix_Sater