- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Deputy Attorney General: "Mueller can investigate any crime he finds"
Posted on 8/7/17 at 9:52 am to NC_Tigah
Posted on 8/7/17 at 9:52 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
It was within the dictates of the INDEPENDENT Council Law.
Muller is neither an INDEPENDENT Council, nor is he working under the INDEPENDENT Council Law.
This is correct . The Independent Counsel Statute expired in 1999. Mueller operates under the Special Counsel provision put into place a little while after. The IC was essentially answerable to no one. The SC is ostensibly answerable to the AG or DAG.
The problem I see right now is the floating out of proposed legislation tat would make it virtually impossible for the President or the Executive branch to fire the SC without Congressional approval. This smacks of extra constitutional overreach by the legislative branch. Essentially Congress will have created a 4th branch of government by doing this or at the very least will have usurped it's Constitutional mandate by telling the Executive Branch that it cannot have autonomy on personnel issues.
0
Posted on 8/7/17 at 9:55 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Only if you ignore the most important word in the statement "directly"
Yes, but the problem Trump has is that the original scope is still quite broad, because remember this is a counter-intelligence investigation, not your routine criminal investigation. Bob Mueller himself helped reshape the FBI after 9/11 to have far-reaching ability to investigate potential national security crimes. If you're suspected of conspiring to break US laws with the assistance of a hostile foreign government, they can reasonably scrub your financial history for many years to see if they can find in what ways you were compromised by debt, induced by foreign money, and even it's been laundered they may be able to track back to its source. Mueller's hires seem to point to this type of investigation.
For example, Deuschebank (one of DJT's big lenders) was hit with a $630 million fine for laundering $10 billion in dirty Russian money in January. If DJT sold real estate or did deals with ill-gotten money, that could potentially be kompromat that would be relevant and therefore fall within scope of the investigation.
This post was edited on 8/7/17 at 10:00 am
Posted on 8/7/17 at 10:08 am to TigerDoc
quote:
remember this is a counter-intelligence investigation,
A lot of people lose sight of this.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 10:31 am to Decatur
Yep. It's a national security investigation with criminal investigation attached. The distinction between a special prosecutor investigation and FBI proper investigation (pre-Comey firing) is less important than the non-counter-intelligence vs. counter-intelligence distinction. Mueller could potentially find a variety of types of criminal activity not-related to the campaign without seeking any additional authorization from Rosenstein.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 10:35 am to CptBengal
quote:
You are the problem. You hate the constitution
Donald Trump: Constitutional Scholar.
Did I say arrest? You can be investigated for a crime without being charged. It's called investigation. Hell I only watched a few episodes of Law &Order and I know that. You can be surveilled. All of this is done without charges. How else would you gather evidence.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:01 am to Minnesota Tiger
quote:
cornered Clinton into lying about a blow job
Well, perjury, suborning perjury and obstruction of justice.
But that would be quibbling would it not? After all, it's not like Clinton was an attorney and the chief law enforcement officer of the U.S. when he was doing this, right?
Or that the misconduct was on government property, with a government employee on government time, right?
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:13 am to TigerDoc
quote:
they can reasonably scrub your financial history for many years to see if they can find in what ways you were compromised by debt, induced by foreign money, and even it's been laundered they may be able to track back to its source. Mueller's hires seem to point to this type of investigation.
If Trump were the bank in this situation, then you may have a point. But since Trump is the seller of the property, then so long as the process were legal and the properties sold within a reasonable range of price, then I don't see how you could make a money laundering charge fit.
It's not up to Trump International to track the means by which Deutschbank has obtained its level of liquidity. Also, under the hypothetical, if there is more than one deviation from the lender in this case, say Chase, for 3 or 4 sales to Russians or HSBC ( I know they are in trouble for money laundering as well) then the whole thing falls apart. Now, if all sales were done by Kremlin Bank and Trust.... maybe you could make a RICO case.
A lot of European banks are involved in less than transparent transactions.....that being said, many US banks were as well. If you are going to single out DB or HSBC for the mortgages, then you are going to have to go after a lot of people who got mortgages in the early 2000's. Deutschbank was pretty heavy on RMBS and HSBC was huge into it.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:19 am to TigerDoc
quote:
Mueller could potentially find a variety of types of criminal activity not-related to the campaign without seeking any additional authorization from Rosenstein.
Therein lies the problem. Either this is about the campaign or it is not. Like I said many times, this is a fishing expedition.The Democrats and some neo cons are getting Mueller to do for them what they were unable to obtain during the campaign. They will try to indict aggressive accounting by Trump's CPA's without obtaining an actual formal indictment.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:27 am to KiwiHead
quote:
Therein lies the problem. Either this is about the campaign or it is not.
The Russia investigation involves more than just the Trump campaign. They are investigating the hacking and active measures campaign as well. And I assume the CI part of the investigation is looking into whether there are CI threats involving Trump associates. That could involve looking into activities that aren't directly related to the campaign.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:28 am to Ace Midnight
quote:It still had nothing to do with the original scope of the investigation. Which is the point he was trying to make.
Well, perjury, suborning perjury and obstruction of justice.
But that would be quibbling would it not? After all, it's not like Clinton was an attorney and the chief law enforcement officer of the U.S. when he was doing this, right?
Or that the misconduct was on government property, with a government employee on government time, right?
So when Trump gets hit up for perjury about something that has nothing to do with Russian hacking, how do we respond?
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:29 am to JuiceTerry
quote:
So when Trump gets hit up for perjury about something that has nothing to do with Russian hacking, how do we respond?
Since it will be some bullshite technical issue over finances or reporting, and not actual, intentional misconduct, I'll say, "It's all about the money."
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:30 am to bonhoeffer45
Minus Watergate how many of these investigations ultimately led to their targets being found guilty and those guilty convictions were upheld.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:30 am to Decatur
quote:As long as it doesn't delve into the DNC.
They are investigating the hacking and active measures campaign as well.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:39 am to Ace Midnight
Perjury would be actual, intentional misconduct. But we're dealing in hypos now. It's gonna be a long, strange trip.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 11:52 am to KiwiHead
quote:
Therein lies the problem. Either this is about the campaign or it is not. Like I said many times, this is a fishing expedition.The Democrats and some neo cons are getting Mueller to do for them what they were unable to obtain during the campaign. They will try to indict aggressive accounting by Trump's CPA's without obtaining an actual formal indictment.
I think only Mueller knows exactly what lines he is drawing, but investigating trump/russia connections is fair game whether it was investments, selling properties, or business connections.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 12:02 pm to Hawkeye95
I am going to laugh my arse of when the only people charged are the Clintons.
Posted on 8/7/17 at 12:04 pm to ihometiger
Don't know the outcome of most of these, but if you include accepted pardons which are often seen as implicit imputations of guilt, at least 7 (GHWB pardoned 6 including the Secretary of Defense [Weinberger] in Iran-Contra and Clinton pardoned Cisneros).
Posted on 8/7/17 at 12:19 pm to Turbeauxdog
quote:
Only if you ignore the most important word in the statement "directly"
I'm not focusing on some adverb, I'm focusing on the subject of the verb the modifier is addressing: the 'what'. Directly from what?
Again, it's fairly apparent from how Rosenstein has posited his statement in ORDER NO. 3915-2017 APPOINTMENT OF SPECIAL COUNSEL TO INVESTIGATE RUSSIAN INTERFERENCE WITH THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND RELATED MATTERS letter (hell, even it's title is vague, related matters?!?) that the 'what' can be virtually any damn thing.
So extending that for clarity, I am saying this whole process allows the SC to investigate "any matters that arose or may arise directly from" 'any damn thing'...
Posted on 8/7/17 at 12:30 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
quote: So what crime are they investigating again? COLLUSHON!
Which isn't even a crime. Sheesh
Posted on 8/7/17 at 12:31 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
It's not up to Trump International to track the means by which Deutschbank has obtained its level of liquidity.
Granted. They would still have to prove money laundering or other financial crimes like any other suspect. My main point was that counter-intelligence investigations have broad authority to basically give a suspect a financial body-cavity search. DJT is the only American presidential nominee not to release his taxes. Presuming DJT has good reason for breaking this norm and lying about this, there's something unsavory there, and at the very least, will play badly politically when investigation is over (Mueller's required to submit a report and has some options to make it public).
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News