re: Our President's attorney's allege illegal conduct by Robert Mueller

quote:

---

None of this is congruent with reality.

---

Often when I disagree with a poster I'll explain which of their points I disagree with and why, sometimes with a link to a sauce that provides the evidence or logic for that underlies my conclusion.

To call my musings which I'm clearly outlining as just opinions coming off the cuff "incongruent with reality" is cute though.

I'm sure Mueller is ready to flip and bring the charges against HRC any day now.

Back in incongruousville, we're putting our big boy pants on and googling some shite.

So, despite your lazy as frick reply failing to single out any particular opinion I spouted, here's the DL.

I'm right about the transition team not being in government. - - Illinois Inst. for Continuing Legal Educ. v. Department of Labor, 545 F. Supp. 1229, 1232 (N.D. Ill. 1982). And thus they're not caught under FOIA directly in the way Fedgov is, except when receiving funding or work from an existing govt agency.

There are a shitload of other statues that appear to entitle all kinds of FOIA-able material to be made public from the transition team, notably as they apply to conflicts of interest. Certainly the mega-suit from the ACLU that explores FOIA on Trump's emolument problem will involve piercing attorney client privilege in the transition period, unless he was brazen enough not to take any legal advice. In fact their website blurb on the suit specifically outlines 11/9 to 1/20 LINK

And while Trump does publicly exude a devil may care attitude to this issue, as I believe you said yourself, he's an intelligent man routinely underestimated by opponents. No way he's not up on this stuff.

It's likely he did have counsel look over the transition teams emails to gauge any particular issues. It would be crazy not to. It's likely counsel kept those all in one place. It's likely attorney client privilege for the WH counsel has already been breached by Mueller's team, in fact there were several who predicted just this, weeks ago. Check out resistance sunshine pumper Seth Abramsons most recent million tweets to find a few that confirm this idea is in play.

It's most likely that the emails Mueller now appears to have came from WH counsel first.

So either Mueller played slightly dirty and got lucky to get some information that itself won't be admissible in the court that Trump won't be tried in since he's a sitting president. Or he and the team of super attorneys he hired actually know a thing or two about getting the information they need, have all been doing so for decades and just did so again, I.E. they make their own luck. But I digress. WH counsel can't cover up crimes, they can't lie to investigators.

Yes that would make transition emails FOIA-able.

And last week's odd noises about how a president can't obstruct justice by firing someone (exec privilege) make about as much sense as saying that perjury is impossible because the first amendment allows for free speech. It's my belief (and that of a couple of commentators I've read), that it was in fact executive privilege, not attorney client, that Jnr tried to invoke in refusing to be honest. Bear in mind that reports of secret hearings come through the grapevine, and Trump Jnr is also very smart (he's Trump's son after all), no way he's dumb enough to assert attorney client privilege regarding his conversations with his dad.

Also bear in mind, yes bear not bare, that Jnr was up against Adam Schiff, a man who knows his way around a witness, so when Jnr asserted executive privilege over matters relating to pre inauguration maybe even pre election discussions, Schiff probably wet himself laughing, thus the recent talks of Schiff leaking.

I look forward to a TL:DR reply.