In this write-up I will basically report what OTHERS are saying. Usually I use snippets, headlines, and excerpts….but this time what these Patriots say is SO VITAL that I will post in their entirety, give FULL recognition, and FULL credit to them…all I am doing is basically 99% reporting and 1% commentary.
Buckle-up…this will be GOOD…OR SCARY…depending on your perspective.
TWITTER PATRIOT WRITES:
MUELLER THREAD. We should all (obviously) be concerned if Trump fires Mueller. But, in my opinion, we should be even MORE concerned if he fires DAG Rod Rosenstein. Here’s why:
2. The investigation into Russia’s election interference began well before Mueller came on the scene, in June 2016. It is an investigation that existed independent of him. He didn’t “start” it.
3. Likewise, if he leaves, it won’t “end” it. Mueller was appointed mainly to insulate an ongoing investigation from conflicts of interest that arose from Comey’s firing. If he leaves, some of that insulation is gone. BUT:
4. The FBI has a statutory mandate to investigate potential violations of federal law and threats to national security. Just because Mueller leaves doesn’t mean that those cases just get dumped in the trash. They are obligated to continue investigation them to their resolution
5. It’s also useful to think of FBI investigations as fractals. Each case can spawn a new case, depending on what’s uncovered. In other words, if during an investigation of one violation, you uncover another, that’s a new case.
6. So while we talk about the “Russia investigation,” that is really an umbrella for what is likely *many* cases involving both criminal and counterintelligence threads. Those don’t just disappear.
7. Further, some of these — like the indictments and plea deals we’ve seen — are already in the judicial system. And no doubt there are outstanding subpoenas and other investigative leads that are already out. In other words, this train has left the station, big time.
8. The key, however, is that there needs to be a prosecutor at DOJ who is willing to facilitate and approve many parts of the investigation. Right now that’s Mueller. In his absence, who is it? DAG Rod Rosenstein (because AG Sessions would still be recused).
9. Under the Special Counsel regulations, Mueller has been reporting to Rosenstein every 90 days about the status of his investigation. He’s also had to seek approval for an expansion of his mandate, or for any charges he’s brought so far.
10. We can conclude that so far Rosenstein has approved of the progress and requests that have been made — if he hadn’t, he would have had to report this to Congress and explain why. That hasn’t happened. He’s also explicitly stated that he believes Mueller is doing his job.
11. Rosenstein, therefore, has basically seen everything that Mueller has. And he’s on board. Presumably, if he is put “back in charge,” he’d continue to move the investigation forward (if he didn’t, it would raise the question why he had been approving Mueller until now).
12. If Trump fires, Rosenstein, however, he can appoint someone new to be the DAG. Which means he can preemptively choose someone who is going to stonewall the investigation from moving forward. Even a new DAG overseeing Mueller could do this.
13. So, IMO, that’s the bigger threat. Rosenstein, not Mueller, is really the buffer right now between POTUS (and Congress) and a full investigation of all aspects of “the Russia investigation,” incl the counterintelligence part, the various criminal threads, and OoJ. /END
14. P.S. And ppl are right that in general, Trump has to fire Rosenstein to fire Mueller. But part of my point is that he could replace DAG, *not* fire Mueller and still achieve same effect if that DAG is willing to block Mueller’s efforts and “spin” the reasons why to Congress.
So, to respond to
@MZHemingway and everyone else about all this. First, I don’t recall publicly defending that he’d never make it to inauguration; if I speculated on that privately, well, okay, bad prediction and I’ll own it. But my guesstimate isn’t the point. /1
The larger problem is that, in classic Twitter fight fashion, the goal post of “evidence” keeps moving every time more evidence shows up. So, what do I mean by evidence? I said it here: 2/
You’d have set up a gallows for less only a few years ago. The weaponization of Wikileaks, the financial intertwining of Trump and the Russians, the meetings with Trump’s people, the RNC platform changes, Manafort – if this isn’t enough, nothing is.
I could go through each of these, but as an example, Mollie asked me about “the weaponization” of Wikileaks. There is no doubt that WL reached out to Trump. No evidence (yet, I grant) that Trump himself responded. /3
But I think there’s enough circumstantial evidence – including the inability of people like Stone and POTUS himself to stop talking about it – that someone on the campaign helped advise someone what to do with those stolen materials. /4
We can argue all day over whether this fits “colluding,” and which cut-out from which camp talked to whom. My point stands: if this were Clinton or anyone else, the hearings and fury would be 24/7. And THAT is only the tip of a giant iceberg. /5
The role of Manafort, the possible quid pro quo in the RNC platform, the fact that Flynn is now a felon – this should have been more than enough. But no. Instead, some texts from a pissed off FBI guy are dispositive that Mueller is on a witch hunt. /6
Meanwhile, we’re treated to nightly freakouts about Fusion GPS, from people acting as if they’ve never heard of oppo. Like this is the first dirty campaign they’ve ever seen, and thus it negates ALL the other evidence that actually *exists*. /7
I have never harped the dossier. I have never said the Russians stole the election. I have never said Trump personally coordinated with the Russians. But these straw zombies keep coming back. So here’s what I *will* say. /8
1. There is clear evidence of contact with the Trump campaign and a hostile foreign power and its active arm in WL. 2. There is a level of contact historically between the Trump Org and Putin that should worry anyone who knows anything about how Russia works. /9
3. There is, imo, a high probability that the Trump Org and its minions have been doing naughty things with Russian money for ages. 4. POTUS, for whatever reason, is clearly scared of Putin and the Kremlin. 5. A lot of people in this WH have been, erm, untruthful about ALL of this. /10
And most important, conservatives defending this WH with “but Hillary” and “uranium” and “Fusion GPS” are being astonishingly hypocritical and should just admit that if this were not their tribe, they’d have burned the WH by now. /11x
@UofDallas researcher Ruth May is an expert in all things corporate in Russia and has worked to make connections in the trail of money flowing from Russian oligarchs to the GOP. This thread is her latest 1/12
Viktor Vekselberg, one of the 10 richest men in Russia, has connections to at least two Americans who made significant contributions to GOP campaigns 8/12
At the center of all the money is the notorious Bank of Cyprus which has a long history of being a conduit for dirty money flowing in and out of Russia 9/12
Cyprus is at the center of a circle of corruption surrounding Trump
Russia’s second largest state-owned bank VTB also quietly transferred $191 million into an offshore company which Yuri Milner then used to fund nearly half of a purchase of
@Twitter in 2011 10/12
For Putin’s inner circle, a penchant for secret deals
Explore for yourself the tangled web of Russian money that warrant special investigator Robert Mueller’s attention, according to Ruth May 12/12
Just In: Robert Mueller is Set to Rip Trump’s White House Apart as Early as This Week
According to Bill Palmer at the Palmer Report, this is the week we’ve all been waiting for1. This is when Special Counsel Robert Mueller will begin to “rip Trump’s White House apart” in order to get to Trump. This will be an interesting week to watch Trump’s staff and Trump’s Twitter account and see the reactions as Mueller tears through there.
CNN confirms Robert Mueller is set to interview Trump’s top White House staffers as early as this week, which has to make Trump very nervous, to say the least. They’ve all seen a lot and heard a lot over the past several months, and given the numerous reports coming from sources inside that White House that say Trump doesn’t treat staffers very well, they just might start talking.
THE FINAL PATRIOT WITNESS FOR THIS ARTICLE:
If the Trump-Russia investigation is truly a witch hunt, as Trump says, the FBI’s application for a FISA surveillance warrant would prove it. Why won’t his Administration allow Congress to see it? (THREAD) 1/
2/ Among the key allegations made by Trump’s allies is that the infamous DNC-funded opposition research dossier provided the basis for the FISA warrant that reportedly allowed surveillance against former Trump campaign advisor Carter Page and potentially others.
3/ To obtain a FISA warrant on a U.S. person, investigators must submit evidence to a judge that demonstrates a reasonable basis to believe that the intended target of the surveillance is an “agent of a foreign power.”
4/ The FISA application would reveal exactly what evidence the FBI relied on to suspect that people within Trump’s orbit were in cahoots with Russia.
5/ If the dossier was the principal evidence presented in the FISA warrant application, it would vindicate Trump and his allies claims that the Russia investigation was just a political witch hunt.
6/ This is why the FISA warrant application is of such keen interest to Trump’s defenders.
7/ Last week, Rep. Jim Jordan, a Trump ally, grilled FBI Director Chris Wray about the dossier’s role in the FBI’s FISA warrant application, and demanded that he allow Congress access to it. Wray refused, saying it was classified.
8/ Yet, there’s one person who has the unchecked power to declassify anything he likes, including the FBI’s FISA warrant application — Wray’s boss, President Donald Trump. It’s baffling that he refuses to do so.
9/ Trump has also made much hay of the Obama Administration’s “unmasking” of Trump associates whose conversations were picked up in routine surveillance of Russian foreign intelligence targets.
10/ Yet, here again the Trump Administration has resisted Congressional requests for access to the details of which Obama officials requested the unmasking and their basis for doing so.
11/ By ordering that the FISA application that the unmasking details be made public, he could prove that the Russia investigation was really the political witch hunt he claims. So, why doesn’t he do it?
12/ If it’s just the dossier, that the FISA warrant is based on, there’s nothing classified about that. Which suggests that there is more to it.
13/ If it’s really a political witch hunt, Trump could be vindicated tomorrow. Trump has the power to get to the truth of the matter, yet is actively resisting doing so.
14/ The only reasonable explanation for Trump’s resistance is that he knows that it would reveal that the FBI had really good reasons to suspect something shady was going on between Trump’s team and Russia.
15/ This would spoil Trump’s primary line of attack in his campaign to discredit Mueller’s investigation.
16/ As National Reviews’ Andrew McCarthy wrote, “In the unmasking controversy, it seems Trump was more interested in politically exploiting the specter of abusive unmasking than in ordering the disclosure of what actually happened. Is the same thing true of the dossier?”
17/ No one knows the real reason Trump’s administration is stonewalling. If he wanted to release the FISA warrant application, he could.
18/ As McCarthy writes, “If [Trump] persists in that posture, we have to assume he would prefer that we not know what the FBI told the FISA Court.”
19/ BOTTOM LINE: If you believe that the Russia investigation is a political witch hunt, you also have to believe that Trump is sitting on the information that could exonerate him. I don’t buy that. Do you?
20/ I highly recommend the
@AndrewCMcCarthy piece on the FISA warrant controversy, which was among my sources for this thread.
Did the DOJ Misuse the Steele Dossier — to Spy on the Trump Campaign?
THE PRESIDENT COULD ORDER DISCLOSURE IF HE WANTED TO. HE HASN’T. WHY?
-Rev. Larry Wallenmeyer.