Ed Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday

Status
Not open for further replies.
Beelzebuddy said:
From the Seth Abramson twitter thread, expect astronomical bail values. Mueller wants to keep them in prison to play them off each other until one of them turns.
Click to expand...

Or maybe this is just it and these people went to jail because the feds think they broke the law.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
So the Trump campaign was aware that the Russians had hacked Hillary's/DNC's emails?
Click to expand...
You're conflating the hacked DNC emails and the private server emails. Trump was calling for the Russians to find the purely personal emails deleted from the private server. The hacked DNC emails he knew about already.
 
BobTheCoward said:
Or maybe this is just it and these people went to jail because the feds think they broke the law.
Click to expand...
Then there'd have been many more indictments. Manafort and Gates weren't the only people with undisclosed financial ties, and Papadopolous wasn't the only person to have lied under oath about Russian collusion.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
From the Seth Abramson twitter thread, expect astronomical bail values. Mueller wants to keep them in prison to play them off each other until one of them turns.
Click to expand...

10 Million Manafort, 5 million Gates asked for. Also asked for home confinement.
 
NoahFence said:
At this level, you have to admit this isn't a hoax. We have three people intimately associated with Trump and his campaign. Two under indictment and one has already pled guilty.
Click to expand...
Mueller makes Ken Starr look a right twat. Starr took eight years to find squat on the massively guilty Clinton crime family, and here's Mueller scoring some scalps after less than eight months.
 
Does anyone know if any of the charges are state charges or are they all federal? (In all the news references I've seen, I don't think I've seen anyone make the distinction.)

I heard Mueller was going to be working with some states to ensure there would be charges for which Trump couldn't just pardon the offender. Not sure if that was the case here though.
 
Beelzebuddy said:
Then there'd have been many more indictments. Manafort and Gates weren't the only people with undisclosed financial ties, and Papadopolous wasn't the only person to have lied under oath about Russian collusion.
Click to expand...

You are guessing. That could be the case.
 
Segnosaur said:
Does anyone know if any of the charges are state charges or are they all federal? (In all the news references I've seen, I don't think I've seen anyone make the distinction.)

I heard Mueller was going to be working with some states to ensure there would be charges for which Trump couldn't just pardon the offender. Not sure if that was the case here though.
Click to expand...

Since Mueller is working for the feds, I don't think he can indict anyone at a state level.
 
Argumemnon said:
Wow, what a dumb answer. One post does not constitute spam, and it's not my fault if you're trying to divert attention from the topic by posting nonsense yourself.
Click to expand...


The topic is Mueller's Grand Jury, which has Podesta under investigation, who resigns the same day these indictments come. Not "diverting attention" at all. It's not my fault that you think everything is about your silly Trump/Putin conspiracy theory, and it's certainly not my fault that you have a habit of posting before thinking.
 
Segnosaur said:
First of all, you are assuming that Trump is actually smart/clever enough to engage in any sort of mocking. Given the fact that Trump has an intelligence level roughly the same as Forrest Gump, it would be correct to be skeptical of a claim that its just 'mockery'.

But lets give him the benefit of the doubt... lets say he really didn't want Russia/China to hack into Clinton's emails. Its still a joke/comment of a very questionable nature. (There are some things you don't joke about.)

Keep in mind that at the time, multiple Republican congress critters also criticized Trump fro his comments.
Click to expand...

Whenever Trump says something stupid or damaging or potentially criminal, he's joking.
 
Childlike Empress said:
The topic is Mueller's Grand Jury, which has Podesta under investigation, who resigns the same day these indictments come. Not "diverting attention" at all. It's not my fault that you think everything is about your silly Trump/Putin conspiracy theory, and it's certainly not my fault that you have a habit of posting before thinking.
Click to expand...

As someone already said, if Podesta is guilty of a yet to be named crime he should go to jail. But he's not even indicted yet, so yeah it's diverting attention from those already indicted.
 
Spindrift said:
Does anyone know if any of the charges are state charges or are they all federal?
Click to expand...
Since Mueller is working for the feds, I don't think he can indict anyone at a state level.
Click to expand...
Maybe not. I was thinking of something along the lines of him asking NY "Can you bring them up the following charges? And then we'll release all the charges together, even though some are federal and some are state".
 
JoeBentley said:
No mass media so everything the President said wasn't immediately broadcast and cataloged by the outrage reflexive, Whataboutism, and score-keeping political fanboys?
Click to expand...

The only thing different is the time lapse. Reflexive outrage, whataboutism and score-keeping political fanboys are as old as the Republic.
 
Childlike Empress said:
The topic is Mueller's Grand Jury, which has Podesta under investigation, who resigns the same day these indictments come. Not "diverting attention" at all. It's not my fault that you think everything is about your silly Trump/Putin conspiracy theory, and it's certainly not my fault that you have a habit of posting before thinking.
Click to expand...

you have some evidence of the hilited ?

I'm betting no...
 
Last edited:
Spindrift said:
As someone already said, if Podesta is guilty of a yet to be named crime he should go to jail. But he's not even indicted yet, so yeah it's diverting attention from those already indicted.
Click to expand...

It's also hoping that people think John Podesta, Clinton's campaign chairman, and Tony Podesta, a lobbyist, are the same person.
 
Steve said:
The best sense of humor ever! People laugh at the things he says all the time.
Click to expand...

I've got a great sense of humour. I have better humour than most people. People tell me all the time, you wouldn't believe. I told a joke the other day, and someone told me -- someone who's a humour professional, 25 years you know -- he told me that is was the best joke he ever heard. He'd never laughed that much. Whole crowds laugh at my jokes -- much larger crowds than Obama and they laugh a lot more. Believe me.
 
Rolfe said:
Has anybody posted this yet?

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/924988473404256256

Twitter thread by a professor of law and journalism attempting to explain the ongoing developments. It's been going for several hours and is already at 130 tweets and I don't think he's finished.
Click to expand...

Fascinating!!

I am at #73 right now. One question: Abramson talks about "Trump ordering the GOP platform change on 2016/03/31" - what is that "GOP platform change"? How can outsider candidate Trump give such an order?
 
Oystein said:
Fascinating!!

I am at #73 right now. One question: Abramson talks about "Trump ordering the GOP platform change on 2016/03/31" - what is that "GOP platform change"? How can outsider candidate Trump give such an order?
Click to expand...

It was about taking a hard line against Russia over Ukraine, I believe, something the Trump campaign wanted to change, for obvious reasons. And it was a request of the Trump campaign on the platform at the convention in 2016.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
Great. If Tony Podesta broke the law, he can go to jail too.

The investigation into Podesta and his firm grew out of investigators’ examination of Manafort’s finances. Manafort organized a PR campaign on behalf of a nonprofit called the European Centre for a Modern Ukraine. Podesta Group was one of several firms that were paid to do work on the PR campaign to promote Ukraine in the U.S.

Or maybe it all has to do with Manafort. Either way, we'll find out. You have some of that ... you know... evidence ?

Or just the_donald conspiracy theories ?
Click to expand...

Spindrift said:
As someone already said, if Podesta is guilty of a yet to be named crime he should go to jail. But he's not even indicted yet, so yeah it's diverting attention from those already indicted.
Click to expand...

TheL8Elvis said:
you have some evidence of the hilited ?

I'm betting no...
Click to expand...

First for anyone that doesn't know, John Podesta and Tony Podesta are brothers, not one in the same. Tony Podesta was apparently involved in kickbacks related to the Uranium One dealing. But to read these two articles: Snopes vs Forbes, you'd think you were reading about separate affairs.

Why Was Obama's Justice Department Silent On Criminal Activity By Russia's Nuclear Agency?
A less noted fact is that Uranium One was represented by the Podesta Group from 2011 to 2013 (managed by John Podesta’s brother), which cashiered $180,000 from its client. The Podesta Group had avoided registration as a foreign agent by claiming that a client, the Centre for Modern Ukraine, had no ties to a foreign government. The Centre for Modern Ukraine was likely funded by ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovich from the billions he extracted before fleeing Ukraine.

The Obama Justice Department chose not to share this information with those government officials responsible for the October 2010 approval of the partial sale of Uranium One to Rosatom. If the FBI’s evidence of Rosatom’s violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act had been disclosed in a timely fashion, the chances for government approval of the Uranium One-Rosatom deal would have vanished, despite its high-level backing from The Podesta Group, Uranium One’s substantial payments to the Clinton Foundation, and Russia’s direct payments to Bill Clinton himself. Hence the stakes in withholding the FBI evidence were quite high.

Given its importance to Russia, one might wonder why the Russian Rosatom representatives insisted on kickbacks and money laundering, whose disclosure could have scotched the whole Uranium One-Rosatom deal. For those who follow Putin’s kleptocracy, there is no mystery. Every Kremlin deal confers a license to steal on the participating Putin associates....
Click to expand...

But when you look at the Snopes article that exposes the timing and details, you can see there was no quid pro quo here involving the Clintons.

Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations? FALSE
The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve

Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the Uranium One decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton herself “never intervened” in committee matters.

Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S....

The timing of most of the donations does not match...
Click to expand...

Snopes update after The Hill article:
On 17 October 2017, The Hill reported obtaining evidence that Vadim Mikerin, a Russian official who oversaw the American operations of the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, was being investigated for corruption by multiple U.S. agencies while the Uranium One deal was up for approval — information that apparently was not shared with U.S. officials involved in approving the transaction. The Hill also reported receiving documents and eyewitness testimony “indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow,” although no specifics about who those Russian nuclear officials were or how the money was allegedly routed to the Clinton Foundation were given. In any case, none of these revelations prove that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participated in a quid pro quo agreement to accept payment for approval of the Uranium One deal.
Click to expand...

Easy enough to confuse the base, make it look like the Clinton red herring is real.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Take it up with politico. It's in the quote.
Click to expand...

NBC News reported last week that Tony Podesta and his firm are part of the Mueller's probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

OK, I thought it was just the firm.

Again, if he broke the law, he can suffer the consequences too.
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Who do you think will sing First, and the loudest?
Click to expand...
Let's not get ahead of ourselves. Until clear evidence of collusion is released (and I do agree that Don Jr's emails are darned close) one might be jumping the gun at this point.
 
Meadmaker said:
That's pretty much it.

We're still pretty much in the bluff and bluster stage of things where there's plenty of posturing for the press. With these indictments, we might be getting toward something substantive, although the speculation from the radio talkers this morning was that these indictments deal with issues not related to the Trump campaign, and that they are a way of putting pressure on Manafort to spill the beans about stuff that is really important, assuming there are beans to spill.


One way or another, I think we can trust Mueller to follow the trail and do the right thing. If he comes up with something substantive against Trump, we'll know it, and no amount of tweeting will change that.
Click to expand...
Similarly, if nothing comes up, we'll have to conclude the evidence was lacking, either because Trump's head honchos were innocent or covered their tracks.

Thus far, I have faith in Mueller's independence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom