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

Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m guessing Ms. Hicks’ “detailed diary” largely consists of dozens of entries quickly trailing into incoherent scribbles, and the ink smudged with tears.
 
My favourite thing about the "diary" story is that I saw a reply to a tweet talking about it from a woman who seemed to find the very idea of a grown woman keeping a diary ridiculous. It's as if she thought people were talking about a pink, fluffy, tiny-padlocked journal in which Hicks would write the names of whatever boy she's crushing on, breathlessly writing about sneaking out after curfew, and writing excerpts of fiction in which that dreamy vampire is, like, so in love with her, all in between doodles of hearts and ponies.

Rather than, you know, documenting her time working in alongside the president, the better to write her memoirs. Or, perhaps, documenting what had been said, when, and by whom, so that if she were required to she could keep her story straight while under investigation for the crimes she's helped commit - or, if she's smart, so that she can be a really helpful witness and avoid gaol time.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
My favourite thing about the "diary" story is that I saw a reply to a tweet talking about it from a woman who seemed to find the very idea of a grown woman keeping a diary ridiculous. It's as if she thought people were talking about a pink, fluffy, tiny-padlocked journal in which Hicks would write the names of whatever boy she's crushing on, breathlessly writing about sneaking out after curfew, and writing excerpts of fiction in which that dreamy vampire is, like, so in love with her, all in between doodles of hearts and ponies.

Rather than, you know, documenting her time working in alongside the president, the better to write her memoirs. Or, perhaps, documenting what had been said, when, and by whom, so that if she were required to she could keep her story straight while under investigation for the crimes she's helped commit - or, if she's smart, so that she can be a really helpful witness and avoid gaol time.
Click to expand...

I feel fairly strongly that if she does end up incarcerated, which I doubt, that it will happen in the US.




So jail, not gaol. :)
 
beren said:
I feel fairly strongly that if she does end up incarcerated, which I doubt, that it will happen in the US.




So jail, not gaol. :)
Click to expand...


It is a term which was once used in the U.S., but but fell out of favor as regular usage during the 19th century. It is still used from time to time as an informal reference, much the same as someone might use "shekels" or "dinero" as a reference to money.

Which is, I suspect, what SB was doing.
 
beren said:
I feel fairly strongly that if she does end up incarcerated, which I doubt, that it will happen in the US.




So jail, not gaol. :)
Click to expand...

Do you write things out in kanji if writing about events in Japan or Japanese people? Or do you use your native language?
 
I usually just try to be funny. Apologies if my lack of seriousness wasn't evident. I'll do better next time.

Sent from my moto x4 using Tapatalk
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Oh, this is interesting: It's being said that if Hope Hicks did really keep "a detailed diary" of her time working with Trump, then it legally belongs to the US government under the Presidential Records Act and, as such, is open to being subpoenaed by Mueller

I'm not sure I see how The Presidential Records Act applies, but then I'm no US legal scholar.
Click to expand...

Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the diary pages that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
He's on MSNBC on the phone right now complaining his emails were being subpoenaed and it would take him 80 hours to sort through all his emails to find the ones requested, the investigation was bankrupting people, and his lawyer was probably going to dump him.
Click to expand...

Gawd! Doesn't Mueller know you're not supposed to do that to white people?!?
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
80 hours to find emails with specific people? Someone needs to teach him how to use the search function.
Click to expand...

Search function? All he needs to do is to order his email folders by received from and sent to accounts. In Outlook (and most others I have seen) it's one click.

I have 3 main email accounts (personal, work, and business) with thousands of emails in them combined, and I could recover all emails send to me by specific people in a matter of minutes.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
80 hours to find emails with specific people? Someone needs to teach him how to use the search function.
Click to expand...

PhantomWolf said:
Search function? All he needs to do is to order his email folders by received from and sent to accounts. In Outlook (and most others I have seen) it's one click.

I have 3 main email accounts (personal, work, and business) with thousands of emails in them combined, and I could recover all emails send to me by specific people in a matter of minutes.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how he has his email set up or the volume of emails we're talking about. However, unless you have to search them for things you want to hide, I can't imagine why you wouldn't hand over the bunch from between a certain time period and to/from certain accounts.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Search function? All he needs to do is to order his email folders by received from and sent to accounts. In Outlook (and most others I have seen) it's one click.
Click to expand...

Still seems quicker to type in the name, rather than order them by name and then scroll through for the specific one you're looking for.

Either way, it's not 80 hours' worth of work.
 
Nunberg is on his third interview, this time in person on Ari Melber, MSNBC.

It's incredible what it reveals about the childishness and infighting in that campaign.
 
Nunberg so looks like he's high on cocaine. He can't sit still, he keeps wiping his nose with his hand, he's acting immaturely (last one could be his normal demeanor), now he just sniffed.

No one is reminding him a search shouldn't take 80 hours.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Nunberg so looks like he's high on cocaine. He can't sit still, he keeps wiping his nose with his hand, he's acting immaturely (last one could be his normal demeanor), now he just sniffed.

No one is reminding him a search shouldn't take 80 hours.
Click to expand...

That he had been drinking has also been suggested...
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Nunberg so looks like he's high on cocaine. He can't sit still, he keeps wiping his nose with his hand, he's acting immaturely (last one could be his normal demeanor), now he just sniffed.

No one is reminding him a search shouldn't take 80 hours.
Click to expand...

dudalb said:
That he had been drinking has also been suggested...
Click to expand...

It's not mutually exclusive.

I see a search warrant in his future.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Nunberg so looks like he's high on cocaine. He can't sit still, he keeps wiping his nose with his hand, he's acting immaturely (last one could be his normal demeanor), now he just sniffed.

No one is reminding him a search shouldn't take 80 hours.
Click to expand...
"80 hours" strikes me as oddly specific, but I don't quite know what to make of that. Coke-speak tends to be highly declarative (I've heard tell), so it fits that pattern.
 
CapelDodger said:
"80 hours" strikes me as oddly specific, but I don't quite know what to make of that. Coke-speak tends to be highly declarative (I've heard tell), so it fits that pattern.
Click to expand...

Let me tell you why you're mistaken... in great detail.
[emoji14]

Two things... 80 hours may be his version of Trumps constant "two or three weeks" dodge... and thirdly, I mean "C"... if you're really high, any detailed task may feel like it takes two weeks.

(I've heard tell)
:D
 
CapelDodger said:
"80 hours" strikes me as oddly specific, but I don't quite know what to make of that. Coke-speak tends to be highly declarative (I've heard tell), so it fits that pattern.
Click to expand...

My guess is he came up with that because he got the subpoena Friday evening and was to turn over the emails by Monday afternoon, which would be a little less than 80 hours. I read one quote where he said 30 hours. He may have first said 30 hours but then realized that would lead to the question of why he didn’t spend 10 hours a day for 3 days and do it. So he bumped it up to 80 hours to make it physically impossible.

The interesting, and wonderful, thing is that none of the interviewers asked the rather obvious questions like:

Do you know you can sort and filter email by sender and recipient? Why don’t you just ask for an extension? If you don’t think you will be found in contempt and arrested, what do you think the court is going to do?

Of course, the answer to any of those questions would probably have been, “This is ridiculous! Carter Page? Do you think I talked to Carter Page?”

It seems like the interviewers realized he is under a lot of stress and is a bit out of it and there was no need for “gotcha” questions. Most of them seemed compassionate and genuinely concerned with his welfare and were even trying to help him out.

I don’t think his lawyer should drop him or refuse to answer his calls. His lawyer should be there for him when he needs legal advice, which is what he desperately needs.
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
<snip>

I don’t think his lawyer should drop him or refuse to answer his calls. His lawyer should be there for him when he needs legal advice, which is what he desperately needs.
Click to expand...


It may be that his lawyer has been trying to give him the legal advice he needs, and he has been refusing to take it.

When this happens, especially in a situation as fraught with pitfalls for everyone associated as this whole Trump administration is concerned, it may be that the lawyer has little choice other than to sever the relationship with the client.

The lawyer/client relationship isn't a one-way street. If a client refuses the counsel of his lawyer (They don't call 'em "counselors" for nothin'.) then that lawyer isn't really representing the client anymore in any practical fashion. They may need to get out from under before they find themselves in an untenable situation.
 
Last edited:
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
My favourite thing about the "diary" story is that I saw a reply to a tweet talking about it from a woman who seemed to find the very idea of a grown woman keeping a diary ridiculous. It's as if she thought people were talking about a pink, fluffy, tiny-padlocked journal in which Hicks would write the names of whatever boy she's crushing on, breathlessly writing about sneaking out after curfew, and writing excerpts of fiction in which that dreamy vampire is, like, so in love with her, all in between doodles of hearts and ponies.

Rather than, you know, documenting her time working in alongside the president, the better to write her memoirs. Or, perhaps, documenting what had been said, when, and by whom, so that if she were required to she could keep her story straight while under investigation for the crimes she's helped commit - or, if she's smart, so that she can be a really helpful witness and avoid gaol time.
Click to expand...
Seriously? Some twonk thought keeping a diary was a childish pursuit? Sometimes I wonder if I live on the same planet as some people.
 
quadraginta said:
It may be that his lawyer has been trying to give him the legal advice he needs, and he has been refusing to take it.
Click to expand...

That isn't what Nunberg has been saying. He says he didn't tell his lawyer he was going on news shows. He says he doesn't know whether his lawyer approves of his decision, but that his lawyer "probably" would not approve. He says he called his lawyer but that they either didn't answer or didn't return his call. He says his lawyer has probably dropped him since he made his decision and went on talk shows. Everything he has said indicates that he has not talked to his lawyer since he got the subpoena.

I don't like the implication that a lawyer should drop a client when the client has created a legal mess--when it has become difficult for the lawyer. That is when someone needs a lawyer the most and a good lawyer will be there to help the client.
 
abaddon said:
Seriously? Some twonk thought keeping a diary was a childish pursuit? Sometimes I wonder if I live on the same planet as some people.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was a sort of "how many of you keep a diary?" The answer is no, I don't. But if I worked in the White House, especially for someone like Donald Trump, I absolutely would. I'd document every single meeting and conversation I had with everybody. Probably on a computer, where I would tag everything with multiple tags for easier cross-referencing later.

I think you'd have to be a fool not to.
 
DevilsAdvocate said:
That isn't what Nunberg has been saying. He says he didn't tell his lawyer he was going on news shows. He says he doesn't know whether his lawyer approves of his decision, but that his lawyer "probably" would not approve. He says he called his lawyer but that they either didn't answer or didn't return his call. He says his lawyer has probably dropped him since he made his decision and went on talk shows. Everything he has said indicates that he has not talked to his lawyer since he got the subpoena.

I don't like the implication that a lawyer should drop a client when the client has created a legal mess--when it has become difficult for the lawyer. That is when someone needs a lawyer the most and a good lawyer will be there to help the client.
Click to expand...


Yes. That's what "he says".

To me, that translates into, "My lawyer told me not to talk to anyone about any of this unless he was there with me, and not to talk to the press at all.

Any competent lawyer would have told him that almost the instant they took him on as a client. And if his lawyer was so incompetent that he didn't then Nunberg needs to be rid of that lawyer anyway.

An out-of-control client who flagrantly ignores his lawyer's advice can be a threat to that lawyer's reputation and position. They could find themselves getting sued for ineffective counsel, or censured by courts or bar associations.

At some point the lawyer has to weigh the needs of the client against that client's behavior and the threat to the lawyer's professional reputation and integrity which that behavior might present. Lawyers are not without responsibility for the behavior of their clients, and if they can't control those clients and prevent them from harming their own cases then the lawyers can't do their jobs.

Why should they be compelled to maintain such a relationship?
 
“I’m happy if the scope changes and if they send me a subpoena that doesn’t include Carter Page,” he said, insisting the two had never spoken.
Click to expand...

…and there it is.

In a post above, I referenced Nunberg’s oddly repeated objection to complying with the subpoena because it asked for communications with Page and he said he never talked with Page. Obviously, if he never communicated with Page, he would simply have nothing to turn over and therefore no reason to object to the request.

The only reason to object to the request for communications with Page is if he did have such communications. He says Page colluded with the Russians. He says they want to get him to testify against Stone and that he wants to protect Stone.

The logical conclusion is that he has communications with or about Page that implicate Stone. This is on the level of, “Sure you can look for dead bodies in my basement, just don’t look in that trap door. Why would you want to look in that trap door? There’s nothing in that trap door. You can look in the basement, but only if you don’t look in that trap door.”
 
Last edited:
DevilsAdvocate said:
The logical conclusion is that he has communications with or about Page that implicate Stone. This is on the level of, “Sure you can look for dead bodies in my basement, just don’t look in that trap door. Why would you want to look in that trap door? There’s nothing in that trap door. You can look in the basement, but only if you don’t look in that trap door.”
Click to expand...


.. which sounds exactly like Trump talking about his tax returns...
 
Regnad Kcin said:
I’m guessing Ms. Hicks’ “detailed diary” largely consists of dozens of entries quickly trailing into incoherent scribbles
Click to expand...

Is she writing down Trump's conversations, then?

timhau said:
"I gave you the chance of aiding me willingy, but you have elected the way of pain." - Robert S. Mueller III
Click to expand...

"There is only one Lord of the Deal, and he does not share power."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom