jimnyc
03-13-2019, 08:40 AM
I'll be the first to say - Whether Trump, which I said before, if he did something treasonous, TOSS him.
If the kids did something wrong, I need to see it, but indict away if truly wrong with evidence. (sure wish this worked both ways). Even Kushner, if guilty, toss and indict.
But I simply don't know yet, none of us do. It's so silent on Mueller's end and I don't trust him or the cronies working with him.
And this rolls on back to "The Spectator" and rather flimsy/anonymous sources again.
Anyway, waiting on the report endlessly, and then a possible reason as to why...
---
Waiting in Vain for the Mueller Report
Expectations that the special counsel will deliver a long narrative of Donald Trump’s malfeasance are likely to be disappointed.
Bob Woodward’s Fear was a blockbuster. Michelle Obama’s Becoming was the best-selling book of 2018. But as far as prepublication buzz goes, neither of them can match the expectations attached to the Mueller report. No one knows when Special Counsel Robert Mueller will file a concluding document with the attorney general, or when all or part of it will be made public, but that hasn’t prevented a devoted sentinel watch.
But there’s a more fundamental question surrounding the report than when the document will land, which is whether it will even exist—or rather, whether it will exist in a form worth the anxious wait. Whether through wishful thinking about a report that could put the final nail in Donald Trump’s political coffin or expectations created by the famous (or infamous) Starr Report in 1998, the unspoken assumption has been that Mueller will produce a lengthy summary of his probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election, but legal experts and veterans of previous investigations disagree.
“I believe that many, including many in the press, have done the country a disservice by creating the impression that when he gets done, Mueller is going to write this scathing, lengthy report detailing what an asshole the president is, even if he’s not a criminal,” says Paul Rosenzweig, a senior fellow at the R Street Institute think tank who was a senior counsel on the Whitewater investigation. “If my thesis about Mueller is right, then that’s just not happening.”
Rest - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/03/what-will-mueller-report-show/584650/
And then...
Report: Attorney General Barr Gave Mueller Permission to Indict Trump’s Three Adult Children and Jared Kushner
A report at The Specator on Friday claims dirty cop Robert Mueller met with Attorney General Bob Barr and the two agreed that President Trump’s children should be indicted.
The report goes on to say that Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his 13 angry Democrats also want President Trump to be indicted but that Barr pushed back on this.
Author and attorney Sidney Powell spoke about this during her interview on the Mark Levin Show on FOX News.
Sidney Powell is an expert of Department of Justice corruption and has followed the career of Democrat hatchetman Andrew Weissmann who has destroyed thousands of lives during his career as federal prosecutor only to see his cases overturned years later by superior court rulings.
Sidney Powell wrote LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice after seeing a core group of federal prosecutors break all the rules, make up crimes, hide evidence, and send innocent people to prison in the Enron case.
Sidney warned that the report, which will likely be authored by Andrew Weissmann, will destroy Trump. That is the goal and that is why Democrats are looking forward to its release.
Via Cockburn at The Spectator.
The story said members of President Trump’s family would be charged but also noted that it is Department of Justice policy not to indict a sitting President. However, there was no frenzy at the DoJ on Friday, no throng of reporters to make the tourists heading up Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House stop and look. So what happened?
Several sources tell Cockburn that the Special Counsel has indeed completed his report. It is said to recommend indicting three of President Trump’s children – Don junior, Ivanka and Eric – as well as his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The Attorney General, William Barr, is said to have ‘silently assented’ to this. It’s also claimed that Mueller wants President Trump himself to be indicted. Barr is said to oppose this. The two men met on Friday but apparently could not agree and this was the reason for the delay in any announcement from the DoJ. At least this is what the sources say.
So who are these sources? Joseph Heller mocked Washington’s – and journalism’s — culture of ‘sources’ in his novel Good as Gold.
‘I believe I got that information about you from a reliable unnamed source.’
‘I’ve been doing a lot of work here as an unnamed source,’ Gold answered with nervousness and haste, ‘so it may have come from me. No truth to it at all.’
None of Cockburn’s sources was ‘in the room’ – as they say in Washington – for the (alleged) discussions between Mueller and Barr and their two staffs. And none of the sources was briefed by the people ‘in the room’. But they did talk to the people briefed by the people in the room and – twice removed from the original conversations – they all give the same account. It is that the older Trump children and Jared will be indicted for financial crimes while Mueller wants to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. The charges, Cockburn is told now, will not be about ‘Russia collusion’.
This is different from the story yesterday, which was that Mueller would ‘make the case for collusion’. It is different from what the former CIA director, John Brennan, said on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show on MSNBC this week. He thought that the children would be indicted and (like Cockburn) that it would happen on Friday.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/report-barr-gave-mueller-permission-to-indict-trumps-three-adult-children-and-jared-kushner/
If the kids did something wrong, I need to see it, but indict away if truly wrong with evidence. (sure wish this worked both ways). Even Kushner, if guilty, toss and indict.
But I simply don't know yet, none of us do. It's so silent on Mueller's end and I don't trust him or the cronies working with him.
And this rolls on back to "The Spectator" and rather flimsy/anonymous sources again.
Anyway, waiting on the report endlessly, and then a possible reason as to why...
---
Waiting in Vain for the Mueller Report
Expectations that the special counsel will deliver a long narrative of Donald Trump’s malfeasance are likely to be disappointed.
Bob Woodward’s Fear was a blockbuster. Michelle Obama’s Becoming was the best-selling book of 2018. But as far as prepublication buzz goes, neither of them can match the expectations attached to the Mueller report. No one knows when Special Counsel Robert Mueller will file a concluding document with the attorney general, or when all or part of it will be made public, but that hasn’t prevented a devoted sentinel watch.
But there’s a more fundamental question surrounding the report than when the document will land, which is whether it will even exist—or rather, whether it will exist in a form worth the anxious wait. Whether through wishful thinking about a report that could put the final nail in Donald Trump’s political coffin or expectations created by the famous (or infamous) Starr Report in 1998, the unspoken assumption has been that Mueller will produce a lengthy summary of his probe into Russian interference in the 2016 election, but legal experts and veterans of previous investigations disagree.
“I believe that many, including many in the press, have done the country a disservice by creating the impression that when he gets done, Mueller is going to write this scathing, lengthy report detailing what an asshole the president is, even if he’s not a criminal,” says Paul Rosenzweig, a senior fellow at the R Street Institute think tank who was a senior counsel on the Whitewater investigation. “If my thesis about Mueller is right, then that’s just not happening.”
Rest - https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/03/what-will-mueller-report-show/584650/
And then...
Report: Attorney General Barr Gave Mueller Permission to Indict Trump’s Three Adult Children and Jared Kushner
A report at The Specator on Friday claims dirty cop Robert Mueller met with Attorney General Bob Barr and the two agreed that President Trump’s children should be indicted.
The report goes on to say that Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his 13 angry Democrats also want President Trump to be indicted but that Barr pushed back on this.
Author and attorney Sidney Powell spoke about this during her interview on the Mark Levin Show on FOX News.
Sidney Powell is an expert of Department of Justice corruption and has followed the career of Democrat hatchetman Andrew Weissmann who has destroyed thousands of lives during his career as federal prosecutor only to see his cases overturned years later by superior court rulings.
Sidney Powell wrote LICENSED TO LIE: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice after seeing a core group of federal prosecutors break all the rules, make up crimes, hide evidence, and send innocent people to prison in the Enron case.
Sidney warned that the report, which will likely be authored by Andrew Weissmann, will destroy Trump. That is the goal and that is why Democrats are looking forward to its release.
Via Cockburn at The Spectator.
The story said members of President Trump’s family would be charged but also noted that it is Department of Justice policy not to indict a sitting President. However, there was no frenzy at the DoJ on Friday, no throng of reporters to make the tourists heading up Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House stop and look. So what happened?
Several sources tell Cockburn that the Special Counsel has indeed completed his report. It is said to recommend indicting three of President Trump’s children – Don junior, Ivanka and Eric – as well as his son-in-law, Jared Kushner. The Attorney General, William Barr, is said to have ‘silently assented’ to this. It’s also claimed that Mueller wants President Trump himself to be indicted. Barr is said to oppose this. The two men met on Friday but apparently could not agree and this was the reason for the delay in any announcement from the DoJ. At least this is what the sources say.
So who are these sources? Joseph Heller mocked Washington’s – and journalism’s — culture of ‘sources’ in his novel Good as Gold.
‘I believe I got that information about you from a reliable unnamed source.’
‘I’ve been doing a lot of work here as an unnamed source,’ Gold answered with nervousness and haste, ‘so it may have come from me. No truth to it at all.’
None of Cockburn’s sources was ‘in the room’ – as they say in Washington – for the (alleged) discussions between Mueller and Barr and their two staffs. And none of the sources was briefed by the people ‘in the room’. But they did talk to the people briefed by the people in the room and – twice removed from the original conversations – they all give the same account. It is that the older Trump children and Jared will be indicted for financial crimes while Mueller wants to charge Trump with obstruction of justice. The charges, Cockburn is told now, will not be about ‘Russia collusion’.
This is different from the story yesterday, which was that Mueller would ‘make the case for collusion’. It is different from what the former CIA director, John Brennan, said on Lawrence O’Donnell’s show on MSNBC this week. He thought that the children would be indicted and (like Cockburn) that it would happen on Friday.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/03/report-barr-gave-mueller-permission-to-indict-trumps-three-adult-children-and-jared-kushner/