Missing: Key Documents About Alleged Misconduct By Robert Mueller’s Lead Prosecutor
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Andrew Weissmann, the lead prosecutor for Special Counsel Robert Mueller, has a history of questionable conduct. But the full extent of Weissmann’s alleged prosecutorial misconduct is unclear because some of the most serious charges were hidden behind redactions and secreted in sealed court filings.
Two months ago I sued to have these records released , but late Friday federal Judge Sim Lake’s case manager confirmed that several of the sought-after documents are missing from the court record.
In early November, Houston attorney Kevin Fulton of the Fulton Law Group filed a motion in a Texas federal court to unseal and unredact court records related to claimed prosecutorial misconduct by Weissmann during the latter’s stint as the head of the Enron Task Force.
In a joint motion to dismiss the criminal charges filed against them, four individuals connected to the Enron collapse alleged that Weissmann had improperly threatened witnesses to keep them from speaking with defense lawyers. In support of their motion, the defendants included an email Weissmann had sent to the lawyer of a “critical witness.” What exactly Weissmann said, though, is unclear, as the brief redacted the details:
Even if cause originally existed to keep the content of this email secret, with the underlying criminal cases now complete, there is no longer a basis to hide the details from the public. Thus, my motion to unredact the public record asked Judge Lake, who had presided over the criminal cases, to release unredacted copies of several court filings, most significantly the joint motion to dismiss, which included this email and other relevant details.
Over the holidays, though, the court entered an “amended notice,” announcing that after “a full and exhaustive” search by the clerk, certain court filings “were unrecoverable in their original or un-redacted form,” including the unredacted copy of the joint motion to dismiss and the supporting memorandum. Also missing from the court record was the government’s unredacted response to this motion, which likely would have included the full text—or relevant portions—of the Weissmann email.
Additionally, in the amended notice the court stated that it could not find in the case records the unredacted copy of the declaration made by Michael Tigar, an expert witness who averred that in his 40 years of experience trying criminal cases in state and federal courts, he had never seen such “unfair pressures brought to bear on the adversary system in a single case.” Several of Tigar’s other conclusions, however, were hidden behind redactions.
Finally, the court stated that “Docket Entry No. 568: Sealed Document” was missing from the record. But the subject matter of that sealed document is completely unknown because the public docket does not even list Docket Entry 568.
Upon learning that these documents were missing, Fulton’s firm contacted the court to request that the clerk, if he had not yet done so, contact the clerks of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and the U.S. Supreme Court. After all, the underlying Enron cases involved multiple defendants and several trips to the Fifth Circuit and Supreme Court. When a case is appealed, the record is transmitted to the higher court, then later returned to the district court. So it seemed reasonable to think that during one of the trips back and forth, the relevant portions of the record were inadvertently retained by the appellate court.
However, late Friday it became clear that the records are gone for good, when Judge Lake’s case manager informed the Fulton Law Group that in addition to conducting a “full and exhaustive search of the Houston Division’s records,” search requests had been “made with the Supreme Court, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and the National Archives,” and those four records were unrecoverable.
The Department of Justice also does not have copies of the records, having told Judge Lake after conducting its own review that it was unable to locate physical or electronic copies of the records. The DOJ then moved for access to the court’s records, which Judge Lake granted.
There is no excuse for these records to be missing, even with the lapse of time. The judiciary maintains court records years after convictions are final, and has detailed procedures to track the location of the files, with the staff responsible for maintaining the records documenting who transferred what to whom, and when, and what was returned, by whom, to whom, and when. Also, in this case the district court still held a majority of the documents requested—so many, in fact, that after receiving four thick binders full of records, the DOJ filed a second motion for an extension of time to reply to the motion to unredact the documents.
To be clear: These facts do not suggest that Weissmann or others on his behalf “disappeared” the records. Nor does any blame lie at Judge Lake’s door. (A federal judge isn’t involved in such logistical matters.) Rather, the most likely scenario is sloppiness by a staffer, but whose staffer—Lake’s, one of the Fifth Circuit judge’s, a Supreme Court justice’s, or one in the clerk’s office or file room—is unlikely to ever be known.
Now we also may never know exactly what transpired when Weissmann oversaw the Enron prosecution. “The third branch of government functions best with proper oversight,” attorney Fulton stressed, upon learning that the records no longer exist. “Unfortunately, the ‘unrecoverable’ court records now hamper that oversight and leave unanswered important questions that the public deserves answers to.”
Efforts to obtain the remaining documents continue, though: By the end of January the DOJ must respond to the motion to unredact the records that haven’t gone missing. The remaining documents, however, are unlikely to provide additional insight into Weissmann’s questionable conduct in the Enron case, which I previously detailed at length here .
Consequently, Weissmann will likely remain Mueller’s “pit bull,” because without the missing documents prompting a public outcry, nothing is likely to change—especially since Mueller led the FBI at the time of the Enron prosecutions and was surely well aware of Weissmann’s modus operandi when he brought him on board as his lead prosecutor. It is facts like these that lead many on the right to question the integrity of the special counsel probe.
By Margot Cleveland
JANUARY 14, 2019
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Who is online
95 visitors
This little story reminds me of a place I used to work. The building was the main office for a large NE retail chain and the personnel office was never locked. The building itself was in operation 24/7. There was a general understanding that people who worked over night could get into the personnel office and clean out an employee's negative information, such as suspensions and other disciplinary actions. The procedure was known as "cleaning" one's file.
In this case the devious Weissmann evidently had somebody working within the Court or justice system do it for him.
For those who don't remember Weissmann's contribution to the Enron case:
"The Supreme Court, in a 9-0 vote in 2005, overturned the Andersen conviction. A year later, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals erased all the fraud convictions against four Merrill Lynch managers. The jury had acquitted another defendant.
“People went off to prison for a completely phantom of a case,” said Mr. Kirkendall .
Mr. Kirkendall became sort of an unofficial Enron historian. He observed goings-on at the Houston federal courthouse and blogged about what he considered a systematic miscarriage of justice."
The documents are in with Trump's tax returns.
I was going to say check the interpreters' Trump/Putin meeting notes, including the ones Trump seized.
Otherwise, yawn.
Oh, now it's his business dealings? Is that why the FBI began an investigation?
How about the Obama/Putin meeting - the one where Obama said to Dimitry Medvedev (into an open mic) "I can be more flexible after the election"!
That's the one I'd love to read. Why not dig up those private notes?
There's a problem. When the President doesn't divest his businesses those businesses become part of the presidency and, therefore, subject to all manner of investigation.
Guess what? You can read all about it because nothing destroyed. Pathetic attempt to compare.
In what world is it ok for our biggest foreign adversary to be the only one who knows what Trump/Putin said in the meeting? I want this specific question answered. Only Russia knows what they said. ONLY RUSSIA. Let me reiterate. Only Russia knows what was discussed. Explain why that is fine with you and apparently other republicans.
So fucking what? That was his job as President, to actually negotiate, not capitulate as Trump has habitually done since taking office.
Steve, the President's son's run the businesses. Is that going to be the end result of the Mueller investigation? Bob Mueller would have a lot of explaining to do!
Then you should link it right here so we can all read it
In what world is it ok for our biggest foreign adversary to be the only one who knows what Trump/Putin said in the meeting?
How many private meetings have US Presidents had with foreign leaders? You mean only this President is not allowed?
One more:
What effect would it have on our foreign policy if private conversations between President's and world leaders were made public?
Again you have it backwards. Putin LOVED Obama as did the Castros
You are NOT answering my specific question. NO AMERICAN KNOWS WHAT WAS SAID, INCLUDING NATIONAL SECURITY (unless they have it via tapping Russians). That has NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE. EVER. If you need time, think about what that means. Because we deserve a rational reason why any American thinks that is ok.
Putin has also had private meetings with Bill Clinton, George W Bush and Barak Obama. World leaders need to be able to talk one on one. If Trump was a "Manchurian Candidate" as you suggest, he wouldn't need to meet with Putin at all. You talk like this was a kind of children's story.
It's the DC shuffle.
When in trouble. lie.
When the lie doesn't work, lose the proof.
When you can't lose the proof, plead the 5th.
Its the DC shuffle .....
I wonder if everyone would have the same reaction if, say, some court documents pertaining to President Trump mysteriously disappeared?
HA! The sky would be falling and screams of 'Watergate' would permeate the air - I can see the headlines now "The President Hired Plumbers Mario and Luigi to Break In - Steal said Documents ….
...
Here is article, off topic - forgive me Vic .. but I think it a must read nonetheless.. if you have not read it already - the full interview was taken down this morning along with the article .. but I found this article from Newsweek that carries more detail of the interview than other sources do...
It is sad, pitiful, pathetic, pick your own word, to see people bend over backwards to "find" defenses for Donald Trump. Now you want to discredit one of the lawyers conducting the Russia investigation over something that happened 20 years ago.
Are you all ( the people responding positively to this seed) so pathetically desperate to help Donald Trump out of his troubles? Jesus I hope not.
Donald Trump is a horrible human being. He is a lying machine. He is lazy in doing his job. He is an ignoramus about global affairs, US history, and many other , really innumerable, topics. He says truly idiotic things every single day , pretty much on an hourly basis.
Forget pro Trump, forget anti-Trump, so called TDS. Just stand back and observe this person and what is obvious about him, and look objectively. The only conclusion that can be is that Trump is a complete asshole. Why do you support him? Because you dont like Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? No objective person in their right mind would ever claim that Clinton or Obama are as psychologically, and mentally, and personality wise, dysfunctional as Donald Trump is. In order to claim that Trump is a good man, or fit to carry out his office as LEADER of the United States, you have to stand reality on it's head.
He needs to be gone from the presidency, and from the national life. And we have to hope that in time we can forget this fool ever existed.
I am embarrassed as a human being , and as a member of Newstalkers, to watch some of you carry on about how Trump is being picked on or treated unfairly. MY GOD.
Be embarrassed that is on you .. the article makes no reference to Trump - I went off topic by posting an interview with a (D) Senator and Cuomo …. regarding lack of evidence
This information being sought is a matter of record and should be able to be produced upon request through the FOIA … you may not think the Mueller probe has been tainted by various individuals that are involved in the investigation but others do … so bury your head in the sand while being embarrassed, but if this individual had ANYTHING to do with Trump, his businesses or administration, I speculate that you, John would be making a major issue regarding the missing information..
Of course he would--he would be shouting it from the rooftops.
They are trying every angle.
They cannot stop the investigation so they attack it and the people involved.
Some call it, trying to get ahead of the situation.
If the case moves forward, try to discredit the people bringing it. Call them crooked and bias ahead of time to try to make the case seem like a hit job.
Typical trump.
I know no one personally that desires the investigation to be stopped .. I do not desire it to be stopped, I am waiting for the results … it does not mean that I cannot view choices made with skepticism does it? Do I have to believe everything as 'fact' .. do I have to agree with everything put forth?
Seems to be a heavily travelled 2way street don't ya think?
Weissmann put innocent people in jail. Mueller is using him on this investigation. You want silence?
Seems to me, there is no silence.
The case was a weird one about shredding documents and the phrasing of instructions to the jury.
It wasn't weird when the Supreme Court had a taste of what Weissmann had done. It wasn't weird to all those who lost their jobs over it. It wasn't weird to the falsely accused.
We have just learned, from the #4 man at DOJ, Bruce Ohr, that he had warned the FBI and DOJ officials that the Steele Dossier was opposition research and therefore biased material as well as unverified info. Weissmann was among those he warned:
“I didn’t know they were employed by the DNC but I certainly said yes that they were working for, you know, they were somehow working, associated with the Clinton campaign,” he answered.
“I also told the FBI that my wife worked for Fusion GPS or was a contractor for GPS, Fusion GPS.”
Ohr divulged his first contact with the FBI was on July 31, 2016, when he reached out to then-Deputy Director Andrew McCabe and FBI attorney Lisa Page . He then was referred to the agents working Russia counterintelligence, including Peter Strzok , the now-fired agent who played a central role in starting the Trump collusion probe.
But Ohr’s contacts about the Steele dossier weren’t limited to the FBI. He said in August 2016 — nearly two months before the FISA warrant was issued — that he was asked to conduct a briefing for senior Justice officials.
Those he briefed included Andrew Weissmann, then the head of DOJ’s fraud section; Bruce Swartz, longtime head of DOJ’s international operations, and Zainab Ahmad, an accomplished terrorism prosecutor who, at the time, was assigned to work with Lynch as a senior counselor.
Ahmad and Weissmann would go on to work for Mueller, the special prosecutor overseeing the Russia probe."
And as we all now know the FBI & DOJ went on with that dossier anyway.
So you all will not believe anything from an unnamed source yet here you are citing an opinion piece that cites an unnamed source.
So you all think that the FBI should not have looked into Steele and see what was going on?
You all can harp about this dossier all you want yet the FISA warrant yet a redacted version of the warrant was released.
Do you honestly think that trump and his appointed heads of the FBI and DOJ had a smocking gun they would just let it ride? Do you think they have not seen the unredacted versions?
They are twisting and trying to find any loophole to discredit the investigation.
If the warrant was so damning, they would have had them. They don't.
Sure. Keep on with that. Meanwhile investigate Hillary again, for the umpteenth time.
Oh that's right, only trump has a crooked charity.
I remember when an unnamed source was a rarity, when "journalists" preferred to vet & name their sources. Since 2016 the unnamed sources have become legion as well as misleading.
So you all think that the FBI should not have looked into Steele and see what was going on?
They did. They knew the document couldn't be verified (were warned about it), they knew Steele lied to them and yet they used it in a fraudulent manner to get a warrant.
You all can harp about this dossier all you want yet the FISA warrant yet a redacted version of the warrant was released.
Do you think they have gotten away with that? Trump won & they've been exposed. Like Hillary said to Obama when she lost..."I'm sorry"
Do you honestly think that trump and his appointed heads of the FBI and DOJ had a smocking gun they would just let it ride?
I think that Wray has removed the implicated individuals & I think that Rosenstein has covered many including his own ass, but he apparently got some kind of understanding with the President, in which he dosen't get fired and is allowed to step down, unscathed, in return for leaving others at the DOJ on their own. I believe that Barr coming in as AG will clean up the mess at DOJ. You seem to forget about all those removed at the FBI and McCabe is still vulnerable to prosecution (as is Comey).
Do you think they have not seen the unredacted versions?
I think Wray & Rosenstein know a lot. They slow walked documents ....right up until the dems took the House. Adam Schiff won't be seeking those documents or an interview with the outgoing Rosenstein.
They are twisting and trying to find any loophole to discredit the investigation.
Nope. I don't think that investigation has any credibility, but in the end Mueller's final report will have to speak for itself. If it only amounts to Manafort talking with Russian agents, Mueller will have a whole lot of explaining to do.
If the warrant was so damning, they would have had them. They don't.
I disagree.....They do....starting with McCabe
I don't see anyone being charged for anything excep people involved in the trump campaign.
At this point we both think a lot of things. What we probably won't know is the complete truth.
At least in our lifetimes.
Being an asshole is not a crime nor evidence of criminal behavior. If it was, 90% of the population would be in jail even for being an asshole for a brief moment.
Right now, there is more evidence that Mueller is using Gestapo tactics of fitting a crime to a person rather than a crime having been committed.
Every single one of the indictments for the Russians involved is over them playing both sides against each other to create chaos, which has no bearing on Trump. each of the indictments against American citizens are for process crimes, most commonly lying to investigators or crimes that occurred years ago, rather than actual hard crimes regarding the Russian collusion narrative. Meanwhile, there is plenty of evidence that the Clinton campaign colluded with a Foreign national to create a document that was used as a basis to start investigating the Trump campaign and Mueller is completely ignoring that evidence. Remember, Steele is a BRITISH Citizen and spy with RUSSIAN contacts that created the dossier that was used as part of the basis for the FISA warrants. And, that dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign. Which means, we have OPEN collusion between the Clinton campaign and a foreign national to affect the outcome of the 2016 election, which is what the Democrats are accusing Trump of doing.
And NT would not exist ...... unless of course all the convicts here got internet access in the pokey.
The dossier was not what started the investigations.That was even testified to in senate hearings.
No it did not .. but I def think it was a significant contributing factor in the FISA warrant against Carter Page.. who interestingly enough has not been charged with anything .. it was a fishing expedition to see if Page's contacts would slip and give up information ..
I am shutting up now … I never desire to become combative .. and given I have the flu .. I could become combative .. I am a bitch right now … : (……….
Like hell it didn't. That's a proven fact despite the FBI trying to use Papadopolous. Now we know that they launched a third investigation on their own.
Crickets on that.
So now senate testimony is not to be believed?
Four Americans were under suspicion. We don't even know all the names.
Do you ever wonder or think why would the FBI open an investigation into trump? Instead of jumping to partisan misdeeds, maybe think there might be a damn good reason?
What is funny is even Sarah Sanders tweeted one time that people complaining about investigations are probably guilty.
We will have two sets of congressional investigations. The House will investigate everything Trump & the Senate will investigate. A better question might be: When will lying to those committees become a crime?
Do you ever wonder or think why would the FBI open an investigation into trump?
There is not much to wonder about when you read the texts between Strzok and Page. Now we even have the revelations of Comey's legal aid James Baker.
Instead of jumping to partisan misdeeds, maybe think there might be a damn good reason?
After 3 long investigations, there should be some hint of collusion, don't you think?
What is funny is even Sarah Sanders tweeted one time that people complaining about investigations are probably guilty.
You'd have to do some twisting & parsing of her words to come up with that.
Thanks for that!
[deleted]
Thanks B .. it has been a long week of achy muscles … I have been grouchy for sure...
It was so much more fun when GOP investigation after GOP investigation targeted Hillary, huh?
Pretty sure Trump is in for a much rougher time than "innocent Hillary". After all, Trump is guilty.
Comey said the investigation began in late July of 2016. Ohr said that information from and about the dossier was shared with Andrew Weissmann (Mueller's number 2 guy), Andrew McCabe, Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, Bruce Swartz, and another Mueller team member, Zainab Ahmad around July 30, 2016. July 30, 2016 was the date that Ohr met with Christopher Steele about the dossier. So, the actual investigation could have started July 30 or July 31 after Ohr met with McCabe, Page, and Strzok and the other 3 DOJ officials (2 of whom are in Mueller's team) and Comey would not have lied under oath and the dossier would be the basis for the start of the Trump investigation.
So you do believe he lied. Funny, I have not heard any republican senators come out and say this.
Haha. If they did something criminal, why are they free? If they are so guilty of something criminal, I am sure the republican run DOJ could bring charges against them, no?
Texting your lover that trump sucks and would be a horrible president, the only thing wrong with that, was using a government phone.
What the hell does that have to do with trump? The investigation into him actually started under Obama. And it is still only for leaking to the press.
Funny what some will dismiss when their party is in power. Manafort handing over data, the constant lies, actual meetings, etc. Even down to trump meeting with putin 5 times and having no record of the conversation and telling the US people that Russia did not meddle in the elections, going against the FBIs own findings.
Other than all the guilty pleas and convictions already handed out, right? Soooo, your statement right there is stuffed with more shit than a sack of manure.
Twisting in the wind with that one.
Could have....
A rougher time? Obviously. Hillary had the FBI set up a fake investigation with no grand jury, immunity for all the relevant witnesses and the decision to exonerate her from the beginning. Trump underwent 3 investigations, all no holds barred, one a special prosecutor investigation and none of them began with any criminal pretext.
Of course, your'e wrong on who is innocent and guilty, but then again you see it your own way.
And you don't believe that Comey, Clapper and others have lied to congress? I thought everyone knew. Here's a sample:
" Katherine Hawkins, an investigator at the nonpartisan Project On Government Oversight, said Congress used to be better at seeking in a bipartisan manner prosecutions for perjury, particularly after the Watergate scandal in the 1970s. She said over the years a large gap emerged between vigorous prosecution of lies to the FBI and those to Congress, something she blames on politics.
“It’s really unfortunate the extent to which there is systematic nonenforcement on the law for making false statements to Congress, and this is only one example,” Hawkins said. One reason for nonenforcement, she believes, is that “very often in high profile cases, it’s a senior member of one of the political parties who’s accused of saying something that’s not true.”
The phone-record program revealed by Snowden was unknown to many lawmakers not serving on intelligence committees or in senior leadership posts. Congress voted to end the automatic bulk collection with Sensenbrenner's USA Freedom Act after some federal courts ruled against its legality.
The NSA’s separate internet-collection programs, underpinned by Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also collect domestic records, but intelligence officials have struggled to quantify the number placed into databases that can be searched without a warrant. Executive branch officials argue that law is essential to preventing terrorism and the House of Representatives last week voted to renew Section 702 through 2023 without major changes. The legislation cleared a key procedural vote in the Senate Tuesday.
Evan Greer, a privacy activist with the group Fight for the Future, said Clapper’s testimony remains relevant to debate about surveillance policy.
"James Clapper lied to Congress, and to the American people, about U.S. government surveillance programs that allow agencies like the NSA and FBI to constantly monitor all of us without due process or any suspicion of wrongdoing,” she said. “Allowing the government to turn our computers and phones into spies that we take with us everywhere we go is detrimental to human rights and has a chilling effect on freedom of expression, but the worst part is that there is zero evidence that these programs have ever stopped a single violent attack.“
Let me know when the House can do what it couldn't before...Oh wait, I know, Nancy can pass a ruling to strengthen House powers of prosecution now that the dems run the House again.
We still are waiting on Mueller and any collusion/conspiracy the President committed...three investigations and $25 million in thus far
What the hell does the government trying to pass a data collection system have to do with the investigation?
Further more, you know republicans run the senate right?
Also, if they want Clapper indicted for perjury, why aren't they doing it?
You have not refuted anything I have said, just changing the narrative.
It has everything to do with the principle of intelligence officers lying to congress with no consequence. Were we not discussing that?
Further more, you know republicans run the senate right?
What does that mean? Does the Senate have more or less power to prosecute that the House?
Also, if they want Clapper indicted for perjury, why aren't they doing it?
Why wouldn't they? Does perjury only apply to Trump campaign members?
You have not refuted anything I have said, just changing the narrative.
You're "argument" was refuted and buried.
No it wasn't. You just refuse to hear it.
trump has put in his people at the head of the FBI and the DOJ. As political as trump is, if he had anything on anyone, we would have heard about it.
Hell just today Cohen has said that trump knew of and approved him paying online sites to skew poll numbers.
One of these days, instead of attacking anyone that has ever even looked at trump, maybe some will realize where there is smoke...
The guilty pleas have nothing to do with Russian collusion or the 2016 election. Flynn plead guilty to lying to investigators, even though Peter Strzok believed he did not lie when interviewed. Cohen plead guilty to tax evasion. Manafort plead guilty to having committed a crime long before he joined the Trump campaign. So, please tell me where Mueller found crimes committed by Trump and actually are regarding Russian collusion in the 2016 election? So far all we have is Mueller getting plea deals for putting pressure on people to flip against Trump and really getting nothing to prove any sort of collusion. And, what crime is Mueller actually investigating, since he isn't acting as an intelligence agent but as a prosecutor, despite this investigation having started as a counter-intelligence investigation rather than a criminal investigation?
Simple. They do not have prosecutorial power. They have to refer the charges to the DOJ, whom then decides whether to investigate or bring charges.
So? It isn't illegal to skew poll results or to pay sites to publish results favorable to one side or the other. It may be dirty politics, but even the media creates skewed polls by the very questions being asked to the people being polled. All you have to do is word a question a certain way and people will give a predictable answer. That is a skewed result when you can create a poll that asks such a question.
We are hearing about it. I gave you some well reported examples but you chose to ignore it.
Hell just today Cohen has said that trump knew of and approved him paying online sites to skew poll numbers.
So, Iv'e heard. Do you know what polls Cohen managed to "skew" (if you choose to believe a man who says whatever prosecutors want to hear) and what the results were? Let me give you a sample of two of the polls he supposedly "skewed":
"The Journal said Cohen commissioned John Gauger, who runs RedFinch Solutions, to write a computer script to repeatedly vote for Trump in a February 2015 Drudge Report poll on potential Republican candidates. The move came as Trump was preparing to enter the 2016 presidential election race, the newspaper reported.
Trump ranked fifth in the Drudge Report poll, with about 24,000 votes or 5 percent of the total, according to the Journal.
Cohen also commissioned Gauger to do the same for a 2014 CNBC online poll identifying the country's top business leaders, although Trump was unable to break the top 100 candidates, the Journal reported."
Hum.....He got Trump up to 5th and over 100th!...are you sure you want to nail Trump with Cohen?
One of these days, instead of attacking anyone that has ever even looked at trump, maybe some will realize where there is smoke...
We have more than smoke on McCabe and others, but you may note, Mueller does not investigate anybody else but Trump. All this time and they have everything yet no crime by Trumps. So disappointing to those who don't care about truth.
If they have all this damning evidence, why are they not doing that?
I swear, some people will justify anything he does.
Just keep throwing out more names. well what about this one, what about this one, well this guy over here...
If McCabe is so bad, why is the trump DOJ doing nothing about it? Seems to me, the most they could get on him is leaking information.
Funny thing about that, at one time the right like leakers and whistleblowers.
I guess only when they hack the DNC.
Justify it? I pointed out that it isn't illegal at all. There is no sanctity of polling. It is comparable to accuracy and precision when measuring amounts of NaCl in salt water. Depending on how the mixture is made, you are going to get different results. That is what polling really is, a mixture of premade questions that guarantee certain result ranges depending on what those questions are made up of.
They may have, they may not have. Just because it hasn't been reported doesn't mean it hasn't happened. But, they could have referred the charges to the DOJ and the DOJ decided not to pursue those charges. There are a lot of potential factors into whether Congressional charges against someone for perjury will be filed and investigated.
I would say it has more to do with election laws. Paying for things in cash or under the table. Not keeping records, etc.
You mean Rosenstein? That's the Trump guy?
trump will have a new head of the DOJ. I guess we will all see what happens then.
I think we have reached common ground.
Oh no ! That can't be... haha
You mean the mostly civil campaign finance laws, since election laws do not actually regulate anything dealing with a campaign but with how elections function at the ballot box. And, yes, there are very few criminal laws regarding campaigns and none of them actually affect or govern how polls are influenced by a campaign.
I wonder how many of those furloughed workers will be voting for Rump in the future?
I thought the left said trump supporters were unemployed idiots...
and the only substantial body of federal workers who voted for trump in mass was the military and border patrol = both of which are essential personnel.
im only surprised the left has not yet written an article detailing how the shutdown targetted democrat bureaucrats.
as for mueller? "the insurance policy" has expired
Who are 'the left' you speak of?
Those who are furloughed aren't all tRump supporters are they dude? 800,000 furloughed employees? How many of them will still blindly support the turd?
You I'm sure are one of them.
He's just a useful idiot to putin, etc., like his supporters
Tick, tock, tick, tock.
P.S.
Do you have anything to say about the article?
Evil looking little fucker.
Looks a little like Heinrich Himmler.