Donald Trump's lawyers investigating special counsel Robert Mueller's team

a reply to: TacSite18

Given my education and background I believe I know what im talking about but as with everything in life, people can decide for themselves.

The scope of his investigation is limited to what Comey testified to Congress about. How does something from 2008 connect?

As I said people want to bitch about Trump looking at Pardons when no crime is committed yet they have no issues with a special counsel when no charges are present.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The scope of his investigation is limited to what Comey testified to Congress about. How does something from 2008 connect?

Are you implying that the jurisdiction of Mueller's investigation is only extends to Comey's insinuation of Obstruction of Justice?

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Xcathdra

The scope of his investigation is limited to what Comey testified to Congress about. How does something from 2008 connect?

Are you implying that the jurisdiction of Mueller's investigation is only extends to Comey's insinuation of Obstruction of Justice?

No, Deputy AG is saying the scope of Muellers investigation is limited to what Comey testified to in Congress and is restricted to original jurisdiction only. It is defined in the letter the Deputy AG issued when Mueller was appointed.

Since Comey stated that Trump was never a subject of the investigation, only to turn around and illegally leak memos to force a special prosecutor, should have been the moment the special prosecutor was dismissed.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

No, Deputy AG is saying the scope of Muellers investigation is limited to what Comey testified to in Congress and is restricted to original jurisdiction only. It is defined in the letter the Deputy AG issued when Mueller was appointed.

NO ONE is saying that. What the hell are you talking about? It is confined to any links relating to the Russian investigation or any links into how Russia attempted to influence the electoral process. Any links which inherently does not limit the scope of that mandate.

Give it a rest pal.

And, when Bob Mueller does just that, and no one can do a damn thing about it, you will see just how wrong you are.

a reply to: alphabetaone

You should let the Dep AG know then because he is apparently under the wrong impression according to you -

Rod Rosenstein's Letter Appointing Mueller Special Counsel ***PDF LINK***





28 CFR 600.4 - jurisdiction

§ 600.4 Jurisdiction.

(a)Original jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall also include the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.

Also you need to brush up n how Special Prosecutors work - Trump can in fact fire him.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You're still banging on that same, worn out, tattered old drum ?
Jesus tapdancing Christ

No-one picks you up on it,
because it's irrelevant to the thread

The initial posit was:

Senator Mark Warner was referring to a Washington Post article saying that Trump was consulting with advisers “about his power to pardon aides, family members and even himself”.

My initial questioning was about a sitting Potus
being legally empowered (or not) to pardon himself
in the case of any legal wrong-doing

This has nothing, what-so-ever, to do with the scope
nor the remit, neither "the-encroaching-into-St Donald's' finances"

If this issue annoys you that much,
go and start a new thread about it !

Stop polluting

a reply to: Damiel

Thats nice... Now you should go back to my post and see who i was responding to. Hint - it wasnt you.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Don't feign umbrage : you copied/pasted the same nothing burger on page 1

originally posted by: Damiel
a reply to: Xcathdra

Don't feign umbrage : you copied/pasted the same nothing burger on page 1

and yet when I posted it again here it was in response to a poster that wasnt you.

As for a nothing burger that is what the Democrats have been eating the entire time they have pushed the russia trump bs. The fact you are desperately trying to ignore what the Dep AG assigned to Mueller reinforces the fact the left / Trump haters are going to whine and bitch over everything. Just like Corey Booker trying to blame Trump for Obamacares failure.

When the left can learn what personal accountability is then you can come back and lecture. Until then it doesnt change the fact you are wrong.

a reply to: Xcathdra

No, Deputy AG is saying the scope of Muellers investigation is limited to what Comey testified to in Congress and is restricted to original jurisdiction only. It is defined in the letter the Deputy AG issued when Mueller was appointed.

Comey testified that there was an investigation underway that, although the President was the subject of investigation at the time, may extend all the way up to the president.

Since Comey stated that Trump was never a subject of the investigation, only to turn around and illegally leak memos to force a special prosecutor, should have been the moment the special prosecutor was dismissed.

What about this part of the edict?

(b) The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confinned by then-FBI Director James 8. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:
(i) any links and/or coordination bet ween the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).

28 CFR 600.4 - Jurisdiction.

a reply to: shooterbrody

That part of that meeting was when Comey showed trump the Steele Dossier.
He cleared the room to avoid embarrassing the president.

a reply to: allsee4eye

His investigation includes obstruction of justice claims in the firing of James Comey so even if trump wasn't previously under investigation as of May 17, 2017 he sure was.
So in investigating that and trump ties to Russia and all those meetings and secret communication channels and such and then real estate deals that seem more like gifts than deals. He has free reign to go where ever his investigation takes him.
He can cross what ever lines he needs to to get to the bottom of this.

a reply to: Xcathdra

No he isn't. Trump just wants that to be the company line on the subject.
Mueller is free to go where ever it leads.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You see that line??

Any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation...

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: alphabetaone

You should let the Dep AG know then because he is apparently under the wrong impression according to you -

Rod Rosenstein's Letter Appointing Mueller Special Counsel ***PDF LINK***

28 CFR 600.4 - jurisdiction

§ 600.4 Jurisdiction.

(a)Original jurisdiction. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall be established by the Attorney General. The Special Counsel will be provided with a specific factual statement of the matter to be investigated. The jurisdiction of a Special Counsel shall also include the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.

Also you need to brush up n how Special Prosecutors work - Trump can in fact fire him.

He already knows by his own words, but maybe i'll give him a nudge in the right direction if he forgets.

So, where, in your entire little diatribe there, in order # 3915-2017, state that this particular mandate limits any portion of the investigation per Jim Comey's testimony? That was according to you.

In fact, it says precisely the opposite (as *I* said), by way of any links provision.

*I* dont need to brush on a thing buddy. I know precisely what the law states the President can and cannot do, what YOU dont seem to realize is that unless this President wants to risk all out war with congress, his constituents, and potentially worse, no he cannot fire Bob Mueller.

Like I said, give it a rest.

a reply to: alphabetaone

He can have Mueller fired and probably will. Under the rules for the special counsel it clearly states that conflict of interest is reason he can be removed.

If conflict of interest can be shown then his removal will be met with much gnashing of teeth in the media and on the left, but not by Trump's constituents. In other words, no different from today.

In terms of conflicts of interest:
1) Mueller was not given the FBI Director role
2) Mueller has stocked his legal team with people who donated to Hillary Clinton's campaign and Obama's - one even worked for the Clinton foundation
3) Mueller is good friends with a witness and man who has personal animus towards the President
4) One of the people (a Russian) in the Trump Jr meeting actually worked for the FBI under Mueller.

The Special Counsel is already sunk with Mueller in charge - there won't be any credence given to his findings now.

a reply to: windword

Comey testified Trump was not the subject of the investigation.

As for the edit if you read the letter the Dep AG put out authorizing Mueller as the special counsel you will notice he only specified 28 CFR 600.4 section A as his jurisdiction.

Section B and section C are not included in the mandate.

a reply to: UKTruth

He can have Mueller fired and probably will. Under the rules for the special counsel it clearly states that conflict of interest is reason he can be removed.

What conflicts of interest would those be?

a reply to: Sillyolme

You cant have obstruction of justice charges for firing Comey since Comey was not directly involved in the investigation. This has be3en explained to you time and again and you continue to repeat false information.