It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Two of the most intriguing questions in US national political discourse – what does the special counsel Robert Mueller have on Donald Trump, and what more is he looking for? – were filled in at a remarkable pace this week, as details of highly sensitive documents and internal Trump Organization emails became public for the first time.
Taken together, the documents could indicate that the special counsel is looking seriously at whether Trump committed an obstruction of justice on potentially various fronts, legal experts say.
... snip ...
In any obstruction of justice case against Trump, Mueller might also review reports from this week that Trump had directly contacted the chairman of the Senate judiciary committee after it was announced that Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr, was scheduled to speak with the committee, said Mariotti.
Mueller might additionally review this week’s report that before pardoning the Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, Trump asked the US attorney general, Jeff Sessions, whether it would be possible to drop federal criminal charges against Arpaio.
“I think that all goes into the same bucket of things that could be used by Mueller if he’s looking at obstruction of justice,” said Mariotti
The documents were still flowing on Friday afternoon, with a New York Times report that Mueller was in possession of a draft letter explaining Trump’s rationale for firing Comey. The draft was reportedly written by Trump and an aide, Stephen Miller, but rejected by the White House counsel, on unknown grounds.
Trump has said he fired Comey while experiencing frustration at the FBI investigation of his campaign’s alleged Russia ties and at Comey’s refusal to publicly exculpate Trump. The firing ironically hastened the appointment of a special counsel, under whom the investigation has expanded.
Former US attorneys judged the draft letter and its possession by Mueller as significant. “Logical assumption: If WH Counsel wouldn’t let him send it, [Trump] had improper if not illegal motives for firing FBI Director Comey,” wrote Joyce Vance, a former federal prosecutor in Birmingham, Alabama, and now a University of Alabama law professor.e draft letter’s existence was that Miller, the aide who helped Trump draft the letter, is “perhaps implicated in conspiracy to obstruct justice”.
“I think he got everybody’s tax returns,” said Mariotti, now a defense attorney at Thompson Coburn in Chicago. “I have no professional, personal knowledge of it, but when you’re looking at someone for something unrelated to taxes, still to get tax return information is very valuable information that tells you a lot of valuable things: who owes them money, who they owe money to, and where they keep their money.”
In the end, any President can fire the FBI Director for any reason or no reason at all and it's legal to do so.
If that were true, it would have been leaked by now and I don't mean the vomit coming from so called anonymous insiders every few days to tie up the headlines with partisan crap.
Nothing will ever come of this just like nothing ever comes from these witch hunts by both sides. It's just a campaigning tactic IMO. Both sides do it and both sides are out of control IMO.
Then you pick Comey's bestest buddy as a special prosecutor It's a dog and pony show. A never ending dog and pony show and the crowd is growing tired of dogs jumping over ponies and they are leaving the venue.
Shove top secret documents down a pant leg and you get probation and a fine small in comparison to your net worth. Meaningless. Have sex with an emotionally immature intern in the Oval Office, you have taken advantage of as President, commit perjury and you become a national star and the darling of a political party and get millions in speaking fee's.
Set up a server at home to hide government correspondence and destroy thousands of them knowing full well it's illegal and nothing happens.
This will be the same.
I think we have a problem in that I'm disgusted with both sides.
I'm not defending either, just pointing out what is true historically.
As to proof, I mean someone coming forward, documents in had, giving their full names and not hiding behind a reporter who may or may not be lying or have partisan motivations.
Intent? Since the President can fire the FBI Director for any reason at all without doing wrong?
You don't think this smells of partisan propaganda?
This card is played all the time by both sides. Remember the hub bub over Bush firing and replacing people from Justice and getting the treatment, while Obama did the same and got little push back, but he did get pushback and just like now, it was propaganda since all Presidents have that power legally.
The idea that any President does not have the right to put in place people that are supporting of their administration is absurd to be honest. It's very telling the media never seems to point that out unless it's directed at a person they support. Boths side are two faced.