Grand Jury Issues Sealed Indictments in Mueller Case

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Roll Call examines the possibilities here:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/analysis-5-possible-outcomes-of-first-mueller-indictments/ar-AAu9yum?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

With this kind of brilliant analysis?

Flynn became enamored with the kind of conservative conspiracy theories that helped power Trump to the White House. The longtime soldier, who had gone into the consulting world after being fired from the DIA by President Barack Obama, became a leading national security and foreign policy adviser to candidate Trump.

I’m to take this article seriously?

Please point out specifically what is false in the part you quoted.

Any article that uses the phrase “enamored with the kind of crazy conspiracy theories” exposes itself

Fact: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/us/politics/-michael-flynn-trump-fake-news-clinton.html

Pull quote "Six days before the election, for instance, Mr. Flynn posted on Twitter a fake news story that claimed the police and prosecutors in New York had found evidence linking Mrs. Clinton and much of her senior campaign staff to pedophilia, money laundering, perjury and other felonies."

Frankly, "enamored with the kind of conspiracy theories" is a very gentle way of referring to Flynn's craziness.

Just because what is written about a politician is negative doesn't mean it shouldn't be printed or is "fake news".

+1
Flynn is a bonafide nutter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please explain to a layperson. What happens to those who are indicted?

In a nutshell: If someone’s believed to have committed a federal crime, they must either have a probable cause hearing before a judge or be indicted. That means the government has enough evidence (probable cause) to try the case. The target will be arrested and arraigned (booked for the crime and have a bail hearing). Normally a non-violent offender (not a danger to the community) will be released on bail. For a wealthy defendant, a lot of bail— unless they are deemed a flight risk. They then get a trial date and either go to trial or plea.

The indictment under seal is interesting. It may be to prevent a media circus this weekend and during the arrest. It is easy to being someone high profile in without the media being six deep. Or to prevent flight (but it seems unlikely that mAnnaforrt could leave the coountry anaad no one wold notice). Or— and this is my own personal conspiracy theory, based on nothing but hope and speculation— Don Jr or (more likely) Kusher are going to be indicted, and Mueller is afraid that Trump will try to interfere with the arrests/ start firing Mueller and his attorneys etc., and inflaming the public via Twitter. So it may be under seal to protect the investigation from Trump. He can still tweet, but he is more limited if he does not know the target. Nd he might cut Manafort loose, but he will fire Mueller,ER before Kushner is arrested

I agree it’s probably Manafort and/or Flynn, although the under seal thing is strange, because everyone knows they are going to becrged.

It would amazing it was Kushner.

I haven’t seen if there is only one indictment, or there might be several?

Is it possible that a sealed indictment may be used to contact the indictees attorney and see if a voluntary surrender can be negotiated with the thinking that courteous treatment may be part of a good cop bad cop routine that gets some kind of plea deal that turns on others negotiated?

Or do you always do the surprise arrest, force the perp walk humiliation and negotiate the plea and proffer afterwards?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Even if they indict Manafort or Flynn, does this really affect Trump? Isn't he just going to say he had no idea what others oh his campaign were up to?

they will flip the little fish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That explains the hyperactivity among Trump trolls here.

Yes. Because those of us who are Trump supporters were given a heads up about this news.
Mr. Steele, you are smarter than that.

Surely you weren't aware. But most trolls echo what they are receiving from their news and social media. You probably didn't know when you forwarded BLM bs concocted by the Russians, either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The leak itself is a felony.

Interesting. Cite the code section on that?

https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcrmp/rule_6

(4) Sealed Indictment. The magistrate judge to whom an indictment is returned may direct that the indictment be kept secret until the defendant is in custody or has been released pending trial. The clerk must then seal the indictment, and no person may disclose the indictment's existence except as necessary to issue or execute a warrant or summons.

I’ve seen speculation this was a defense attorney leak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Roll Call examines the possibilities here:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/analysis-5-possible-outcomes-of-first-mueller-indictments/ar-AAu9yum?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

With this kind of brilliant analysis?

Flynn became enamored with the kind of conservative conspiracy theories that helped power Trump to the White House. The longtime soldier, who had gone into the consulting world after being fired from the DIA by President Barack Obama, became a leading national security and foreign policy adviser to candidate Trump.

I’m to take this article seriously?

Please point out specifically what is false in the part you quoted.

Any article that uses the phrase “enamored with the kind of crazy conspiracy theories” exposes itself

Fact: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/05/us/politics/-michael-flynn-trump-fake-news-clinton.html

Pull quote "Six days before the election, for instance, Mr. Flynn posted on Twitter a fake news story that claimed the police and prosecutors in New York had found evidence linking Mrs. Clinton and much of her senior campaign staff to pedophilia, money laundering, perjury and other felonies."

Frankly, "enamored with the kind of conspiracy theories" is a very gentle way of referring to Flynn's craziness.

Just because what is written about a politician is negative doesn't mean it shouldn't be printed or is "fake news".

Didn’t Flynn’s son tweet in support of the Pizzagate conspiracy? And didn’t Flynn himself retweet a supporting Pizzagate? Why yes, they did.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/05/politics/mike-flynn-jr-son-pizza-gate-conspiracy-theory-donald-trump/index.html


It’s hard to know if he was just playing politics and knew it was BS or of Flynn actually bought into Pizzagate. But in either case is is shocking that someone who has so little personal integrity, and/or is a complete nutjob was able to become a 3 Star, and then NSA. And very scary.

And in general, I have had a lot of respect for how the top military men have behaved this year. McMaster. The Joint Chiefs issuing statements after C-ville, and the service Academy Head who gave a speech saying that there was no room for racists on his campus come to mind. It feels like the military and The Senate might be able to help us survive Trump.

But Flynn? Screw loose. It makes you wonder if something changed after he left the military. And Kelley. Whom I respected at one point. Button after he used his dead son as a prop when he walkeout and lied. Someone with integrity would have resigned before they did that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WSJ: Mueller Should Step Down from Russia Investigation

Aaron Bandler
21 hours ago

Screenshot from YouTube.
The Wall Street Journal editorial page has called on former FBI director Robert Mueller to step down from his role as special counsel in the Russia investigation.

The editorial recapped the news that broke earlier in the week that Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) paid Fusion GPS, an opposition research firm, to unearth information against then-presidential candidate Donald Trump. The firm produced a dossier comprising allegations against the president, including the claim that the Russians were blackmailing Trump with videos of him with Russian prostitutes. The editorial noted that the dossier was “based on largely anonymous, Kremlin-based sources.”

From JJ link

https://www.google.com/amp/s/jewishjournal.com/news/nation/226574/wsj-mueller-step-russia-investigation/amp/

So investigators get wind of collusion and research it, and its the researchers who are castigated instead of the colluders?

That makes a lot of sense.

[Anonymous]

For those on the right, did Fusion make Trump say all of this?

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/7/11/15947434/something-weird-donald-trump-russia

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please explain to a layperson. What happens to those who are indicted?

In a nutshell: If someone’s believed to have committed a federal crime, they must either have a probable cause hearing before a judge or be indicted. That means the government has enough evidence (probable cause) to try the case. The target will be arrested and arraigned (booked for the crime and have a bail hearing). Normally a non-violent offender (not a danger to the community) will be released on bail. For a wealthy defendant, a lot of bail— unless they are deemed a flight risk. They then get a trial date and either go to trial or plea.

The indictment under seal is interesting. It may be to prevent a media circus this weekend and during the arrest. It is easy to being someone high profile in without the media being six deep. Or to prevent flight (but it seems unlikely that mAnnaforrt could leave the coountry anaad no one wold notice). Or— and this is my own personal conspiracy theory, based on nothing but hope and speculation— Don Jr or (more likely) Kusher are going to be indicted, and Mueller is afraid that Trump will try to interfere with the arrests/ start firing Mueller and his attorneys etc., and inflaming the public via Twitter. So it may be under seal to protect the investigation from Trump. He can still tweet, but he is more limited if he does not know the target. Nd he might cut Manafort loose, but he will fire Mueller,ER before Kushner is arrested

I agree it’s probably Manafort and/or Flynn, although the under seal thing is strange, because everyone knows they are going to becrged.

It would amazing it was Kushner.

I haven’t seen if there is only one indictment, or there might be several?

Is it possible that a sealed indictment may be used to contact the indictees attorney and see if a voluntary surrender can be negotiated with the thinking that courteous treatment may be part of a good cop bad cop routine that gets some kind of plea deal that turns on others negotiated?

Or do you always do the surprise arrest, force the perp walk humiliation and negotiate the plea and proffer afterwards?

This is not normal territory. Normally you seal so indicted does not flee, or stage a Waco type event, etc. during an arrest, or co-conspirators are not tipped off. So you don’t give up the element of surprise. But the conditions of it being sealed can be agreed to by the Judge. Nothing says it can’ t be sealed, except xxx attorney can be notified. Mueller is running as low key an investigation as possible, except the Manafort raid. It is certainly possible that whomever is indicted will surrender quietly and privately. That seems like Mueller’s style. And a splashy arrest helps no one in the end. It is also possible to notify the target of the indictment, and offer them a private deal to testify in exchange for immunity, and never arrest the person who was indicted. Although that seems unlikely, since the indictment leaked.

My *guess* is that it is sealed to prevent Trump from trying to prevent the arrest. Trying to fire Mueller, issuing a blanket pardon for all federal crimes the target did, etc. Mueller has been very careful to protect this investigation from Trump. it feels *to me* like he is trying to arrest without Trump trying to stop it. Because we get into an ugly cycle if an indictment is issued, Trump pardons, rinse, repeat. It is one (ugly) way to stop the investigation. But I have no proof of that.

I would also hope (and assume) that to the extent possible, they are filing state charges/ have state charges ready to go as well (like in financial crimes cases) so prevent Trump from stopping the investigation. (POTUS cannnot pardon state crimes).

[Anonymous]

Can Trump simply fire Mueller at this point if the heat really turns up?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can Trump simply fire Mueller at this point if the heat really turns up?

He probably could -- although the special counsel position was designed to not allow that. It would be insane for Trump to do it, although I don't know if he realizes that. It would be much worse than firing Comey, and that was very bad for Trump.

[Anonymous]

Can Trump pardon Manafort, Flynn et Al as soon as the indictments are handed out?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can Trump simply fire Mueller at this point if the heat really turns up?

Only Rosenstein can fire Muller. So Trump would have to fire Rosenstein and a few others under him, get them replaced and have the new people fire Muller.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can Trump pardon Manafort, Flynn et Al as soon as the indictments are handed out?

It is unknown if a president can pardon in cases of his own impeachment. The legal papers around Watergate suggest that is not allowed for a variety of reasons including the separation of powers (by pardoning, Congress wouldn't be able to litigate an impeachment)

So if Trump really wants to go through that and put the country through that, it would take years of litigation and the GOP would be completely shredded in the meantime.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can Trump simply fire Mueller at this point if the heat really turns up?

Only Rosenstein can fire Muller. So Trump would have to fire Rosenstein and a few others under him, get them replaced and have the new people fire Muller.

I take this back. An AG who isn't recused on the subject could also fire Mueller. So if Trump fired Sessions and replaced him with someone else, that someone else could fire Mueller.