Guiliani, Trump, and Ukraine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking via WSJ: A grand jury has issued a subpoena related to Manhattan federal prosecutors' investigation into Rudy Giuliani, seeking documents from ex-Rep. Pete Sessions about his dealings with Giuliani and associates, according to people familiar.

Pete Sessions was basically a good guy who chucked his moral compass when the Tea Party came on the scene. I would've never voted for him, but appeared to be decent. Now he risked his family and his reputation for campaign contributions.

I did vote for him, before I moved here. I'm shocked by all this. Did he go around the bend? Was it greed? Or did he become a Tea Partier?

Pete Sessions’ father is Bill Sessions, the former FBI director who HW Bush had under investigation for corruption and Clinton fired once the investigation was complete. after being fired, the elder Sessions did some legal work for Semion Mogilevich, the head of the Russian mob who was previously on the FBI’s most wanted list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking via WSJ: A grand jury has issued a subpoena related to Manhattan federal prosecutors' investigation into Rudy Giuliani, seeking documents from ex-Rep. Pete Sessions about his dealings with Giuliani and associates, according to people familiar.

Pete Sessions was basically a good guy who chucked his moral compass when the Tea Party came on the scene. I would've never voted for him, but appeared to be decent. Now he risked his family and his reputation for campaign contributions.

I did vote for him, before I moved here. I'm shocked by all this. Did he go around the bend? Was it greed? Or did he become a Tea Partier?

Pete Sessions’ father is Bill Sessions, the former FBI director who HW Bush had under investigation for corruption and Clinton fired once the investigation was complete. after being fired, the elder Sessions did some legal work for Semion Mogilevich, the head of the Russian mob who was previously on the FBI’s most wanted list.

To be fair, that happened at Barr's instigation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking via WSJ: A grand jury has issued a subpoena related to Manhattan federal prosecutors' investigation into Rudy Giuliani, seeking documents from ex-Rep. Pete Sessions about his dealings with Giuliani and associates, according to people familiar.

Pete Sessions was basically a good guy who chucked his moral compass when the Tea Party came on the scene. I would've never voted for him, but appeared to be decent. Now he risked his family and his reputation for campaign contributions.

NBC News reporting that Sessions is cooperating with SDNY in their investigation of Giuliani.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Giuliani now refusing a Congressional subpoena.
https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/giukiani-comply-congressional-subpoena/story?id=66293635&id=66293635&__twitter_impression=true

LOCK HIM UP.

It would warm the cockles of my cold heart to see Nancy Pelosi reintroduce the power of Inherent Contempt with the arrest of Rudy Giuliani. Let him dry out in the tombs underneath the Capitol Building for a couple days and drag him out to testify without a shower.

+1

LOCK HIM UP. But make him sweat more by subpoenaing everyone else around him first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Breaking via WSJ: A grand jury has issued a subpoena related to Manhattan federal prosecutors' investigation into Rudy Giuliani, seeking documents from ex-Rep. Pete Sessions about his dealings with Giuliani and associates, according to people familiar.

Pete Sessions was basically a good guy who chucked his moral compass when the Tea Party came on the scene. I would've never voted for him, but appeared to be decent. Now he risked his family and his reputation for campaign contributions.

NBC News reporting that Sessions is cooperating with SDNY in their investigation of Giuliani.

Excellent.

[Anonymous]

Trump's FBI has been effecting a Counter Intelligence operation on Giuliania for months

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/16/politics/giuliani-counterintelligence-probe/index.html

So, what if Trump and Guiliani spoke by phone? Does that mean the FBI is spying on Trump?

(answer, no)

[Anonymous]

Feds got Correia, who was indicted with Parnas and Fruman, at JFK today.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/David-Correia-Arrest-Campaign-Finance-Laws-Rudy-Giuliani-New-York-563212841.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feds got Correia, who was indicted with Parnas and Fruman, at JFK today.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/David-Correia-Arrest-Campaign-Finance-Laws-Rudy-Giuliani-New-York-563212841.html

They arrested the other one in SF a few days ago. So that's all 4 in the indictment.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2019/10/11/andrey-kukushkin-ukraine-campaign-finance-violations-rudy-giuliani/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump's FBI has been effecting a Counter Intelligence operation on Giuliania for months

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/16/politics/giuliani-counterintelligence-probe/index.html

So, what if Trump and Guiliani spoke by phone? Does that mean the FBI is spying on Trump?

(answer, no)

This investigation started last winter, so Trump had Giuliani on this international goose chase WHILE he was under FBI surveilence.

Lordy, I hope there are tapes.

[Anonymous]

This article about Parnas and Fruman dated 3 days before the phone call fleshes out some stuff (Perry isn't mentioned, but I'm guessing he was brought into scenes to say the phrase "liquified natural gas" from time to time to sort of sprinkle credibility around them, kinda like glitter); also, Trump, to doesn't speak in full sentences anyway, could be cued to say "LNG" as needed. I enjoy the link to Fiddler on the Roof. Also, the watchdog organization complaint which ultimately become the indictment has a link.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feds got Correia, who was indicted with Parnas and Fruman, at JFK today.

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/David-Correia-Arrest-Campaign-Finance-Laws-Rudy-Giuliani-New-York-563212841.html

He apparently flew there to meet them, no tickets to Vienna.

[Anonymous]

This made me laugh:

In her testimony, Ms. Hill described her fears that Mr. Sondland represented a counterintelligence risk because his actions made him vulnerable to foreign governments who could exploit his inexperience. She said Mr. Sondland extensively used a personal cellphone for official diplomatic business and repeatedly told foreign officials they were welcome to come to the White House whenever they liked

Ms. Hill said that his invitations, which were highly unusual and not communicated to others at the White House, prompted one instance in which Romanian officials arrived at the White House without appointments, citing Mr. Sondland.

[Anonymous]

I assume that just because someone is a lawyer and doing stuff for someone else doesn't necessarily mean the stuff they are doing constitutes legal work or legal work production, right? So (disregarding stuff that could potentially constitute criminal activity) is there some kind of rule of thumb as to whether the stuff comes under lawyer-client privileged communication or work product?

It's sounding like Rudy is going with the spin that he was doing stuff to protect Trump from the Mueller investigation and that seamlessly leads into doing other stuff but it's all under one Trump umbrella so therefore protected?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume that just because someone is a lawyer and doing stuff for someone else doesn't necessarily mean the stuff they are doing constitutes legal work or legal work production, right? So (disregarding stuff that could potentially constitute criminal activity) is there some kind of rule of thumb as to whether the stuff comes under lawyer-client privileged communication or work product?

It's sounding like Rudy is going with the spin that he was doing stuff to protect Trump from the Mueller investigation and that seamlessly leads into doing other stuff but it's all under one Trump umbrella so therefore protected?

You are correct that attorney client privilege does not apply to criminal behavior. Neither does executive privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I assume that just because someone is a lawyer and doing stuff for someone else doesn't necessarily mean the stuff they are doing constitutes legal work or legal work production, right? So (disregarding stuff that could potentially constitute criminal activity) is there some kind of rule of thumb as to whether the stuff comes under lawyer-client privileged communication or work product?

It's sounding like Rudy is going with the spin that he was doing stuff to protect Trump from the Mueller investigation and that seamlessly leads into doing other stuff but it's all under one Trump umbrella so therefore protected?

You are correct that attorney client privilege does not apply to criminal behavior. Neither does executive privilege.

Also correct that not everything a lawyer does is protected by attorney-client privilege or attorney work product. These are defined and much litigated terms and both can also be waived.