On Jan. 24, 2017, then-national security adviser Michael Flynn was questioned by the FBI in his White House office. The session, focusing on Flynn’s transition talks with the Russian ambassador, led to Flynn pleading guilty to a charge of lying to investigators. He is now awaiting sentencing.

But why did FBI agents go to the White House in the first place? We still don’t know precisely, because we have only snippets of information from the various Trump-Russia investigations. There’s no reason it should be a big secret, but it is.

Newly unredacted portions of the House Intelligence Committee Republicans’ Trump-Russia report say top Justice Department and FBI officials — Sally Yates, James Comey, Andrew McCabe and Mary McCord — gave “conflicting testimony” about the “primary purpose” for sending the FBI to question Flynn.

Some said the reason for interviewing Flynn was “investigating potentially misleading statements to the vice president,” according to the report. Some said it was investigating “a possible violation of the Logan Act.” And some said it was “a desire to obtain more information as part of the counterintelligence investigation” into Flynn.

Who said what? It’s impossible to know, because the committee has not released the interviews.

Beyond the specific issue of the Flynn questioning, the Republican report’s little snippets of quotations and characterizations of testimony leave much untold. They also leave many wondering whether the GOP told the whole story of what its investigators gathered.

In their minority report, House Intelligence Committee Democrats included a few passages from interviews with key figures.

But the brief passages are just the ones Democrats want the public to see. Like Republicans, they leave a lot out.

The bottom line is that the public still does not know what many important players have told the House about the Trump-Russia affair.

The solution is obvious and simple: Release the transcripts of the committee’s witness interviews.

It would be a public service — actually, it is a public responsibility — for the committee to release those interviews.

A good example is about to be set by the Senate Judiciary Committee. One of the areas that panel has focused on is the much-discussed June 9, 2016 meeting in Trump Tower. Committee investigators questioned six of the participants, including Trump Jr. The transcripts of those interviews remain secret.

Capitol Hill’s secrecy is nothing compared to that of special counsel Robert Mueller, whose lawyers recently declined to tell a federal judge in open court what their investigation is about. It happened in a hearing in the case of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who has been charged with financial crimes unrelated to the Trump campaign and the 2016 election.

In court, Mueller prosecutor Michael Dreeben essentially admitted that the May 17, 2017, order appointing Mueller and stating the subject of the investigation was just for show. Mueller’s real assignment remains a secret. Mueller got his marching orders, Dreeben said, in secret conversations with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. It was all done in secret.

Federal District Judge T.S. Ellis’ incredulous reply was simple: “Come on, man.” Ellis ordered Dreeben to show him the special counsel’s complete assignment. That’s a good thing — but of course, it will happen in secret. The public still won’t know.

And that has been the problem with this investigation, going back to the beginning. In February, I wrote that in the Trump-Russia probe, “Too much material is secret, too much is classified, and too many attacks are launched and defenses mounted with too little public knowledge of the underlying facts.”

That’s still true, and becoming more so every day.

Byron York is a nationally syndicated columnist.

(87) comments

Diane Turski

Stop with the conspiracy theories nonsense! The public has a right to know what the results of the investigation are when the investigation is finished. Each piece of this investigation has opened a new "follow the money" trail to new indictments, government cooperation and guilty pleas! We have a nest of traitors being investigated and I want that investigation protected and to continue to its natural end! No interference, no obfuscation, no premature end to protect the guilty, no matter who they may be!!!

Carlos Ponce

" We have a nest of traitors being investigated and I want that investigation protected and to continue to its natural end! No interference, no obfuscation, no premature end to protect the guilty, no matter who they may be!!!"
"no matter who they may be!!!" All signs point to members of the previous administration. Just who orchestrated placing an FBI mole in Trump's campaign? Is the FBI dragging its feet in supplying subpoenaed documents to Congress because this will implicate members of the Obama administration and upper echelons of the FBI including Comey? E-mails between FBI Agents Peter Strozk and FBI lawyer Lisa Page indicate Obama was aware of illegal activities by the Justice department. Did Obama orchestrate this?

Diane Turski

Carlos, you missed the call to end the conspiracy theories nonsense! So, stop it!

Carlos Ponce

"So, stop it!" What a laugh! Looks like Diane is afraid that the truth will emerge!

Diane Turski

Diane is not afraid of the truth, Comrade Carlos.

Carlos Ponce

"Comrade?"
comrade definition: "a companion who shares one's activities or is a fellow member of an organization. synonyms: companion, friend, colleague, associate, partner"
If you insist....[unsure]

Steve Fouga

Ongoing law-enforcement investigations are generally not made public, in any jurisdiction i know of. Maybe sometimes, but not usually. Why should this one be different?

George Croix

Because it's a sham, Steve.
Unpopularity has now become a criminal act according to the TDS bunch.
Under our system of 'justice' we're supposed to have evidence a crime was committed, then find proof of the guilty....in this case, it's already been decided by the 'resistance' who's guilty, so then hunt for a crime to charge them with.
If the real reason for the investigation was to find collusian with Russians, we already have admissions from and proof of guilt of the DNC and the Hillary campaign spending MILLIONS to 'collude' with the Russinas/Ukranians and Fusion GPS with Chris Steele for the 'dossier' to try to marginalize Trump, and CONTINUING after the election for millions more bucks.
Of course, the calling for 'openness' and 'justice for all' from the usual suspects excludes that.
Imagine if you were under investigation for auto theft based on information provided by a source being paid for by your neighbor who had another stolen car sitting right there out front in his driveway, and the Police knew that car was stolen, but kept after you and gave him a pass.
It's a remarkably similar real life situation to my out-of-the-air example....
Problem with 'progressives', is it's impossible to confuse them with facts once their minds are made up...usually for them....

Steve Fouga

There was enough suspicion of collusion as far back as summer 2016 that an investigation was begun. The "Mueller" part is simply a continuation after Trump fired Comey. It has been a fruitful investigation, too, with several indictments and cooperating witnesses. These things take time; just be patient, and everything will eventually come out. Who knows, we might even get to see Trump's tax returns.

You afraid Trump is guilty of something big, George?

Carlos Ponce

"It has been a fruitful investigation, too, with several indictments and cooperating witnesses. "
"Judge blasts special counsel Robert Mueller's criminal case against Paul Manafort"
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/05/04/judge-questions-special-counsel-robert-muellers-case-against-manafort/581806002/
Of the Russians Mueller indicted, Mueller didn't think they would come to the United States but......."Russian firm accused of funding U.S. election trolling disputes Mueller charge - Company tied to Putin's chef says prosecutors invented 'make-believe crime.' "
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/14/russian-firm-robert-mueller-charge-disputed-585645
As for Michael Flynn, look for this to be tossed out, too. Pleading guilty under duress. Mueller threatened to go after Flynn's son.
"fruitful"???? That's some ROTTEN FRUIT, Steve.

George Croix


The 'suspician' came from a coordinated effort to gin up, and pay to get it, dirt on Trump before the approaching election, then use the classic leftist ploy of accusing others of doing exactly what they are doing....why do you suppose Obama did squat about 'Russian inteferrence' when he knew about it months before the election, except say 'cut it out'....hooo boy...that'll show 'em.....well, then again, that doesn't matter to about half the country....including several contributors in these forums.
I KNOW Hillary and the DNC are guilty of something big, and few seem to care.
That's just plain dishonest. But, we've become a nation where as long as 'our side' can get away with whatever, then it's OK...
Now, about that "You afraid Trump is guilty of something big, George?"
That 's cheap sh..o..t deflecting and diverting inuendo, Steve...the same stuff being used to 'speculate' on Trump only, while ignoring the obvious. Can't refute the message, impune the messenger.
You've got plenty of company in that.....
Scared? Sure. Must be, huh.....

Steve Fouga

I can't think of a good reason for wanting the investigation shut down, or openly exposed, thus undermining it, other than the fear that Trump is actually guilty, and the desire to keep him in office no matter what. If he's innocent, and his associates and family are innocent, why not just let it run its course? And please, no hogwash about how expensive it is to the taxpayer; the federal government blows more money on a few hours of inefficiency and bad decisions than this investigation will cost in total (I can't prove that, but years of experience make me confident in saying it).

"why do you suppose Obama did squat about 'Russian interference' when he knew about it months before the election" Search me, George. I think it was his stupidest decision of all, even surpassing the "red line" fiasco. In my opinion it's one of several things that can be blamed for costing his party the presidency.

As I've said before, I'd be fine with a Hillary/Bill investigation. I think they're crooked as hell. The only thing that makes me think there's NOT such an investigation already ongoing is that Trump would have tweeted about it by now. If he thinks they're guilty of something, why doesn't he sic his Justice Department on them?

Carlos Ponce

"I can't think of a good reason for wanting the investigation shut down.."
I can:
1. Trump is not guilty.
2. The entire investigation was orchestrated to undermine Trump's presidency.
3. Mueller's indictments have been determined to be overreach by a Federal District Judge.
4. Flynn plead guilty to only a process crime.
5. There is evidence that the Justice Department and the FBI planted a mole in the Trump campaign to plant information. Once the information was given to George Papadapolis they then used that as a reason to start the investigation.
6. The DNC and the Hillary campaign paid for the Russia-Steele Dossier.
7. The disturbing parts of the Steele dossier were fabricated. They cannot be proven because they never occurred.
8. The investigation is using millions of tax dollars in a fruitless search. No evidence of collaboration
9. Collaboration is not a Federal crime so it cannot be used for impeachment.
10. Mueller has gone far beyond the parameters set up by Rosenstein.
More if you like......

Carlos Ponce

11. The Russians who used Facebook worked both sides, pro and anti Hillary, pro and anti Trump and most was done AFTER the election in an effort to cause division in this country. And the Democrats played right into their plot. Useful idiots.

Carlos Ponce

12. "Mueller may have a conflict — and it leads directly to a Russian oligarch"
http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/387625-mueller-may-have-a-conflict-and-it-leads-directly-to-a-russian-oligarch

Carlos Ponce

13. One of the Russian companies Mueller indicted (Concord Catering) DID NOT EXIST at the time of the alleged conduct. OOPS! Is Mueller that INEPT?
U.S. Magistrate Judge G. Michael Harvey: What about Concord Catering? The government makes an allegation that there's some association. I don't mean for you to – do you represent them, or not, today? And are we arraigning them as well?
Attorney Eric Dubelier: We're not, and the reason for that, Your Honor, is I think we're dealing with a situation of the government having indicted the proverbial ham sandwich. That company didn't exist as a legal entity during the time period alleged by the government. If at some later time they show me that it did exist, we would probably represent them. But for purposes of today, no, we do not.

Jim Forsythe

Investigations of this magnitude, do not end overnight. Most of what is happening, is not is being shared at this time.
The indictment and plead barging are normal for a case like this. If charges are ever leveled against Trump, it will be a year or more from now. Mueller will continue until he is finished , or he is removed.

Carlos Ponce

It will drag on and on beyond the midterms. The swamp dwellers hope that the midterms will be fruitful for the Democrats. With the Republicans no longer in control they can stop the investigation by the Inspector General and Congressional oversight Committees into the corruption of the previous administration. That's the REAL STORY that the Leftist media refuses to cover.

Jim Forsythe

Since 2014 midterms, Republicans have had control of Congress .Since 2017 they have had control of all three branches.
If they are have not conducted the investigations they want ,they have no one to fault but themselves . The Russian investigation was started after the Republicans took control. At any time they can stop the investigation, if they want to.

Carlos Ponce

Problem with investigating members of the previous administration and its appointees - they're like clams. But the truth is coming out. Look for the Inspector General's report.

Jim Forsythe

DOJ inspector general releases scathing report on fired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe
Trump can not use the OIG's report to bolster his attempts to discredit the Russia investigation as it centers on McCabe and is not connected Robert Mueller, the special counsel leading that inquiry.
Anything that comes from the investigation about McCabe, Clinton , Comey will change the Russian investigation how? If Clinton , Obama , and other go to jail, it will not change the investigation about Trump and Russia.
At any time they can stop the Russian investigation, if they want to.

George Croix

Jim, it's supposed to be an in vestigation about Russian interference in the election process in collusian with American entities....unless it only matters one way....
You think McCabe, et al, actively participating at the highest levels of the DOJ/FBI, with 'insurance policies' and lying under oath and such to undermine a then candidate for election, and later winner, and doing so by running interference for the folks on the other side of the election KNOWN to be 'colluding' with the Russians and even making up phony 'dossier' to aid in the process and divert attention to what they were doing onto someone else, should be excluded?
Can't use any info or negatives on him?
Well.............hmmmmm........

Jim Forsythe

The investigation is looking at all aspects of the Russian thing. This includes all, such as Clinton.
At this time, we do not know for sure what happened.
After it is over, I hope it becomes clear as to what happened. If anyone is guilty , they should be punished .
At this time, all that is clear is Democrats and republicans have a different view of what is happening.
Republicans are in charge of the investigation and they have not stop it yet ,so maybe they are finding something.

George Croix

I didn't say a word about expense to the taxpayer, Steve.....make your case with your own words
Running a course until the midterms was the whole idea in the first place, absent an AG that is one...Mueller biggest priority absent the hoped for but never yet found 'collusion' is to keep his FBI rogue buddies out of jail....so far, he's doing pretty good at it.
with 90+% of all media against him and an entire half nation with TDS, Trump can't win no matter what, so firing Mueller does nothing to help and more to hurt.
Just look at last and this week....great economic news and historic activity overseas with isreal and all you hear about from the usual suspects at the lunatic frings, or MSM as it used to be, is a porn star and a Russia fantasy....
Why not investigate Hillary now. Who'd conduct it? The Deputy AG is in the tank with the 'resistance, despite who appointed him, and the actual AG is nearing the end of a complete transformation to genus Mustela....imo...
Worst thing out of all this is that this nation is now forever transformed into one where the results of an election are cause for 'resistance'...it will be interesting to see if the lunacy going on now can even be matched, much less topped, in the future, but it WILL be there......
Anyway, less inuendo and attempted mind reading, and just debate what is actually written would be a better course when you want to back-and-forth...

Steve Fouga

What I say generates plenty of back and forth. So does what you say. Just different styles -- mine has more mind-reading, but yours has just as much innuendo. As for actual content, we both want what's best for our country, and we both worked hard to achieve it. We agree on 90% of what that is, I would bet. Mind-reading again.

I understand your practical approach to the Trump presidency -- some of his policies are both working as designed and beneficial, and if the policies are successful enough it's worth overlooking some faults. But I'm not as sanguine as you are, concerning our economy and the Middle East. On the other hand, I have great hopes for Korea. I just can't abide a crook, a cheater, and a narcissist as president. Maybe if I were rich enough to have benefited from the tax cuts, I'd be happier with him. I'd like to see him hounded by legal troubles for the rest of his life, as an example to future office-seekers. Hillary too, if she committed prosecutable offenses. I really can't stand a crook in public office.

George, I've just read some excellent biographies of Washington, FDR, and Lincoln. I was astounded by how similar the opposition's treatment of those worthies was to the opposition's treatment of Trump. A difference is that they entered office with at least some degree of popularity, whereas Trump entered as historically unpopular. But damn! it's amazing how chewed up those guys were at the hands of the press and political opponents.

George Croix

But you could abide an incompetent race baiter who blamed his own country for the worlds problems and even invited to the WH people who called for killing Police officers

Well, we pays our own money and makes our own choices...

George Croix

Forgot to add, but had to take time to process hog.
I'll have to do some studying on Washington, FDR, and Lincoln and see if the 24/7 MAM and Facebook gave them a lot of 'resistance' too.....and the opposition was as big a bunch of derangement syndrome headcases as are out there now.
Maybe so.....maybe the new crop just got better learning from the old....

George Croix

MAM??

Freudian slip.....

MSM

Steve Fouga

"maybe the new crop just got better learning from the old...."

They got faster. No more hateful or vitriolic.

George Croix

Well, it took a few hours less than 18 days for news of Lincoln's election to get to California.
Here's hoping the 'resistance' doesn't put us in the same situation again that they had back then.....
A lot of people are going to be very surprised to learn someday when/if they grow up, that their boss is running a business, not a popularity contest....

Gary Miller

Steve. The value of the tax cuts isn't who got the cuts but is instead who gets the jobs.

Steve Fouga

Gary, that's not entirely true. The rich saw a lot of value from the cuts, in the form of cash. It'll be awhile before we see whether the cuts created a wealth of new jobs.

wmaceo@att.net Maceo

The "secrecy" you mention may be for national defense purposes. Instead of telling Mueller to explain, voters should be telling Trump to come clean, stop all his lies, stop filling his and his cronies' pockets with lucrative contracts and priming the well for when he's a private businessman taking advantage of markets being opened in our adversaries' back yards. He has no concept of cause and effect, he clearly doesn't understand foreign policy, how trade, sanctions, treaties, agreements, all affect our national defense. He sees new markets, he sees billions in corporate profits. Its obvious this vein runs through his cabinet appointees as well as others on the fringe. Look at Pruit, Flynn, Kushner, Cohen, and I can go on. We need to protect our nation from both foreign and domestic enemies = even if its our own President. Trump has degraded our standing in the world, he's causing distrust among our allies and our own citizens. He's degraded the office of the Presidency. He gets advice from political talk-show hosts (Hannity is NOT a news reporter nor are most of Fox's reporters/anchors). Trump has caused world wide embarassment to those visiting other countries. He's white trash disguised with decorations of gold. We need a real hero right now, and our best bet is Mueller. God bless McCain, Romney, the Bushes, and others like them who are not afraid to go against Mr. Blow Hard.

Carlos Ponce

No doubt where you stand on the issue, wmaceo@att.net Maceo. No doubt you will be proven wrong.

Steve Fouga

In my opinion that's a pretty good summary, Mr. Maceo. [thumbup]

Carlos Ponce

No, Steve, All I read is Maceo hates Trump, Maceo hates Trump, Maceo hates Trump. No reference to policy, no issues addressed. Just pure hatred. That's NOT productive. All Maceo does is summarize his hate. And you think that's "pretty good"?

Steve Fouga

Mr. Maceo did a good job of expressing the litany of COMPLAINTS (not HATRED) that many folks have, concerning our president. He's not likeable, he's not competent, he's crooked, and he has surrounded himself with crooks.

This makes it hard to dispassionately examine his policies. Personally, when I look hard at his policies, I find some that I like, some that I don't, and some where it's too soon to tell. But the background nastiness and grossness are always there, dominating the news and making the president less relateable and less effective than his policies might warrant. A president is much more than the sum of his policies, or in this case, much less.

Carlos Ponce

Hate is hate. The so called complaints are just Left wing Leftist Trump bashing. Nothing to most of it if one bothers to research the truth.

Jim Forsythe

.Mueller is.

George Croix

Well, you certainly have plenty of company. Fortunately not quite enough to get the greater of two evils into office though

Diane Turski

Tick Tock, Comrade Carlos....

Emile Pope

When the clock strikes one, then Trump is done...

Carlos Ponce

Emile, Trump tenure will not be done until January 2025. I guarantee it. Then President Pence takes over.[beam]

Jim Forsythe

"Emile, Trump tenure will not be done until January 2025. I guarantee it." How are you going to guarantee it? What are You going to do if he does not win, say you were wrong, if so that is no Guarantee? Trump may not run. he may not even win his parties nomination. You do not know whom he would be running against!
It could be Obama and Biden, you never know.
Sometimes Guarantees are not worth the type on a page.
If Trump does not win , what are you prepared to do?

Carlos Ponce

Trust me, Jim. Bookmark this page and come January 2025 I'll remind you![beam]

Jim Forsythe

I may not have to wait long, you never what may happen to Trump.
What kind of guarantee is it . What is Carlos going to do, if Trump is not President in 2025?
If Trump does not win , what are you prepared to do?

Carlos Ponce

Jim, I get it! You really want to see Mike Pence become President! Be patient! His turn will come!

Jim Forsythe

If Trump does not win , what are you prepared to do?
Carlos said,"Judge blasts special counsel Robert Mueller's criminal case against Paul Manafort"
Today.
A federal judge dealt President Donald Trump's former campaign manager Paul Manafort a major blow on Tuesday by refusing to dismiss criminal charges brought by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, after Manafort claimed that Mueller's probe has run amok and should be reined in.
In a sharp rebuke of those claims, Judge Amy Berman Jackson of U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein had followed all the Justice Department's rules when he hired Mueller and Mueller's case against Manafort is not overly broad or improper.
Rosenstein "expressly approved the Special Counsel’s investigation of the facts alleged in the indictment, so there has been no violation of the regulations, and the Special Counsel did not act without authority," wrote Jackson, who was appointed by Democratic President Barack Obama.

Carlos Ponce

The judge in the Manafort case is U.S. District Judge T.S. Ellis III . Judge Ellis rebuked Muellers's team earlier this month in Virginia.
U.S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson is a Barack Obama appointee in the District of Columbia.
"The tax- and bank-fraud offenses were allegedly committed in Virginia, where Manafort resides, not in the District of Columbia, where the original indictment was filed."
"Mueller sees the Virginia indictment as, in effect, a superseding indictment. That is, he will likely seek to proceed on the Virginia charges first — they are not only stronger and carry very weighty sentences; they are also the product of four additional months of investigation and thus represent the prosecutor’s refined understanding of the underlying facts and evidence."
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/02/are-paul-manafort-and-rick-gates-asking-to-be-tried-twice/
Can you say "DOUBLE JEOPARDY"? I smell a rat. Mueller didn't get his way in Virginia so he switched to DC with an Obama appointed judge.

Jim Forsythe

Double jeopardy is not how one plans on not going to jail. If your whole defense is hinged on Double jeopardy, it is risky. Better would be if one did not do it. Mueller has a lot to choose from, as too what he charges Manafort with. It's hard to claim double jeopardy when Manafort has not even been tried once.
Special Counsel Robert Mueller filed a 32-count indictment hitting former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and aide Rick Gates with fresh charges of tax evasion and bank fraud.
Manafort is specifically charged with five counts related to filing false income tax returns and four counts of failure to report foreign bank and financial accounts. Gates is accused of 11 counts related to filing false income tax returns and three counts of failure to report foreign bank and financial accounts. Both men are accused of nine counts of bank fraud and conspiracy to commit bank fraud.

double jeopardy as jeopardy is the risk of conviction or punishment, double jeopardy refers to the rule that a person should not be tried twice for the same crime. Boasting persons who have been wrongly acquitted of murder discover that, in many jurisdictions, perjury is considered as a different crime from murder, so if the accused person has himself given perjured testimony he may be tried, convicted and sentenced for lying under oath, if, of course, he chose to give evidence on his own behalf

Carlos Ponce

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller filed a 32-count indictment hitting former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort and aide Rick Gates with fresh charges of tax evasion and bank fraud." - in Virginia where Judge TS Ellis rebuked the Mueller Team.
You don't get it. Mueller is out of control. He files originally in DC with an Obama appointed judge but the alleged crimes occurred in Virginia. But the Virginia District judge won't go along with Mueller's shenanigans. So he goes back to the DC court. Court shopping taken to a height. What happens if Ellis in Virginia tosses out the indictment? Will Mueller still continue with similar charges in DC? The man is out of control.

Jim Forsythe

You don't get it. Mueller is in control.
You are right , he is the man. He is the one that controls when and where .If Manafort is not guilty, he has nothing to worry about.
If Muellers team can prove the charges, Manafort is in trouble.
If you have not read what he is charged with , the amount of money and where if came from , go to the below link.
https://www.justice.gov/file/1038391/download

MANAFORT resided in homes in Virginia, Florida, and Long Island, New York. So a trial in any of these locations makes sense. As it is a Federal case, it can be anywhere.
Last week, a judge in Washington dismissed a civil lawsuit that Manafort filed using similar arguments. In that case, the judge said Manafort should save that reasoning for his criminal case.
History of tax evasion,
Al Capone tax evasion
On Oct. 17, 1931, Chicago gangster Al Capone was convicted of income tax evasion and later sentenced to 11 years in federal prison, ending his control of the Chicago underworld.


Carlos Ponce

"You don't get it. Mueller is in control." And that's the problem. The LAW should be in control. JUSTICE should be in control. The Constitution should be in control. Going court and judge shopping when you don't get your way is not what our forefathers envisioned. With Mueller in control and not the Judicial branch of the government, there's a huge problem with Constitutional rights.

Carlos Ponce

Ask yourself, Jim. Why did Mueller originally go with the DC District Court? Attorneys can ask for a change of venue when they believe the jury may be influenced by pre-trial publicity. But on this level there is just one person - the judge. Did Mueller know that if he went outside the DC beltway his case would be in trouble? So he vamps the indictments and heads to Virginia which has jurisdiction without dropping the DC case. Why? Think about it. Manafort's lawyers now have to split their time between two District courts, two District judges. Same case. That can get expensive. When the Virginia District Court Ellis disagrees with Mueller's team, he then puts all his efforts into the Obama appointed District Court judge. How would you like to be tried in two different courts at the same time for the same accusation? NO ONE WOULD!

Jim Forsythe

Mueller is in control of the case against Manafort.until it reaches the court, and then the Judge is in control.
"The LAW should be in control", that's what the Judge and the defense team is for.
T"he Constitution should be in control", What has Mueller done that is Unconstitutional ?
T"he Constitution should be in control." Charges are in place and it is on to the next step, going to court. Is that not what the Constitution says should happen.

"Mueller in control and not the Judicial branch of the government". He is the one bring the charges to the court. If not him ,who would be the right one. He is the one in charge of the case against Manafort for the Government. If you disagree ,who would be the right one to bring charges before courts, for the court to decide the case?
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller ,so he is working for the DOJ. Both are republicans.

Manafort will go before the court and have his day. Mueller team will state the facts, Manafort team will defend and the court will decide what has been proven.
It is Mueller job to bring the charges before the court. The charges are for crimes against the USA . Manafort may choose to take a plea bargain.

Carlos Ponce

"What has Mueller done that is Unconstitutional"
Trying someone for the same alleged crime in two different courts comes to mind.
Costly for the defendant, costly for the persecution. But when the taxpayer's bankroll the endeavor does Mueller really care?

Carlos Ponce

"Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller ,so he is working for the DOJ. Both are republicans."
They can call them selves whatever they want but they bray like donkeys. They did that out of political expediency. Mueller has built a team of Hillary contributors. Birds of a feather....
People ASSUME Rosenstein is a Republic because of his appointment by President Bush. "Hey Rod, call yourself a Republican and Bush will appoint you!" At best he's a RINO.

Jim Forsythe

Mueller is working for the USA government, you and I. Until he is removed from the job, he is tasked with doing his job too the best of his ability. Trump is the one that can have him fired . If he does not have him fired, he must think Mueller is doing a OK job.
Mamafort is charged with conspiracy against the US and you are worried about what court he is going before and how much it is going to cost? Trump’s campaign manager and his aid have both been charged with conspiracy against the US.
If Manafort did what he is accused of, is it not important that he pays the cost of his deeds.

This is before the second charges. At that time, he was looking at 80 years in Prison
"President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, and Manafort’s business associate Rick Gates face decades in federal prison and millions of dollars in potential fines if convicted on all counts in a sprawling federal indictment"

Jim Forsythe

""What has Mueller done that is Unconstitutional"
"Trying someone for the same alleged crime in two different courts comes to mind."

Manafort has not been tried yet, so your point is not in play.
To accuse Mueller of doing a Unconstitutional act , the act must have happened.

Carlos Ponce

"Manafort has not been tried yet."
They're in two different Courthouses facing two different judges. Do the math, Jim.

Carlos Ponce

"Paul Manafort, and Manafort’s business associate Rick Gates face decades in federal prison and millions of dollars in potential fines if convicted on all counts in a sprawling federal indictment"
But Jim Forsythe just posted Manafort is NOT on trial. Hmmm........

Jim Forsythe

"What has Mueller done that is Unconstitutional"
"Trying someone for the same alleged crime in two different courts comes to mind."
Manafort has not been tried yet, so your point is not in play.
To accuse Mueller of doing a Unconstitutional act , the act must have happened.
"They're in two different Courthouses facing two different judges.
I must of missed the part of when the trial started. Until they both have a trial going on, for the same thing, nothing is unconstitutional as far as Double Jeopardy is concerned.
"Manafort is NOT on trial" yet, but does face the potential punishment that the Federal indictments call for.
Manafort does face more than 80 years. He is not on trial yet, but does face federal indictment and will be on trial soon, if he dose not plea.
.
"Mueller has built a team of Hillary contributors." Are you saying that only people that are Republicans should be on Muellers team.
If Hillary was being investigated, for what ever, only Democrats should be on that team?
How many on Muellers team are Democrats?
How many on Muellers team are Republicans?
How many are on Muellers team, in total?
If this is a problem to have someone from another party on am investigation team, it is going to be hard to assemble a team, as many give money to both parties. Also, some people work for both Democrats and Republicans.
Most of the jobs I worked on, did not know if I was a Demarcate or a Republican. Did they ask you what party you belonged to, for your jobs?

Jim Forsythe

And the beat goes on! Below is a good reason for the Russian investigation.If you think that what is reported below is O.K. about how the Russia interfered with our elections , then it will be open season on our elections.
"The Senate Intelligence Committee has determined that the U.S. intelligence community was correct in assessing that Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the aim of helping then-candidate Donald Trump, contradicting findings House Republicans reached last month."
“We see no reason to dispute the [intelligence community’s] conclusions,” the committee’s chairman, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), said Wednesday in a joint statement with its vice chair, Sen. Mark R. Warner (D-Va.), who added: “Our staff concluded that the ... conclusions were accurate and on point.The Russian effort was extensive, sophisticated, and ordered by President Putin himself for the purpose of helping Donald Trump and hurting Hillary Clinton.”"

Carlos Ponce

BUT they failed to report any collusion between Team Trump and the Russians.
"Dead End: Senate Intelligence Dems Admit There May Be ZERO Evidence Of Collusion Between Russians And Trump Campaign-
Even some Democrats on the Intelligence Committee now quietly admit, after several briefings and preliminary inquiries, they don’t expect to find evidence of active, informed collusion between the Trump campaign and known Russian intelligence operatives..." Townhall.com
AND "There is no evidence any vote was changed." Chairman Richard Burr Senate Intelligence Committee.

Jim Forsythe

You are O.K. with the Russians medaling in our elections? Do you want to stick your head in the sand and say that it did not happen, or do you want to do something about it. If we understand what happen, we can stop future attacks on us This is not a Democrat, Republican thing, but a USA citizen thing. This is not about collusion, but it is about our way of life, being attacked by Russia. The leaders at the top for Russia ordered this , and you are OK with it?
"Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election with the aim of helping then-candidate Donald Trump"
"The Russian effort was extensive, sophisticated, and ordered by President Putin himself for the purpose of helping Donald Trump and hurting Hillary Clinton.”"

Carlos Ponce

"You are O.K. with the Russians medaling (sic) in our elections?" The Soviets tried it and later the Russians. They TRIED to meddle. They were unsuccessful as determined by the House and Senate committees investigating. The Soviet Union wanted John F. Kennedy, not Nixon. Does that make JFK an illegitimate president? NO! We can't judge a presidential candidate based on who the Soviets or Russians preferred. Just like Barack Obama. He TRIED to meddle in the Israeli elections. He TOO was unsuccessful. The Mexicans tried to interfere in our elections too. They preferred Hillary. Why isn't THAT being investigated???? That bothers me because its been discovered that some Mexican Nationals ACTUALLY VOTED in the 2016 election. And Mexican television (Multimedios) shown in the US encouraged them - American citizenship not necessary. It's more widespread than you think, Jim. And there has been voter fraud committed by non-citizens in Galveston County. The man was put on a jury pool but claimed he was not a citizen. He was then DROPPED from the Galveston County Voting rolls. Then he got mad because he had voted in previous elections but now could no longer vote. This was reported in the GCDN in a column.
So I ask you - You are O.K. with ANY NON-CITIZEN meddling in our elections by actually registering and voting??????

Steve Fouga

Hahahaha! Carlos is comparing a few random Mexicans voting to an organized effort by an adversarial foreign power, possibly our worst enemy, rigging an election to put an irresponsible, incompetent narcissist in our country's highest office!

Carlos, you have no sense of perspective. Mexicans! LOLOLOLOL! Come on, Carlos. Pay attention to what's really happening. Don't let yourself get too jacked up by the few media outlets still purveying rightist nonsense. Rejoin planet Earth, quick, before it's too late! [cool]

Jim Forsythe

Anyone that does not follow the law, should face the consequences..
The man in your example was taken care of.
Russia interfering in the 2016 presidential election was not just one vote being influenced.
As I said earlier, it has nothing to do with party. It has to do with a attack on us. Do you have a reason you do not want to stop this action by the Russians.
Its a big difference from "The Soviet Union wanted John F. Kennedy" to "The Russian effort was extensive, sophisticated, and ordered by President Putin himself for the purpose of helping Donald Trump and hurting Hillary Clinton.”"

"The Mexicans tried to interfere in our elections too. They preferred Hillary". Why isn't THAT being investigated????"
Ask the Republican party, as they have the power to do so. Any other misdeeds can be investigated, if the Republicans wants to. When a party has all three branches of Government, they are at fault, if what they want to get done, is not.

Carlos Ponce

"The man in your example was taken care of."
No persecution for fraudulently voting - just removed from the voting rolls. But you say he was "taken care of". Hmmm....
"Ask the Republican party, as they have the power to do so."
Trump tried with the commission on Voting fraud. But voting rolls are left up to the individual states and many balked at the idea. "Voter fraud! Ha Ha Ha. There's no voter fraud!" And Governor Moonbeam of California has doubled down registering as many non-citizens to vote including illegal aliens. Remove the votes from non-citizens and Hillary's popular vote victory DISAPPEARS.
In Virginia 1,852 non-citizens cast nearly 7,500 ballots during elections dating back to 1988.
Zombie Vote:
"He fought in World War II. He died in 2014. And he just registered to vote in Va."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/virginia-politics/he-fought-in-world-war-ii-he-died-in-2014-and-he-just-registered-to-vote-in-va/2016/09/29/5e0bffee-8670-11e6-ac72-a29979381495_story.html?utm_term=.5fd1de043036
"Lawsuit: 100,000 noncitizens registered to vote in Pennsylvania"
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/feb/26/lawsuit-100000-noncitizens-registered-vote-pa/
In Texas:
"State Senator Don Huffines (R-Dallas) voiced concerns over “illegal voting by noncitizens” this week in a letter to Dallas County elections officials. He called upon County Clerk, the Honorable John Warren, and Elections Administrator Toni Pippins-Poole to update the public on their progress in removing noncitizen voting registrants. Last year, a judge sentenced Rosa Maria Ortega, a Mexican national, to eight years in prison for 'illegal voting.' She cast ballots in numerous Dallas County elections over 10 years..."
"There is a “significant problem” with non-citizens illegally voting in our elections, according to just-released information from the office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton concerning voter fraud!"
"Ask the Republican party, as they have the power to do so." Let me repeat: voting rolls are left up to the individual states. Voting by non-citizens is against Federal law. 18 USC 611
But it is up to the STATES to discover who is voting illegally. "Since 1996, a federal law has prohibited non-citizens from voting in federal elections, punishing them by fines, imprisonment, inadmissibility, and deportation"
My suggestion: Erect a sign at every polling place that reads: IF YOU ARE NOT A CITIZEN AND YOU VOTE WE WILL SHIP YOUR A** BACK TO YOUR HOME COUNTRY.

Carlos Ponce

RE: Steve Fouga May 17, 2018 12:05am
Actual voting by non-citizens compared to an "attempt" to influence which produced NO effects on the election. You sound like a hypocrite, Steve (Jan Brady) Fouga! "Russia, Russia, Russia!" NO effect on the election as determined by the Justice Department, the Senate Intelligence Committee, the House Intelligence Committee and Barack Hussein Obama. And the votes cast by non-citizens are MORE than a "few".

Jim Forsythe

This thread is about Mueller and the Russian investigation. If you want to talk about fraudulently voting, start a new thread.
As far as I know, Mueller has not found fraudulently voting, as part of Russia investigation.

Carlos Ponce

You must mean the clock is running out on the witch hunt, Diane.

Gary Miller

The Muller witch hunt started illegely. A crime to investigate is required for a special coulcle appointment. Muller was appointed to look for a crime but not the known crimes of HRC and Obama regime. What a two year Muller hunt for a crime has proved is the Trump administration is a lot more honest than the Obama administration was. Obama and his holdovers are the main criminal suspects. If the equality of law, elite vs commoner, is restored most of the convictions will be for Democrats of the Obama era.

Steve Fouga

"A crime to investigate is required for a special coulcle appointment."

Well, let's see. Here's the actual U.S. code governing the appointment of special counsel:

§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.

The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and

(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.

Given that several indictments have stemmed from the special counsel's appointment, it looks like Mr. Rosenstein has been vindicated for his action. I bet Mr. Mueller has a lot more proof of crimes than you think he does. But just be patient, and don't get too distracted by media reports. It'll all become clear over the next few years.

Gary Miller

Steve. The only thing The Mueller Investigation is doing is to run out the statute of limitations on Obama/HRC area crimes. Stalling and slow walking evidence until they can't be prosecuted for known crimes. Is that your idea of Equal Justice?Protecting the rich and powerful from justice?

Steve Fouga

No, it's not, Gary. I believe in equal justice. I guess I don't understand why Clinton and Trump investigations couldn't run concurrently. Why can't they? I'd just as soon see the Clintons investigated, if there's suspicion of crimes. Why aren't they being investigated? Maybe they are. If an investigation was begun prior to the statute of limitations, I believe any future indictments would be valid, even if they came after the statute expired. In other words, there's still time, and with a Republican administration they should be able to launch an investigation at will. Why haven't they?

George Croix

"...determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted."
Exactly. Criminal investigation.
Criminal.
As in, there's been a crime, now we need to see who's guilty.
It's NOT we've decided who to investigate, now let's see if there was a crime.
That's 3rd World cra_
Those 'several indictments' ....hmmmm....one was for supposedly lying to the FBI AFTER the investigation started, even though the FBI agents interviewing him said they did NOT think he was lying. Then, there are the 13 Russian companies/individuals 'indicted' by Mueller's team.....how very convenient, thinking that no way would any of that ever come across the pond to here, yet getting the usual suspects positively giddy with that 'Russian' thingy. Except NOW one of those companies DID lawyer up, sent them here, and are not only pleading not guilty, but demanding full access to ALL 'proof' of their guilt that led to an indictment as part of the discovery process.....uh oh.....didn't expect that to happen.....AND when the Mueller team tried to back off and delay that, the Judge says no no no...you guys INDICTED so that means you are supposed to not only have evidence of guilt but be ready for trial, so this will move ahead.....oooopppsss...wasn't supposed to happen...was just supposed to be a safe way to get some 'Russian' into the charges brought mix that would never see daylight after failing to find squat elsewhere.....
Expect more of the same.....except the KNOWN criminal activity will go untouched by this collection of investigators....
There should be no complaints about ANYBODY being legitimately investigated for any crime and then being held accountable....
This sham does not qualify for legitimacy.
If it can be done to one, it can be done to anybody...
That should concern everybody.....
That it does not, is way more telling and potentially harmful than some Russian hacking into the voter base of Bugtussle, AR.
Oddly, the worry by the usual suspects is that the Russians may have compromised the results of an election, without any actual proof the outcome would have been any different, yet every single day the 'resistance' goes out of it's way to compromise the results of that election.
Can't confuse 'em with facts...their minds are made up....

Steve Fouga

Tampering with an election is a federal crime, whether the outcome is affected or not. Sort of like shooting at someone is a crime whether you hit them or not.

Here's Mueller's remit, to refresh our memories about the hugely broad scope of his investigation:

The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James B. Comey in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:

(i) any links and/or coordination between 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).

(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters. . . . .

Carlos Ponce

Steve Fouga: "Tampering with an election is a federal crime, whether the outcome is affected or not."
Does that mean Barack Obama will be held responsible with trying to tamper with the Israeli election? [whistling]

George Croix

Steve, so far, it's only considered a crime if you voted for the guy who won.....

George Croix

ps:
Question:
Tampering? A wide open term if ever there was one.
Would that include ANY contact with an election that is intended to sway an outcome, even if it does not?
Unless an effort was made to physically change the vote(s) of, well, voters, then it's toothless and meaningless as a practical matter, subject to whim.
So far, the ultimate tamper, the weeks of hanging chads, and lawsuits to only count part of the votes while claiming to want to count them all, would seem to have been REAL tampering.
Look out, Al.....

Steve Fouga

George, "tampering" is my word; I don't know what the legal term is. I've seen "meddling" used a lot. Also "interference." All are vague.

George Croix

Gary, what could possibly be wrong about a fired FBI Director, who had some really odd ideas about how to conduct an investigation by deciding unilaterally to cover his boss's and his boss's boss' but_s the outcome of a much greater malfeasance case involving thousands of national security issues, before even interviewing the principal, arranging to leak classified information such that ultimately a special counsel would be empowered, said counsel just happening to be the fired FBI guys close friend, then going on a book tour to make more pre-emptive strikes to sway opinion on favor of that counsel, knowing full well he, himself, will never be held accountable for such behavior.
Just another day at the BHO DOJ.... [rolleyes]

Mike Zeller

Mueller's answer for all you guys who want to shut down this investigation. " You Don't Know, What You Don't Know."

George Croix

That's very true, Mike.
The only thing we know is that there hasn't been doodley squat shown for 16 months...that does not mean there is nothing just waiting to drop right about, oh, a couple days before the mid-terms....coincidentally, of course.....
It would be a legitimate investigation, imo, or at least less illegitimate, to go after ALL of the connections to Russian involvement into the 2016 election, especially the ones they don't even have to hunt for. Problem is, indicting the Russians themselves is pretty much like indicting the Man in the Moon, even if evidence abounds, because they don't have to pay any attention to us, if they choose not to.
It's a bit eye opening that one indicted-by-Mueller's team Russian company has attorneys that showed up here to fight the indictment, and the team tried to get that delayed. Why? If they're guilty, and an indictment is made only when evidence of guilt exists, then why the push back...why not hole up in Russia....be interesting to see what comes out of discovery
As such, I'd like to see Mueller, already loose among us anyway and with a toothless AG afraid of his own shadow, push Pandora's lid all the way open and branch out but stay on track with the original hunting scope...No more looking for anybody wearing a MAGA cap who ever had a salad with Russian dressing on it.....
Let's hold some bipartisan hangings......

Steve Fouga

George says: "I'd like to see Mueller, already loose among us anyway and with a toothless AG afraid of his own shadow, push Pandora's lid all the way open and branch out but stay on track with the original hunting scope..."

Thumbs UP! TEN thumbs up! [thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup][thumbup]

George Croix

You left out the bipartisan hangings.....
That's like leaving the bananas out of the banana pudding....

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thank you for Reading!

Please log in, or sign up for a new account and purchase a subscription to read or post comments.