Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Quin_Dub · 05-12-2018 11:13am

Igotadose wrote: »

Discussion of the offer of the penthouse to Putin is a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. I remember when I worked for a multinational how they, every year, drilled us about this. You can't offer *anything* at all without vetting it through your legal department, in advance, and getting approval, is what I learned. A pen, a pad of paper, whatever. No gifts to any foreign business contacts outside the company. Don't pay for meals. Nada.

Trumpco of course has only the best people, some of whom are now at the reigns of the USG, they'd never violate the FCPA. Note that violations don't actually have to include the act of donating/giving whatever. Just corrupt intent, which is why you never offer anything.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-putin-fcpa-moscow-project-cohen_us_5c06b70ee4b066b5cfa6885d

BTW, it might not be Trump himself is in violation, just the underlings that did the deed (was there a letter? email? something? that records this?) And in the maelstrom of corruption and criminality that surrounds Trump and TrumpCo, this is small potatoes.

Congress and the USG will be after Trump and TrumpCo for years long after he's gone from the WH.

I mean it's not like Trump has ever said that the anti-bribery law was "ridiculous, a horrible law that made it difficult for U.S. companies to compete overseas." or anything...

But the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bars businesses from paying bribes to overseas officials, remains a key part of U.S. efforts to combat global corruption.

Now one study is showing the Trump administration's use of the law may be declining, even as administration officials say they're committed to enforcing it.

When the law was first passed, the United States was something of an outlier because many other governments did little to stop bribery. Over time, however, attitudes changed. Today, governments around the world are much more likely to cooperate in pursuing wrongdoers.

Still, the 1977 law has its critics, like Trump, who say companies can't compete when barred from paying bribes in places where doing so is routine.

"Now, every other country goes into these places, and they do what they have to do. It's a horrible law and it should be changed. I mean, we're like the policeman for the world. It's ridiculous," Trump said in a 2012 interview on CNBC.

Such comments have raised questions about the Trump administration's interest in enforcing the law.

mcmoustache · 05-12-2018 11:35am

Captain Obvious wrote: »

Flynn gives "substantial cooperation" to prosecutors. Mueller recommends no jail time. A Redditor gives a full breakdown of his activities.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/04/politics/flynn-mueller-filing/

Not a good 24 hours for Trump.

What has me somewhat confused is Flynn's behaviour over the past year or so. From the filing last night, we know that he has been fully cooperating so much that Mueller wants to let him completely off the hook. On the other hand, he has been full MAGA at public events and retweeting QAnon nonsense.

I got the impression from the filing that Flynn went above and beyond in terms of his cooperation so it doesn't make sense to me that he would do that while still red-capping in public.

On the other hand, his plea agreement from last year does contain this interesting bit:

(a) Your client shall cooperate fully, truthfully, completely, and forthrightly with this Office and other Federal, state, and local law enforcement authorities identified by this Office in any and all matters as to which this Office deems the cooperation relevant. Your client acknowledges that your client's cooperation may include, but will not necessarily be limited to: answering questions; providing sworn written statements; taking government administered polygraph examination(s); and participating in covert law enforcement activities.

I wonder if the red-capping over the past year was just an act? I'll keep an eye on his and his son't twitter to see if there's any change now that the cat's out of the bag.

everlast75 · 05-12-2018 12:14pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

What has me somewhat confused is Flynn's behaviour over the past year or so. From the filing last night, we know that he has been fully cooperating so much that Mueller wants to let him completely off the hook. On the other hand, he has been full MAGA at public events and retweeting QAnon nonsense.

I got the impression from the filing that Flynn went above and beyond in terms of his cooperation so it doesn't make sense to me that he would do that while still red-capping in public.

On the other hand, his plea agreement from last year does contain this interesting bit:

I wonder if the red-capping over the past year was just an act? I'll keep an eye on his and his son't twitter to see if there's any change now that the cat's out of the bag.

I think so. Mueller values secrecy and it would appear for example with Cohen, that he does not like others to know what is going on behind closed doors. Keeping up appearances I guess fits into that M.O.

I think there may have been two cards played with Flynn in terms of securing his unadulterated co-operation, given that he apparently was only facing 6 months.

I think they played his legacy as a US officer and asked if he wanted to be remembered as a guy who sold out his Country after all his service.

Secondly, I reckon his son is on the hook for something serious, and he wanted to ensure his safety.

This is speculation on my part, but I too was mystified at the complete 180 in terms of his chants of "lock her up" to cooperating utterly with Mueller, and others.

prawnsambo · 05-12-2018 12:23pm

everlast75 wrote: »

Secondly, I reckon his son is on the hook for something serious, and he wanted to ensure his safety.

I don't know if you've read this, but (and it's pretty damn out there) it suggests the same thing. It's a year old, but so far it's still stacking up. Only time will tell if it's accurate.

Senior law enforcement officials presented Donald Trump’s former National Security adviser, already indicted at the time for failure to register as a foreign agent of Turkey, with irrefutable evidence of espionage committed on behalf of the Russian state by both himself and his son and business partner, Mike Flynn Jr. Espionage is a capital crime.

Penn · 05-12-2018 12:32pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

What has me somewhat confused is Flynn's behaviour over the past year or so. From the filing last night, we know that he has been fully cooperating so much that Mueller wants to let him completely off the hook. On the other hand, he has been full MAGA at public events and retweeting QAnon nonsense.

I got the impression from the filing that Flynn went above and beyond in terms of his cooperation so it doesn't make sense to me that he would do that while still red-capping in public.
I wonder if the red-capping over the past year was just an act? I'll keep an eye on his and his son't twitter to see if there's any change now that the cat's out of the bag.

I'd say it's more likely that he still fully believes in Trump and what Trump is doing and is still a MAGAholic, but that he also recognises how deep a sh*theap he (and possibly his son) is in and co-operating fully is his best chance of staying out of jail and having some semblance of a comfortable life going forward. That's why so many have flipped on Trump; as much as they believe in him or saw him as their golden goose, they know if they stick with him too long they'll go down with the ship.

Penn · 05-12-2018 12:37pm

Also, not sure on the accuracy of this as it's just something I saw on Twitter yesterday, but regarding Roger Stone pleading the 5th Amendment, is it true that that only protects you from having to give testimony, but doesn't protect you from having to submit documents? As in Stone may still be forced to provide documentary evidence if asked and the 5th amendment doesn't protect him from that. Haven't had a chance to look it up myself.

amandstu · 05-12-2018 1:28pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

I mean it's not like Trump has ever said that the anti-bribery law was "ridiculous, a horrible law that made it difficult for U.S. companies to compete overseas." or anything...

I think that quote (that I was unaware of) goes to the heart of his and his cronies' putrid mindset.

Not to say that the giving of gifts is not justifiably engrained into all cultures but I think most of us know when we have stepped in a piece of sh** whereas some of us seem to use them as stepping stones.

Itssoeasy · 05-12-2018 1:34pm

This whole Trump presidency has been an out of control landfill fire, but I found Rudolph gulianni and his stupid conspiracy theory about twitter about g20.In funny when it was clearly taken to be a link of some kind by twitter because Rudy didn't make a proper space between the full stop of one sentence and the start of the other.

aloyisious · 05-12-2018 1:37pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

On the other hand, his plea agreement from last year does contain this interesting bit:

I wonder if the red-capping over the past year was just an act? I'll keep an eye on his and his son't twitter to see if there's any change now that the cat's out of the bag.

Double-agenting wearing a wire?

B0jangles · 05-12-2018 1:39pm

Itssoeasy wrote: »

This whole Trump presidency has been an out of control landfill fire, but I found Rudolph gulianni and his stupid conspiracy theory about twitter about g20.In funny when it was clearly taken to be a link of some kind by twitter because Rudy didn't make a proper space between the full stop of one sentence and the start of the other.

And Rudy was supposed to be Trump's Cyber-Security Expert.

It's almost too perfect.

aloyisious · 05-12-2018 1:52pm

[HTML][/HTML]

prawnsambo wrote: »

I don't know if you've read this, but (and it's pretty damn out there) it suggests the same thing. It's a year old, but so far it's still stacking up. Only time will tell if it's accurate.

From Huffpost Dec 2017. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/michael-flynn-will-keep-military-rank-and-pension_us_5a219b9fe4b0a02abe90ff61

Now if Gen Flynn was still on the General Staff "officers liable for active duty while retired" list it might make a difference as to whom could in theory try him on a capital charge of espionage, and terminate his federal defence pension abruptly.

mcmoustache · 05-12-2018 1:53pm

prawnsambo wrote: »

I don't know if you've read this, but (and it's pretty damn out there) it suggests the same thing. It's a year old, but so far it's still stacking up. Only time will tell if it's accurate.

If Mensch's Patribotics report is correct, it's probably coincidental. I don't think she has been right about much anything since the story about the dns lookups to alpha-bank. As I said, the report could well be correct but she's a terrible source.

everlast75 · 05-12-2018 2:31pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Double-agenting wearing a wire?

Apparently RR floated that idea in the story that broke when removal of the president was discussed, so possible?

everlast75 · 05-12-2018 2:36pm

Penn wrote: »

Also, not sure on the accuracy of this as it's just something I saw on Twitter yesterday, but regarding Roger Stone pleading the 5th Amendment, is it true that that only protects you from having to give testimony, but doesn't protect you from having to submit documents? As in Stone may still be forced to provide documentary evidence if asked and the 5th amendment doesn't protect him from that. Haven't had a chance to look it up myself.

Good explanation from a solid professional

https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1070083530150043649?s=19

aloyisious · 05-12-2018 2:44pm

RTE is discussing the Mueller investigation with a US journalist and it seems that Rob Mueller has asked the judge hearing the Flynn case NOT to impose jail-time on the general as he has been cooperating with the investigation. I don't know if the request is par for the course to avoid a charge of bias or means the general has rolled and provided Mueller info beneficial to his investigation and he wants to keep Flynn onside while unsettling the usual suspects.

Gwen Cooper · 05-12-2018 2:49pm

aloyisious wrote: »

RTE is discussing the Mueller investigation with a US journalist and it seems that Rob Mueller has asked the judge hearing the Flynn case NOT to impose jail-time on the general as he has been cooperating with the investigation. I don't know if the request is par for the course to avoid a charge of bias or means the general has rolled and provided Mueller info beneficial to his investigation and he wants to keep Flynn onside while unsettling the usual suspects.

It's probably a message to the others - cooperate and I'll be nice.

Quin_Dub · 05-12-2018 2:51pm

aloyisious wrote: »

RTE is discussing the Mueller investigation with a US journalist and it seems that Rob Mueller has asked the judge hearing the Flynn case NOT to impose jail-time on the general as he has been cooperating with the investigation. I don't know if the request is par for the course to avoid a charge of bias or means the general has rolled and provided Mueller info beneficial to his investigation and he wants to keep Flynn onside while unsettling the usual suspects.

There are a few things about the Mueller submission on Flynn that are very interesting.

One is obviously that he's recommending no jail time for Flynn which suggests that Flynn has given up everything and everyone that he knows.

The other is that the submission lists 3 active cases that Flynn is helping with and that the "Russian Collusion" case is listed 2nd out of three with the 1st being described as a Criminal Case with the details redacted and the 3rd not being described at all.

The size of the redacted sections suggests that the 2 unknown cases are substantial and significant ( given that the redacted sections are both larger than the text plus redactions for the Russian Collusion section).

What (or who) does Flynn know about that has not yet been made public??

aloyisious · 05-12-2018 3:04pm

Quin_Dub wrote: »

There are a few things about the Mueller submission on Flynn that are very interesting.

One is obviously that he's recommending no jail time for Flynn which suggests that Flynn has given up everything and everyone that he knows.

The other is that the submission lists 3 active cases that Flynn is helping with and that the "Russian Collusion" case is listed 2nd out of three with the 1st being described as a Criminal Case with the details redacted and the 3rd not being described at all.

The size of the redacted sections suggests that the 2 unknown cases are substantial and significant ( given that the redacted sections are both larger than the text plus redactions for the Russian Collusion section).

What (or who) does Flynn know about that has not yet been made public??

I'm mindful of the reports from some months back where Don was allegedly walking around the W/W doubting the reliability of all those working there. I can just imagine the effect on Don if he got the idea in his head that staffers were recording what he [or his family members] was saying.

mcmoustache · 05-12-2018 3:10pm

Penn wrote: »

Also, not sure on the accuracy of this as it's just something I saw on Twitter yesterday, but regarding Roger Stone pleading the 5th Amendment, is it true that that only protects you from having to give testimony, but doesn't protect you from having to submit documents? As in Stone may still be forced to provide documentary evidence if asked and the 5th amendment doesn't protect him from that. Haven't had a chance to look it up myself.

On the face of it, the 5th protects you from incriminating testimony but not from submitting documents. There's a grey area, however, where the act of production provides information that wasn't in the hands of prosecutors.

Under the Act of Production Doctrine, the act of an individual in producing documents or materials (e.g., in response to a subpoena) may have a "testimonial aspect" for purposes of the individual's right to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination to the extent that the individual's act of production provides information not already in the hands of law enforcement personnel about the (1) existence; (2) custody; or (3) authenticity, of the documents or materials produced.

mcmoustache · 05-12-2018 3:12pm

aloyisious wrote: »

Double-agenting wearing a wire?

He could be asked to do so or to record his phone conversations as part of the plea deal. That's not to say that it happened - just that he could have been.

prawnsambo · 05-12-2018 3:16pm

aloyisious wrote: »

RTE is discussing the Mueller investigation with a US journalist and it seems that Rob Mueller has asked the judge hearing the Flynn case NOT to impose jail-time on the general as he has been cooperating with the investigation. I don't know if the request is par for the course to avoid a charge of bias or means the general has rolled and provided Mueller info beneficial to his investigation and he wants to keep Flynn onside while unsettling the usual suspects.

It seems that the "no charges" are in relation to relatively minor offences. 'Relatively' because according to the timeline posted earlier, he could well be charged with more serious offences.

serfboard · 05-12-2018 3:24pm

aloyisious wrote: »

I'm mindful of the reports from some months back where Don was allegedly walking around the W/W doubting the reliability of all those working there. I can just imagine the effect on Don if he got the idea in his head that staffers were recording what he [or his family members] was saying.

Yep, this is also reflected in what he is saying about Mike Pence:

The New York Times wrote:

In one conversation after another he has asked aides and advisers a pointed question: Is Mike Pence loyal?

Mr. Trump has repeated the question so many times that he has alarmed some of his advisers.

A paranoid narcissist who sees betrayal and disloyalty everywhere.

In other words, thinking that everyone around him is just like himself.

TomOnBoard · 05-12-2018 3:47pm

I don't know if this was posted earlier and I missed it.

If its a dup. pls advise..

Anyway, Rudi seemingly failed to insert a space in a tweet after the G-20 meeting and set himself up for some very embarassing consequences. I'll leave it to yeerselves to judge...

"Mueller filed an indictment just as the President left for http://G-20.In July he indicted the Russians who will never come here just before he left for Helsinki.Either could have been done earlier or later. Out of control!Supervision please?"

For full story, see WaPo here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2018/12/05/rudy-giulianis-typo-became-an-anti-trump-message-he-blamed-twitter-this-atlanta-man-pranked-him/?utm_term=.9e96f48993cb

Generally another tour de force from Trump's Cyber-Security Czar...

prawnsambo · 05-12-2018 3:48pm

serfboard wrote: »

Yep, this is also reflected in what he is saying about Mike Pence:
A paranoid narcissist who sees betrayal and disloyalty everywhere.

In other words, thinking that everyone around him is just like himself.

Mike Pence is just about the only person he can't fire.

prawnsambo · 05-12-2018 3:54pm

@TomOnBoard Yep it's a dupe. See post #69

dr.fuzzenstein · 05-12-2018 3:57pm

http://g-20.in/
No matter how often I click it, it never gets old.

demfad · 05-12-2018 4:06pm

Part of the Flynn Memo refers to “related firsthand witnesses” being “forthcoming” after Flynn flipped. "Firsthand Witnesses". Who are they? And First hand witnesses to what or whom? Interesting.

aloyisious · 05-12-2018 4:21pm

demfad wrote: »

Part of the Flynn Memo refers to “related firsthand witnesses” being “forthcoming” after Flynn flipped. "Firsthand Witnesses". Who are they? And First hand witnesses to what or whom? Interesting.

Plus the use of the term "related", meaning to an event or family ties.

Water John · 05-12-2018 4:24pm

When you see Flynn getting a pass from Mueller for what he had done in exchange for cooperation, one must assume he has put some very senior people in the spotlight.

Penn · 05-12-2018 5:24pm

Water John wrote: »

When you see Flynn getting a pass from Mueller for what he had done in exchange for cooperation, one must assume he has put some very senior people in the spotlight.

Well I think as prawnsambo pointed out earlier, the charges he's getting a pass from are fairly minor ones. We don't know how some of the more serious charges which are likely to be brought against him might play out.

prawnsambo wrote: »

It seems that the "no charges" are in relation to relatively minor offences. 'Relatively' because according to the timeline posted earlier, he could well be charged with more serious offences.

He could still be facing sentences, though possibly reduced or suspended if indeed he's still helping with catching the bigger fish.

Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

Comments