Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Trump Transition Team Lawyer: Mueller improperly grabbed tens of thousands of transition docs

Trump Transition Team Lawyer: Mueller improperly grabbed tens of thousands of transition docs

Deep State: “career staff at the General Services Administration … have unlawfully produced [transition team] private materials, including privileged communications, to the Special Counsel’s Office.”

On December 3, 2017, when it became clear from the plea of Michael Flynn that Robert Mueller was heavily focused on post-election political decision making of the Trump transition team, I asked, Why is Robert Mueller even investigating the presidential transition?

It is clear from the prosecution of Flynn that Mueller views the transition as within the scope of Mueller’s investigation, otherwise there would have been no reason for Mueller to prosecute Flynn…. The public documents regarding Flynn’s plea make clear that the transition is in focus.

If news reports have any credibility (and they may not), then Mueller is investigating the political actions of the Trump transition team during the transition period.

What authority, however, gives Mueller power to investigate the political strategies of the incoming Trump administration long after the election was over? It does not appear that Mueller has that power under the Order appointing him as Special Counsel….

To the extent Mueller’s team is investigating the political decisions and strategies of the incoming Trump administration during the transition period, it amounts to an interference in the post-election political process and is beyond Mueller’s authority.

Earlier today, Mike Allen at Axios reported a scoop that made clear Mueller was focused on the transition, Scoop: Mueller obtains “tens of thousands” of Trump transition emails:

Special Counsel Robert Mueller has obtained “many tens of thousands” of Trump transition emails, including emails of Jared Kushner, transition team sources tell Axios.

  • Trump officials discovered Mueller had the emails when his prosecutors used them as the basis for questions to witnesses, the sources said.
  • The emails include 12 accounts, one of which contains about 7,000 emails, the sources said.
  • The accounts include the team’s political leadership and the foreign-policy team, the sources said.

Why it matters: The transition emails are said to include sensitive exchanges on matters that include potential appointments, gossip about the views of particular senators involved in the confirmation process, speculation about vulnerabilities of Trump nominees, strategizing about press statements, and policy planning on everything from war to taxes.

  • “Mueller is using the emails to confirm things, and get new leads,” a transition source told me.

How it happened: The sources say Mueller obtained the emails from the General Services Administration, the government agency that hosted the transition email system, which had addresses ending in “ptt.gov,” for Presidential Transition Team.

Now both Fox News and Axios are reporting that the lawyer for the Trump transition team is accusing Mueller of having improperly obtained the documents.

From Fox News:

A lawyer for the Trump presidential transition team is accusing Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s office of inappropriately obtaining transition documents as part of its Russia probe, including confidential attorney-client communications, privileged communications and thousands of emails.

In a letter obtained by Fox News and sent to House and Senate committees on Saturday, the transition team’s attorney alleges “unlawful conduct” by the career staff at the General Services Administration in handing over transition documents to the special counsel’s office.

The transition legal team argues it could be a violation of the 4th Amendment – which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Kory Langhofer, the counsel to Trump for America, wrote in Saturday’s letter that the GSA “did not own or control the records in question.”

Langhofer said the special counsel’s office received “tens of thousands of emails” from the GSA as well as certain laptops and cell phones containing privileged materials.

The transition attorney said they discovered the “unauthorized disclosures” by the GSA on December 12th and 13th and raised concerns with the special counsel’s office.

“We understand that the special counsel’s office has subsequently made extensive use of the materials it obtained from the GSA, including materials that are susceptible to privilege claims,” Langhofer writes.

Trump for America is the nonprofit organization that facilitated the transition between former President Barack Obama to President Trump.

Axios reports in an update:

Charging “unlawful conduct,” Kory Langhofer, counsel for the transition team, wrote in a letter to congressional committees Saturday that “career staff at the General Services Administration … have unlawfully produced [transition team] private materials, including privileged communications, to the Special Counsel’s Office.”

  • The seven-page later, obtained by Axios, says: “We understand that the Special Counsel’s Office has subsequently made extensive use of the materials it obtained from the GSA, including materials that are susceptible to privilege claims.”
  • The letter says this was a violation of Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure.
  • “Additionally, certain portions of the [transition] materials the Special Counsel’s Office obtained from the GSA, including materials that are susceptible to privilege claims, have been leaked to the press by unknown persons.”

The Special Counsel’s office said: “We will decline to comment.”

The transition sources said they were surprised about the emails because they have been in touch with Mueller’s team and have cooperated.

The twist: The sources say that transition officials assumed that Mueller would come calling, and had sifted through the emails and separated the ones they considered privileged. But the sources said that was for naught, since Mueller has the complete cache from the dozen accounts.

This is sure to escalate the situation, and has all the appearances of impropriety by the Special Counsel’s office. We will update as more becomes known.

Once again, however, this shows how Mueller is going beyond his mandate and investigating post-election politics and political decisions of an incoming administration.

Perhaps this is why rumors started swirling on Capitol Hill that Mueller would be fired.

UPDATE: Letter from transaction team lawyer is here.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

regulus arcturus | December 16, 2017 at 6:21 pm

Wouldn’t this disqualify use of any of this info in proceedings as fruit of the poisonous tree?

    No……lol…….for a simple reason. It’s completely legal. In fact, it’s completely normal for a white collar case

      Connivin Caniff in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 7:23 pm

      Explain how theft is legal.

        It’s public information, on a public government server? They’re not private e-mails.

          SDN in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 7:37 pm

          Except that it isn’t public information. Until 12 noon Jan 20, Donald Trump and his transition team aren’t government officials.

          regulus arcturus in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 7:40 pm

          No.

          These were government-loaned servers, and none of Trumps team using them had been sworn in for any official duty.

          Fail to see how this would be considered “public” in any way, since users were still private citizens at the time.

      SDN in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 7:42 pm

      I see you went to Obama’s Con Law class. 4th Amendment, dipstick.

      Barry in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 9:40 pm

      After reading down thread all of CeejJ comments –

      It is a f’ing commie moron, just another of the hired idiots paid to spread lunacy on threads.

      It goes by other names like yellowsnake, etc.

In litigation the law has moved quickly to place obligations on any attorney who may have received privileged communications from his adversary. I suppose the “special” counsel will spend millions of taxpayer dollars to argue that he is not bound by such rules, which are meant to apply only to non-special lawyers.

    puhiawa in reply to Rick. | December 16, 2017 at 7:19 pm

    However the Rules of Professional ethics have a separate and distinct obligation and this is unethical. Rule 1.6, I believe.

      CeejJ in reply to puhiawa. | December 16, 2017 at 7:28 pm

      You know nothing about the law. It’s perfectly standard for prosecutors to go to 3rd parties to get e-mails for white collar prosecutions. It mainly happens when they think the defendants are destroying/withholding evidence, and obstructing justice

        SDN in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 7:41 pm

        Not without subpoenas and warrants, they can’t. Basic 4th Amendment.

          Pachase in reply to SDN. | December 17, 2017 at 12:02 am

          Anyone with a .gov email address sign papers indicating that there is “NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY GRANTED OR IMPLIED” with regards to any emails sent or received from that account.

          Every email sent or received from a .gov email account is LITERALLY the property of the American people.

          There is no way that any 4th Amendment rights were violated. The 4th Amendment states:

          The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

          The key word is “THEIR” persons, houses, papers, and effects. Emails sent to/from a .gov account do NOT belong to the sender. They belong to us…the American people.

          SDN in reply to SDN. | December 17, 2017 at 5:59 pm

          You really need to read the actual laws governing the transition teams: The Presidential Transition Act of 1963, as amended, provides that a presidential transition must be
          organized as a “separate fund” and operated as a private social welfare corporation pursuant to
          section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code. See 3 U.S.C. § 2 note § 3(h)(3)(A).

          “The National Archives recently advised that “[t]he materials that [presidential transition team]
          members create or receive are not Federal or Presidential records, but are considered private
          materials.” ”

          The National Archives is the statutory agency that defines Federal records. These aren’t.

          Oh, and do you have a screen shot showing that warning on the transition team computers? No screenshot, no apply.

        Paul in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 7:45 pm

        Welcome. I suggest you exercise caution when showing your ass around here. You’re likely to get it handed to you.

        Barry in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 9:42 pm

        CeejJ is an idiot.

        fulldroolcup in reply to CeejJ. | December 17, 2017 at 12:08 pm

        CeeJ, perhaps you can explain why Hillary Clinton, when subpoenaed by Comey, argued that the emails on that private server of hers were privileged, how she was able to cull out the ones she felt were personal, how she sent only innocuous email to Comey, how she managed to get her advisors to bleachbit the server and destroy the laptops they were sent on, etc —-all w/o her being charged with numerous felonies.

        If what Comey did was legal, then why did Hillary skate? If Comey didn’t require a subpoena, why did he issue one and thereby alert Hillary that he wanted that info?

        puhiawa in reply to CeejJ. | December 18, 2017 at 12:03 pm

        Actually I do know a bit about the law. And a great deal about subpoenas. I also happen to have a passing acquaintance with the obligations of an attorney that inadvertently acquires attorney client communications. The first of which is to immediately notify the opposing attorney of the same.

      puhiawa: There must be an ethical rule that applies. I am not sure that Rule 1.6 is applicable beyond an attorney’s obligation to his own client. I may be wrong.

        puhiawa in reply to Rick. | December 18, 2017 at 12:07 pm

        1.6 has 8 or so subsections in our State. I believe one less in the model and Federal code. The last section deals with communications in the hands of another.

I think they were hoping to find smoking guns such as emails to the Russians saying something like, “Trump intends to fulfil his blood oath of fealty to Gospodin Putin and thanks him for ensuring that the Crooked Hillary votes were manipulated enough to ensure his win.”, or messages in between the transition team saying things like, “As previously agreed with the Russians…” or “Our early 2016 commitment to the Russians have ensured their help in winning our election so we must be planning for taking care of their earlier expressed needs.”

Perhaps they were looking for the email in which President-Elect Trump Says “As I said….I will have more flexibility after the election”.

Perhaps this just continues the trend.
Every “investigation” thus far has been used as a pretext to spy on Trump, first as candidate then as president-elect. Who says Mueller isn’t gathering up intelligence on president Trump in real time?

Unethical. Mueller is unethical.

It’s kind of sad when legal-minds decide they can make far more money being far-right conspiracy theorists. The fact that they’re using the word “improperly” (which means absolutely nothing, in legal terms) should tell you this is just garbage

Of course, my other theory is that Mueller’s investigation is meant to stymie prosecution of Democrats. First by tying up Trump in a PR morass, secondly by collecting and destroying incriminating evidence against Hillary.

“Improper use” means absolutely nothing, in legal terms. It basically means “we’re angry that he has the e-mails”……………..

Connivin Caniff | December 16, 2017 at 7:17 pm

It isn’t just “inappropriately obtaining transition documents” or an ethics issue: it is theft, pure and simple, which is a crime. Prosecute all responsible parties, as one would when dealing with us Deplorables.

Errr…….firstly the e-mails were from a public, governmental server. They’re not private e-mails. If team Trump were dumb enough (probably) to send incriminating e-mails using a public, governmental server, then they deserve to go to prison. Secondly, it’s perfectly normal for a prosecutor to go to a governmental 3rd party to get e-mails.

    regulus arcturus in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 7:43 pm

    Wrong.

    These were government-loaned servers, and none of Trump’s team using them had been sworn in for any official duty.

    They were private citizens, not government officials at that time.

    A subpoena is required.

    Merlin01 in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 10:22 pm

    Again you use Hillary’s tactic and mistakes as possible criminality of behalf of Trump and Russia. Just because Hillary was that stupid doesn’t mean Trump is stupid too!

    Just stop digging you fool!

Humphrey's Executor | December 16, 2017 at 7:22 pm

With the help of the Democrats, the Russians have been successful in disrupting our democratic processes far beyond their wildest dreams.

The fact that they’re using the world “improperly” (which means absolutely nothing, legally) should tell you the complaint is for the media (Fox, Breitbart) and the right wing traitors/conspiracy theorists (Ron Coleman, Infowars etc). You know, people keen for Mueller to go away.

Truth is, it seems Mueller went to a 3rd party (perfectly legally) because he didn’t team Trump to give him everything. And it seems Team Trump are so upset, because they were in fact trying to hide certain e-mails from Mueller (which he now has!)

    Err, saying the same thing for the fourth time in 24 comments on this story isn’t going to get any more traction than saying it once.

    Barry in reply to CeejJ. | December 16, 2017 at 9:52 pm

    CeejJ, you need to raise your hand in that room of typists you’re sitting in, and ask the boss for some help.

    Here, you’re just getting your ass handed to you. See if you can get some help from a professional commie.

    Oh, and while they are helping you out, ask them to explain how crooked Clinton is not guilty of violating the law you spoke of earlier.

    You remember, where you stated “Err, public officials aren’t allowed private e-mails.”.

    You’ll need some salve to put on that as well.

All of this investigationing stems from one thing – Trump’s refusal to make his private income tax returns available to the state co;trolled media. This what they are really after. The Russian collusion thing is just a smoke screen.

Am I the only one who is getting scared that everything Mueller collects will be considered poisonous fruit? How will they prosecute Team Hillary and FBI if they say that everything Mueller collected is tainted?

IIRC, in Nov 2016, Trump told the NYT that he was no longer interested in pursuing Mrs. Clinton, in part because he wanted to heal the wounds of a divisive campaign. It will be a real travesty if they are just playing us to collect and bury every single lead that would allow us to put criminals in jail.

    I hear you, elle, but rest easy. There is no way in hell Mueller would ever go after the Clintons. Period.

    Do you think Comey and Mueller and every FBI director going back to the Clinton presidency don’t know the corruption and dirty dealings of the Clintons? They know it–and all of the disgusting details–better than we do!

    When he said he didn’t want to pursue Hillary, Trump was trying to avoid what is happening right now. He called off the idea of going after Hillary because he thought that they would not go after him. Quid pro quo. He was wrong. Dead wrong.

    In short, fret not about Mueller’s integrity being blown; he has little to begin with, and it’s growing more scant by the day. It matters not because he had ample opportunity, as did Comey, to investigate the Clinton racket, and he did not. Mueller headed up the FBI during the Bush years, so it’s not like Obama, Holder, and Lynch were the roadblocks.

    Sessions would go after her in a New York minute.

      Well, I hope you are right. It’s clear that something is not right with how this is all going down and my fear is not that Mueller won’t prosecute the Clintons. He won’t for all the reasons you say. My fear is that Mueller and his team will improperly obtain ALL of the evidence to prosecute the Clintons, every single scrap of it, and then when Sessions or someone else DOES try to prosecute the Clintons (and all of the other corrupt FBI, DOJ, etc.) that they will say, “Oooh, I’m sorry, that evidence was discovered as poisoned fruit in the Mueller investigation and you can’t use it now”.

      Is it a ridiculous idea that Mueller could discover all of the useful evidence making it poison fruit that would have to be thrown out? I don’t know. Hopefully that’s not possible.

      so I guess my question is, if the Mueller investigation is hopelessly compromised and they and the information that Mueller gathers in on Trump poison fruit, why isn’t the information Mueller gathers on Hillary (and corrupt officials) poison fruit as well?

        SDN in reply to elle. | December 17, 2017 at 6:02 pm

        Elle, what is going to be raised is the necessity to prove that this information would have been found regardless.

          elle in reply to SDN. | December 17, 2017 at 10:48 pm

          I suppose it would be difficult to say that most of it would not have been found, which is a relief.

          I hit the down arrow instead of “reply” and I can’t change it. I give you an up arrow 🙂

Wow.

If this is what I think it looks like … then Mueller has been handed a yuge hand grenade. In fact, so yuge that I might suspect he was set up. Someone set a booby trap, and Mueller stepped right in it.

Just … wow.

As someone who as been involved in white collar criminal investigations, let me share my thought son this matter.

First of all, the transition team materials were not public documents or records and should not have been released without the permission of the transition team management, DJT or under a search warrant, subpoena or other court order.

If they were turned over to the SC, without said permission or pursuant to a court order, then they can not be used as evidence against Trump or any member of the transition team. And any investigative leads which they may provide can not be legally used and any evidence produced as the result of said leads would likely be fruit of the poisonous tree and inadmissible in a court of law.

Now, in all of the investigations, of similar type, in which I was involved, documents and other materials were always obtained from a third party under a subpoena or search warrant. The same as they would be obtained from the actual owner of the property. This guaranteed that the material and any evidence obtained as a result of leads provided by the material would not be suppressed in court. Depending upon what information was turned over to Mueller, this might well have killed the investigation.

Now, it is entirely likely that there is nothing in these documents which is evidence of any collusion between Trump, his associates and the Russian government. There might well be nothing in them which would lead to any such evidence. But, Mueller is not worried about presenting a criminal prosecution which would be successful. He is simply gathering material which can be used to harm Trump, and his associates, if leaked to a willing media.

One of the best blogs I follow is the Conservative Treehouse and they have been discussing this latest development quite thoroughly. Go to https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/12/16/digging-ugly-holes-robert-mueller-team-illegally-obtained-trump-transition-team-emails/ and enjoy. The Mueller team has been set up quite well.

If they used any of that, and it’s likely they did, to charge Flynn with perjury, he should withdraw his plea. His lawyers should be looking at the evidence against him very carefully.

Ok, taking a step back. (Non lawyer with some .gov experience)

The GSA transition office pops up every four years, and sets up an entire ‘President-in-waiting’ apparatus, from offices to phones to computers to email addresses AS government property. GSA owns it all, and this allows the incoming president-elect to operate outside of the existing government Executive Office servers until D-Day, when the outgoing administration accounts are all archived, and the new accounts are rolled over from the GSA servers in one big blorp.

Incoming administration email and records are subject to governmental retention and access policy if sent/received from the office of the president-elect. That still means privileged lawyer-client and (whatever the technical term for internal policy discussions with the President) documents are NOT for just handing out to the investigation. Mueller’s investigation certainly seems to have stomped fairly solidly on this rake, but PART of the blame should have been put on the Trump team for not taking control, archiving, and sealing those communications inside of their control. By at least three months into the administration, the GSA computers should have been turned back in, the server hard drives archived for storage, and every scrap of transition team material placed under the Executive control.

Now, I trust the Mueller team to wipe/delete that improperly obtained material as much as the Wisconson John Doe prosecutors did. Somebody in the investigation screwed up by requesting the information without a proper subpoena, and somebody in GSA screwed up by handing it over outside of the proper chain of command/custody. Both of these people deserve a slow-roasting over a fire, but it will never happen. They’ll just vanish into ‘somebody’ status, as in, “Somebody, we don’t know exactly who, gave…”

    tom_swift in reply to georgfelis. | December 17, 2017 at 4:01 am

    but PART of the blame should have been put on the Trump team for not taking control, archiving, and sealing those communications inside of their control.

    Well, if all this is Mueller blundering into a trap, that was no clumsy oversight, that was the bait.

    I suspect a deliberate trap because the bait was so enticing and tempting, and easy to grab … Good bait usually is.

    I’m sorry, but communications between members of an incoming transition team are NOT government records, no matter where they are stored. A President-Elect is still a private citizen and any business which he transacts, before being inaugurated, is private business. The various Presidential Transition Acts do not identify the President-Elect, or any of his transition team, as members of the US government. The services provided by the GSA, including communications facilities, are all rendered to a non-government entity and personage in order to facilitate a smoother transition of power. Simply storing transition team communications on a government server does not make them public documents, anymore than putting a personal letter into a desk drawer in a government office building makes that document a government or public document. This is analogous to an investigator attempting to secure copies of your emails from your ISP. Even if the ISP releases the emails in response to a legitimate subpoena or court order, it would still notify the customer of the release.

    In order for any of this material to be released, legally, without the consent of the President or his transition team, the SP’s investigators would have had to present a subpoena, search warrant or similar court order. The GSA would have had to notify the President or the manager of the transition team of the request and subsequent release of the material. This did not happen. Somebody may be in serious trouble here.

It’s not surprising that Mueller’s team was interested in this political material. The whole investigation is political, because there’s nothing illegal about colluding with a foreign government in order to win an election. It is illegal to rig an election, by voter fraud, or actual “hacking”, as in the original Dem excuse for Hillary’s loss, etc. But, so far, a method by which the election was rigged hasn’t even been identified, so there can’t possibly be anybody (Russian or otherwise) guilty of non-existent rigging. It just didn’t happen. Criminal investigations aren’t conducted this way – by starting with the people who did it, and then figuring out what it was they did that broke the law. That’s completely nonsensical.

Mueller’s job is to damage Trump, period. He’s damaging Trump’s conduct of his agenda simply by dragging out a so-far unproductive investigation. Convictions for serious crimes aren’t necessary to his objective.

Essentially, the Mueller team is treating the incoming elected president and his team as a criminal enterprise. Criminalizing the transition of power is destructive to our entire system. Shame.

The exclusionary rule is not a constitutional rule, it’s something the courts invented in the 20th century for their own use. Maybe this material and whatever is derived from it can’t be used in a court, but it can be used by congress, and it can be used in the “court” of public opinion.

    This true. The Exclusionary Rule is a court construct not a Constitutional restriction, and is really stupid, as it only protects the guilty.

    Though the information obtained by Mueller can be used by Congress and the media, the SC is set up to prosecute CRIMINAL violations and, therefor, criminal rules of evidence have to be considered. Unless, of course, one is not really running a criminal prosecution.

Mueller is looking for Trump’s reset button.

I think we are looking at this all wrong. I am a small government conservative/libertarian. I think all of the small government/good government types should push for legislation to have a special counsel with nearly limitless subpoena power for every incoming president. It should apply to the entire executive branch.

The key of course, is that for a Republican administration the special counsel is stocked with rabid democratic hacks. Likewise, when there is a Democrat administration, it must be stocked with equally rabid Republican partisans.

Imagine if this was in place during the Obama administration. A flunky tries to pull up Hillary’s emails for the past week as SOS. The flunky finds zero emails. Then pulls up the emails from the SOS staff – finds out they have sent 600 emails covering official business to Hillary, but they went to a private server.

Pull SOS Clinton in that afternoon for questioning under oath. File process charges (ala Flynn) by that evening.

I am perfectly happy to see that happen on both sides of the aisle. Sunlight is the best disinfectant, and I am tired of all of the frickin’ vampires we have running our lives with almost zero accountability.

DC has issued the FBI has a special fishing license covering 2 species.

Democrats – only minnows can be taken, large fish are catch and release. Only barbless hooks can be used. Seasons are limited. There is an annual limit on the number that can be caught.

Republicans – all sizes are legal and none can be returned to the swamp after capture. Any method is legal. All trophies must be given a perp walk. If unsure of the species, it is to be treated as a Republican. Continuous open season. No bag limits.

It takes judicial watch about two years to get action on FOIA requests that are usually only obtained after going to court to get the government to comply with the law. GSA bureaucrats seem to have volunteered these papers and information.

“When we have obtained emails in the course of our ongoing criminal investigation, we have secured either the account owner’s consent or appropriate criminal process,” Peter Carr, a spokesman for the special counsel’s office, said in a statement to The Hill.

The truth…if any…of that is pretty easily determined.

If the T-rump lawyer turns out to be the father of “fake news”, what will the T-rump cultists…and the others here with their hair on fire…say…???

Hmmm…???

    Ever and always on the side of the progs.

    VaGentleman in reply to Ragspierre. | December 18, 2017 at 5:12 am

    rags,
    Since you’ve want to make this is the test case, what will you and the other #NT-Cheeto Satan cultists say when he is proven right?

      Ragspierre in reply to VaGentleman. | December 18, 2017 at 8:39 am

      What are you fantacizing about with your “test case”?

      Your syntax is revealing. “…when he is proven right”, meaning your have no doubt that the lawyer for T-rump is telling the truth.

      This is the cultist in you.

      What will I say if the T-rump lawyer is being truthful?

      “OK.”

        VaGentleman in reply to Ragspierre. | December 18, 2017 at 8:57 am

        Just “OK”?
        It’s good to know it doesn’t matter. For a moment I thought it was important, but now I know it was just you being smarmy. Got it!

          Ragspierre in reply to VaGentleman. | December 18, 2017 at 9:09 am

          “…it doesn’t matter”

          Another example of hateful liars imputing stuff to me, and than condemning their own manufacture.

          VaGentleman in reply to VaGentleman. | December 19, 2017 at 3:12 am

          rags,

          Consider:

          Mr. Jefferson, what do you say about Mr. Madison’s constitution?
          OK.

          Mr. Churchill, what do you say about Germany invading Poland?
          OK.

          Mr. Roosevelt, what do you say about Japan attacking Pearl Harbor?
          OK

          None of these responses is believable because:

          GREAT MEN don’t respond to GREAT ISSUES with ‘OK’.

          OK shows that either the man or the issue isn’t great. In this case, since you brought up the issue to start with, it shows that both lack greatness.

          Ragspierre in reply to VaGentleman. | December 19, 2017 at 6:52 am

          What’s HIGH-larry-ous is the image of you stewing on that load of shit for a full day…!!!

          Critical Thinker: Which proposition is true?

          Critical Thinker AFTER further and illuminating information: OK. Now we see.

          You’re really such a poor, lying, trolling, delusional cultist nutter!

          Always fun…!!!

          VaGentleman in reply to VaGentleman. | December 20, 2017 at 7:20 am

          rags,

          Hail! Oh great critical thinker and sage of all things conservative!
          On Nov 8, 2016, many conservatives thought that the election was between Trump and Clinton, and that if he lost, she would win. Thinking he would be more conservative, they voted for him. After a year’s reflection on ‘further and illuminating information’, what say you? Would she have won if he lost? Has he been more conservative than she would have been? Were they correct? Was his election ‘OK’?

          Ragspierre in reply to VaGentleman. | December 20, 2017 at 9:00 am

          Both candidates were unfit. Both are stinking, lying, pathological Collectivist thugs.

          Again.

          And I’ll note that you cannot answer my questions.

          VaGentleman in reply to VaGentleman. | December 23, 2017 at 8:34 am

          rags,
          The stupidity of your position is apparent. You actions did not change the result. A ‘stinking, lying, pathological Collectivist thug’ was elected. Your protest was meaningless. All you did was give away any chance you had to elect the best ‘stinking, lying, pathological Collectivist thug’ for your cause. You wrongly think that washing your hands of the matter by disnefranchising yourself makes you morally superior to those who made the adult choice of electing the best they could. What an idiot you are. Now, because you can’t bring yourself to admit the truth, you have to deny the #reality that Trump was a far better choice than Clinton. A denial of #reality that you claim shows the superiority of your position. Bullshit.

          Now to your question. First, let’s take note of the innumerable posts where you refused to answer questions, or tried to and failed and ran off with your tail between your legs yelling ‘liar, liar,…’ as your ‘argument’ evaporated.

          Your question is just a cheap rhetorical trick. The issue is the conduct of the SC, not Trump’s lawyer. Since you want Trump to be convicted of something, and you dream about the ‘gotcha’ you think would then be able to blast at his supporters, you constantly invent these little tests that you think show their stupidity and lack of character. Neither the integrity of the SC nor that of Trump’s attorney has any bearing on the integrity of Trump’s supporters or their decision to elect him. Their answer to your question should be – ‘Fluck off, troll!’

Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein … announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III [is appointed] to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters.

So if the emails archived by the GSA cover campaigning during 2016 Presidential Election, they are germane and proper evidence. I am struck by the antagonistic Trump team attempting to hide relevant facts which we are led to believe can only prove Donald Trump innocent of conspiring with the Russians.

I haven’t read all the comments- there are too many, so some may have hit on this- but I think the important facts are being glossed over here. Mueller could have subpoenaed these documents properly from the GSA, and the GSA, on receiving a subpoena, would have referred the matter to the proper legal authorities in the executive branch that handle such matters (I assure you- this is not a GSA specific office), and that team would have had the task of complying with the subpoena while also dealing with the legal objections of the parties whose communications these were. I personally think Mueller would have prevailed in obtaining the documents, minus those the presiding judge determined do meet privilege claims.

The point I am making here, though, is this- if Mueller had done this in the proper manner, Trump’s lawyers and the those for the entire transition team would have been aware that Mueller got these documents in August instead of this past week. It is all but certain that Mueller decided to try to get the material secretly by not using a subpoena. The goal wasn’t to use the material for prosecuting a crime they were investigating- otherwise Mueller’s team is smart enough to use a subpoena in that case- the material is intended to create perjury traps. I consider this behavior highly unethical, and I think the tell that this was the plan was this- no one at the GSA appears to have informed anyone outside the GSA that these materials were turned over- that is mindboggling to me, and it suggests that they were specifically ordered using legal threats to not do so by Mueller himself (or the member of his team assigned to this task).

The question Lowentritt and all those who worked on this at the GSA need to answer is this- why did they not inform, at the very least, the White House Counsel that they were turning over, or had turned over this material at the time it was done. The secrecy over the matter is the key element here- it is almost inexplicable other than for the purpose I described above.

    I can only give you one thumbs up, consider it X10.

    You are, IMO, correct. The “highly ethical” Mr. Mueller, just ain’t. He’s corrupt to the core. He doesn’t care about the country, its laws, or due process. His only job is to get Trump or Trumps people. Truth and justice be damned.

It is one thing for Lowentritt to defend the turning over the materials without forcing Mueller to obtain a warrant- it is an entirely different thing to defend this while not informing any one else in the executive branch that it was being, or had been done. Lowentritt has a big explanation to make here, and so far he hasn’t made it.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend