The Mueller grand jury is still seated proceedings robustly.

[drray23]

Darren samuelsohn (politico) was in court today listening to the arguments about that mystery lawsuit that is pitting a foreign company against the Mueller team. Their lawyers motioned for stuff to be unsealed since we were told the Mueller investigation had ended. Not so fast, said the judge, the Mueller grand jury is still empaneled and proceeding robustly. ...

It would appear that Mueller handed off enough things to other prosecutors that trump and his ilk may have been celebrating a little too early..

Update : here is the politico article about it.


https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2019/03/27/mueller-grand-jury-1238861

And I should correct that its the federal prosecutor who said its proceeding robustly, not the judge as I incorrectly stated.

[RHMerriman]

1. Yep; should probably put all the "exonerated" bullshit coming from the Administration

Yep; should probably put all the "exonerated" bullshit coming from the Administration back where it belongs, back in Trump's lower intestine.

[former9thward]

2. The Grand Jury has not met since Jan 24th.

That is not my definition of "robustly".

[drray23]

3. It's the judge definition. That's the wording the judge used. Nt.

[former9thward]

5. No it is not.

The judge asked a question to the government prosecutor and HE said it was operating "robustly" without offering any evidence that it was.

[drray23]

6. Yes you are right. I saw that when reading the article

That I just linked. I saw the initial report on Rachel where samuelsohn was interviewed and misstated it.

[manor321]

7. Why would the prosecutor have to offer any evidence in court?

What a bizarre response. They don't have to offer evidence that the grand jury is still working. LOL.

It's true the media has staked out a location but maybe they've been fooled.

[former9thward]

11. Oh so now the media has been "fooled".

When the media reported the grand jury was meeting that was accepted like gospel. But now they have been "fooled". What a bizarre response...

[uponit7771]

12. +1, right ... I just read the CNN account with 1/24 date & thought how would CNN know !?!?

Looks like Barr lied

[drray23]

9. On another note why would it be an issue that the prosecutor stated that?

I seriously doubt a federal prosecutor would lie to a judge in court. If he said so, it's true.

[former9thward]

14. I deal with prosecutors every week.

In court. You have far, far more trust in them than I do.

[drray23]

15. Would not they end up in trouble if they lie in court to a judge ?

If not, what the hell is going on in our justice system ?

[former9thward]

21. Judges are far too busy to chase down every off hand comment in court

and check its accuracy. Besides "robustly" is a subjective word which can mean anything to anyone.

[uponit7771]

8. hmmmm, I was thinking the judge was just repeating what the Mueller prosecutor was saying no? tia

[drray23]

10. Yes indeed. I corrected that in my op.nt.

[uponit7771]

13. got it

[progressoid]

18. Yeah, I made a similar observation in another OP about this.

We aren't getting the whole story IMO.

[uponit7771]

4. Looks like Red Hatters have started a whisper campaign against Mueller saying he knew in 2018...

... that there was no collusion.

[RussBLib]

16. It's entirely plausible

Mueller perhaps realized he wasn't going to be able to nail Trump on conspiracy charges so Mueller wrapped up his report, while passing off the incomplete proceedings (Butina, Gates, Flynn, etc) to other jurisdictions.

[lame54]

17. Celebrating prematurely IS the plan...

Along with a full court press on the revenge talk

They took the upper hand

[zentrum]

19. That's how I see it too.

[HubertHeaver]

20. They took the upper hand,

and they will overplay it.