From Dan Abrams' Law Newz: Report Says "NY Attorney Generals Case Led to Sealed Trump Indictment"

[mhw]

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/report-says-ny-attorney-generals-case-led-to-sealed-trump-indictment/


Report Says NY Attorney General’s Case Led to Sealed Trump Indictment
by Ronn Blitzer | 12:05 pm, May 30th, 2017

SNIP
The report states that Schneiderman’s office was looking into Russian oligarchs and mobsters, including Semion Moglievich who reportedly lived in Trump Tower.
That investigation supposedly turned up information that led Schneiderman to go to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC). FISC, the story goes, then brought evidence to a federal grand jury who indicted the President. While prosecutors won’t/can’t move forward with a criminal case against the sitting President, the indictment is supposedly being used for an impeachment case.

The report says that after the grand jury voted to indict, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein showed the indictment to Senators including Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina), and that Representative Al Green (D-Texas) then called for Trump’s impeachment on the House floor. “I can report as fact that the Sergeant At Arms of the Senate … went to the White House on that Wednesday night,” the report says, adding that President Trump was notified that an impeachment case against him has commenced.
The report also indicates that a judicial branch official informed Trump that he didn’t follow procedure when he declassified information that he revealed to Russian officials."


Abrams also notes:

"While Mensch’s credibility has been called into question, she was reliable when reporting on a different story involving FISC, where she broke the news that the FBI, during the Obama administration, obtained a FISA warrant to look into ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

If this new report is true, it could explain why White House lawyers were reportedly researching impeachment in the days after Trump was supposedly notified"

--------

So it appears , Mensch & Taylor are indeed being credited by Law Newz / Dan Abrahms as having credibility enough to warrent recognition.

Law Newz says:
"If this new report is true, it could explain why White House lawyers were reportedly researching impeachment in the days after Trump was supposedly notified".

Mensch & Taylor may be unconventional but they have sources, and like all reporting agencies do, will protect the identities.

Good for Law Newz in giving rightful credit to Mensch & Taylor.

https://patribotics.blog/

[Thomas Hurt]

1. Almost everyday, mercilessly teasing us.....

[Me.]

2. Very Interesting

But doubters will still do so but only her...none of the 3 guys and perhaps now Abrams who report such info.

[mhw]

5. Well if its credible in the eyes of Law Newz/ Abrams to put it on his site,

Then its credible enough for me, you & everyone who reads his Newz site.
He is very respected.

[Me.]

6. Agreed

[FakeNoose]

3. Did he have a show on MSNBC?

Dan Abrams I mean. I haven't seen him for awhile.

Just sayin'

[PatSeg]

9. Yes, he did a number of years ago

I think he came on after Keith Olbermann.

[MiddleClass]

30. He gave up running MSNBC to have the show

I think he actually had Phil Griffin's job,

I think it was called Dan Abrams reports 10 p.m. weeknights.

I do pray this is right, it still labeled as wishful thinking. With the strong lean to may be true.

If true, that's the end of trump resigning, and not being until Republicans see their job going away

[PatSeg]

64. I remember him replacing

Joe Scarborough after Olbermann. I checked and you are right, he had been general manager of MSNBC for a short time. Abrams' show was replaced with Rachel Maddow's show. He seems to have had a very diverse career.

Whether it is true or not, I think Trump's days as president are numbered. The whole administration reeks of corruption.

[C_U_L8R]

29. He was the GM of MSNBC for a little while

I really enjoyed his shows. Always buttoned up.

[WoonTars]

4. I love Fitzmas!!!

I'll wait to the fat guy in the red suit has actually dropped the presents off under the tree before i get all giddy...

[LanternWaste]

16. Giddiness is irrelevant to a burgeoning series of interconnected stories.

Giddiness is irrelevant to a burgeoning series of interconnected stories.

Though if presents are indeed, critical to you, I'll certainly send you the "skepticism for its own sake... 'cause I'm clever" t-shirt. In Garamond typeface, as well.

[WoonTars]

24. None of that post makes sense...

None of that post makes sense...

2XL I'd prefer comic sans.

But you'd better wait until some/any/one of these interconnected stories actually amounts to anything...

[Warren DeMontague]

27. I'm not on Team "Louise" OR Team "Louise is full of shit", myself.

However, the 'interconnected stories' on stuff like "sealed indictments" all draw back to a single source, namely Louise.

If it's independently corroborated, no one will be more excited than me. But Dan Abrams's blog is doing nothing here except repeating the original claim.

[PRETZEL]

7. Confused?

Schneiderman is investigating the Trump on RICO(?). How would he have standing in a FISC? These would be NY state charges, not federal. I don't know, but can a state AG go before a FISC?

Is Schneiderman and the New York District Office working on adjoining cases, RICO and something else within the Trump Campaign/Organization with the Russians?

I'm confused. If the FISC issued survielance warrants on the Trump Campaign/Organization (servers?) could Schneiderman have access to that information? And if so, could he have compelled Loretta Lynch to unmask the names of the Americans who were heard talking to the Russians?

[Fiendish Thingy]

12. If NY AG is investigating Russian mobsters

Or international money laundering, or the US subjects of an investigation are out of the country, wouldn't the AG need a FISA warrant to Surveil outside the US?

[onenote]

36. The FISA court issues surveillance warrants to Federal authorities not state

Schneiderman undoubtedly knows this and wouldn't go to the FISA court for a warrant. And the FISA court doesn't "hear cases" so he wouldn't have brought his investigation there either.

And there was no reason and no likelihood that the Sergeant at Arms of the Senate went to the White House to notify Trump that Rep. Green had given a speech on the House floor (not the Senate) calling for his impeachment -- a speech that had no legal effect in terms of initiating the impeachment process.

So the fact that some lawyer no one has ever heard of uncritically posted an article on Abrams' website basically restating Mensch's most recent blog piece means pretty much nothing.

[furtheradu]

8. Sgt of arms, Senate, informed trump case for impeachment has commensed...

Well, now. THAT seems clear enough.
Thanks for this!

[MiddleClass]

31. I'm baffled

Impeachment is the house thing.
Senate votes on conviction and removal,

I thought but don't know, the impeachment has to be finished before the Senate would get word.

The only thing logical would be strange rules of Congress requiring Senate Sergeant at arms to inform a defendant.

Probably a way of taking Congress connections out of the house before the vote. I don't know who informed Bubba?

[onenote]

38. Which is why its easy to tell Mensch's piece is BS

There would be no reason for the Sgt. at Arms to go to the WH because Rep. Green gave a speech calling for Trump's impeachment. That speech had no legal effect in terms of commencing the impeachment process. It was a speech, nothing more, nothing less. And when Green was done, here is how the Speaker Pro Tem
responded: "Members are reminded to refrain from engaging in personalities toward the President, such as accusations that he committed an impeachable offense." https://www.congress.gov/crec/2017/05/17/CREC-2017-05-17-house.pdf

Does that sound like an impeachment case has been commenced in the House?

[Worktodo]

10. Just quotes the patribotics blog

This doesn't add any weight to the original report. No new sources, no confirmation of anything... it's just a rehashing of the original blog post.

[mhw]

14. Haa.

Maybe Louise & Claude hacked Abrams site & posted their article word - for - word.

He did add a commentary btw.

And a fair one at that.

Get under the bus Dan. Sorry.

[pnwmom]

17. Actually, it does. The report shows that this attorney thinks that the story

reported by Mensch is legally plausible -- which some here have been disputing.

Now it remains to be seen whether her sources are correct.

[onenote]

39. Actually it shows that this attorney is as clueless as Mensch.

See:https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=9132105

[jberryhill]

42. +1

[enid602]

11. Late

Impeachment proceedings commencing 129 days after inauguration. Better late than never.

[L. Coyote]

13. Funny thing about colluding with Russians, they can out you any time they want.

Link to tweet

Too many fronts of investigation for Trump to keep up with. Difficult enough for reporters.

[mhw]

15. Thats the truth. Lots of fires starting in every direction & they'll get harder to contain

Explains why everyone's taking the 5th..

[Calista241]

57. The Russians could leak what they reported him as saying. But then it becomes a he said / he said

kind of thing. Unless Kislyak took a recorder into Trump Tower and recorded the meeting, which i kind of doubt the Secret Service would allow.

And there is an active investigation by the Independent Counsel now. Kushner, Trump, Flynn, nobody is going on the record with anyone for anything until Mueller issues his final report. What Spicer says doesn't mean shit, from a legal point of view.

[L. Coyote]

61. The trump Tower meeting was recorded by US intel, and Trump phoned in.

Count on everything Kislyak does being recorded, photographed, even videoed where possible, and by both sides. The Russians no doubt record all contacts.

[Calista241]

65. You don't know any told that.

If US Intel wiretapped or recorded Trump at Trump tower That's more than a huge deal. And it would exonerate Trump of much of the scandal he had about him claiming he was wiretapped by Obama.

You and everyone better hope those meeting weren't recorded by anyone associated with the government.

The only recording that could exist are if Trump recorded his own meetings, or if he allowed (and the Secret Service let them) the Russians to record it.

[NCjack]

18. A.G. Schneiderin -- U R da man!!! Chew Donnie into small pieces

and spit them into Clinton "Little Siberia" Prison, NY for the rest of his life. Bury traitor and crime mobster in the inner courtyard.

[CatWoman]

19. one of the ugliest sides of DU has been the constant denigrating of both Mensch and Taylor

sometimes some of you suck.

[madokie]

21. Scoot your tail over I want a seat on that bench with you

Some judge will have to have mercy on tRump to keep him from dying behind bars.

If I was a betting man I'd bet good money on that

[WoonTars]

26. I will wager a very large amount of imaginary money that Dump sees not one day...

..behind bars.

Not.Gonna.Happen.

[WoonTars]

25. Mensch is a former conservative politician that admires Maggie Thatcher...

....the denigration is well earned...

[mhw]

32. And mourning Joe has some skeletons but he is often quoted & linked right here on DU.

Brit conservative is not quite the dirty word it is in the US.

Also.

She's done some pretty remarkably acvirate reporting.
Who her sources are, we don't know & shouldn't expext to.

There isn't a news agency out there that reveals their sources.

[pnwmom]

34. She is the enemy of our enemy -- which makes her our ally at this time. nt

[Gravitycollapse]

37. An empty platitude. I have enemies on many fronts.

Many of them are enemies of each other. None of them are my friends.

[jberryhill]

43. The same thing was said of Assange critics

[orangecrush]

20. Interesting

But I will wait until real action is taken against Trump to get my hopes up.

[Sunlei]

22. not much time for Mr. Trump to come clean before his Republican betters* have him all tied up.

*"The (R)ussian colluders Gang"

[Blue_Adept]

23. Abrams in general is fantastic, a no bullshit kind of guy

I only see him when he's on GMA these days but when he's on I stop and listen knowing that he's making it simple and understandable while backing it up with the reasons why.

[yodermon]

28. Mini-meta-analysis: Mensch & Taylor have posted all sorts of assertions, yet *THIS* is the one ABRAM

Abrams picks up and reports, with commentary.

Hmmmmm.

[jberryhill]

44. Ronn Blitzer, not Abrams

It wasn't posted by Abrams.

[Ruby the Liberal]

33. Schneiderman went to the FISC?

That doesn't sound right. I thought only (federal) DOJ could take a case to the FISC.

[pnwmom]

35. She's saying that Schneiderman took the case to Federal authorities

because it involved issues of national security. And national security issues are heard before FISC.

"Upon his own judgement and belief, Scheiderman decided that his case touched both Federal issues, and issues of National Security. He took his case to the Federal authorities. While the appropriate Federal District can often be location-based, if a federal case is to start on the same factual basis, the court chosen can also be based on subject matter. Because National Security is involved, Schneiderman brought his case to FISC to be heard.

"FISC does not empanel Grand Juries. Per procedure, Schneiderman dismissed his case, which as a state AG he can do without a judge’s ruling; he had the right to dispose of it. The case was then restarted Federal Court on the facts offered by Schneiderman, as a RICO case. FISC provided evidence under seal to a Grand Jury, drawn from the Eastern District of Virginia, who read the evidence in a SCIF, a secure facility in the building sealed away from the public."

patribotics.com

[AngryAmish]

40. Not to mention the FETA court is handing down indigtments within the week

Or a little bird tells me.

[jberryhill]

45. That sequence is nonsense

[pnwmom]

47. Dan Abrams doesn't appear to think so. So legal opinions differ. n/t

[jberryhill]

50. Lol

First off, Dan Abrams does not personally vet what his editor Ronn Blitzer posts.

Secondly, this blog also hyped the standard preliminary order in the "Jane Doe rape case" in a way that led people to believe a trial was coming up in a civil case which was never served on the defendant. Oh, yeah, the Casey Anthony TV lawyer was going to crack that one wide open.

But, most importantly, the rehashed "if it's true" blog posting does not address the obvious procedural nonsense one way or the other.

There is no click-seeking lawyer on DU that buys the ridiculous notion of a State AG going to the FISC to prosecute a case.

I realize people put great stock in "media lawyers" like Nancy Grace and whatnot, but they are in the media profession and not in the legal profession.

[pnwmom]

52. That's not how I understood her post.

I understood her as saying that the State AG took his evidence to a Federal prosecutor, and the Federal prosecutor worked with a FISC and the Eastern District Court of Virginia.

[jberryhill]

53. It is still ridiculous

A state AG is not going to be looking to obtain a foreign intelligence surveillance subpoena.

Incidentally, do you know what US District Court has jurisdiction in Washington, DC?

(Hint: not the EDVA)

[pnwmom]

56. Were you aware that the Eastern District Court in Virginia

has a history of finding ways to expand its jurisdiction, especially in cases of national security?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/in-vas-eastern-district-us-attorneys-reach-transcends-geographic-bounds/2012/12/15/a3f8f992-4625-11e2-9648-a2c323a991d6_story.html?utm_term=.3566cf016571

Among the 94 U.S. attorney’s offices across the country, law enforcement officials say that the Alexandria office, with its 130 prosecutors, has raised its profile to the point where it rivals the Southern District of New York, which is famous for its financial fraud and terrorism cases.

“Virginia is home to the Pentagon, CIA and the world’s largest naval base,” MacBride said in an interview. “All that, plus our proximity to the nation’s capital, means we’re a national security bull’s-eye.”

SNIP

“Criminals today aren’t confined by borders, and neither are we,” MacBride said. “A criminal organization is as much a threat to us from across the ocean as it is across the street. That’s why we made the strategic decision to go after networks and their leadership wherever they are found.”

[onenote]

60. Your understanding doesn't fit the chronology in her post

According to her post:

1. Because Scheiderman decided that his case touched both Federal issues, and issues of National Security, he "brought his case to FISC to be heard." FISC, not EDVA.

2. Because FISC does not empanel Grand Juries, Schneiderman dismissed his NY case. (According to Mensch he could do this without a judge's ruling because he is AG; of course, there was no NY "case" to dismiss, just an investigation and thus he obviously had the right to "dispose of it" without a judge; indeed, there would be no role for a judge to play in an investigation.)

3. The case was then re-started in Federal Court as a RICO case -- apparently the EDVA -- on the facts offered by Schneiderman and evidence provided under seal by FISC -- even though FISC doesn't "provide evidence" in cases, it issues surveillance warrants.

Is there a possible chronology in which Schneiderman consulted with a US Attorney and based on that consultation, the US Attorney in the EDVA went to FISC for a surveillance warrant that produced evidence that the US Attorney then presented to a grand jury? Yes. The question is why does Mensch insist on a much more convoluted and essentially impossible to believe sequence of events.

[pnwmom]

62. I think that part of the problem is she writes like a reporter, not a lawyer.

Reporters often state a general point and then circle back to it several steps later. So what you saw as her "insisting" on a certain sequence of events, I saw her stating that several things had happened, but not necessarily in that order.

I agree that it would be a poorly written legal brief, and wasn't the best written article, either.

[jberryhill]

63. Does she KNOW a lawyer?

Do you think that if you were in her position, you might want to run some of what you are reporting by a lawyer?

Having once had to walk back nonsense, do you think you might prevail on a lawyer to ask, "Does this make sense?"

Do you think she might know a lawyer or two (like her actual FOIA lawyer who made sure to publicly call out some of her nonsense) that might help her ungarble it?

She's got the story of the century, but doesn't care if it makes no sense?

The "Supremacy Clause" nonsense is still there, and onenote lays out points which are not some sort of arcane or disputed propositions.

[onenote]

41. You are correct. Another example of Mensch's story not standing up to scrutiny.

[jberryhill]

51. Did you see this part?

One of the linked stories has the Senate seargant at arms being dispatched to the White House to report a non existent impeachment resolution.

[onenote]

55. Yep. See post 38

[Foamfollower]

46. So Abrams, who lost his credibilty before being fired by MSNBC, is repeating Mensch bullshit.

[WinkyDink]

49. Well, your characterization isn't exactly proven fact, either, is it now?

[Foamfollower]

54. Actually, yes, it is proven fact.

Mensch's bullshit has been demonstrated time and again to have no resemblance whatsoever to US governmental procedure or legal precedent.

She makes shit up and some people believe it. That's all there is to it.

[boston bean]

48. Umm the article does not say what is claimed in the title of the OP.

[Dawson Leery]

58. kick

[Doug the Dem]

59. I smell a Mensch