General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBreaking - NYT says Mannafort to be indicted
Tweety just said on Hardball
no surprise really
triron
(21,999 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)Orrex
(63,203 posts)This is what concerns me about the Mueller investigation. Unless he scoops up Trump and Pence, one or the other will simply pardon everyone, declare victory, and enjoy a bulletproof presidency for the rest of the term--potentially an 11-year Pence presidency.
If he doesn't nab Trump, I'd almost prefer that he hadn't bothered in the first place.
jmowreader
(50,555 posts)The rules of succession are solidly encased in the Constitution:
Trump began the Reign of Terror on January 20, 2017.
If he is removed AFTER January 21, 2019, Pence can run for two terms of his own.
If he is removed on January 20, 2019, or before, Pence can only run for one term of his own.
What I think is happening is very simple: Pence ideally wants to be a two-term president. He does not want to go down in history as the first president to be restricted to one term. And so, Congress is going to do everything it can to minimize the damage Trump can cause in two years, largely by bringing in bills that have no possibility of getting through Congress. Once January 21, 2019, passes, Pence can safely 25th Amendment Trump into the gentle caresses of one Eric Schneiderman, Two Scoops' favorite state attorney general.
This doesn't mean we're not going to lose Obamacare. But I think they won't do it UNLESS they can figure out a way to make sure the Democratic Party takes the blame for it.
Orrex
(63,203 posts)In all the discussions of impeachment and the 25th, I haven't seen a summation as clean or clear as yours.
greeny2323
(590 posts)I just see an article that says his prosecutors threatened to indict him. That's different.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/mueller-russia-investigation.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
mnmoderatedem
(3,726 posts)no details yet. For whatever that's worth.
deminks
(11,014 posts)With a Picked Lock and a Threatened Indictment, Muellers Inquiry Sets a Tone
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/mueller-russia-investigation.html
WASHINGTON Paul J. Manafort was in bed early one morning in July when federal agents bearing a search warrant picked the lock on his front door and raided his Virginia home. They took binders stuffed with documents and copied his computer files, looking for evidence that Mr. Manafort, President Trumps former campaign chairman, set up secret offshore bank accounts. They even photographed the expensive suits in his closet.
The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, then followed the house search with a warning: His prosecutors told Mr. Manafort they planned to indict him, said two people close to the investigation.
The moves against Mr. Manafort are just a glimpse of the aggressive tactics used by Mr. Mueller and his team of prosecutors in the four months since taking over the Justice Departments investigation into Russias attempts to disrupt last years election, according to lawyers, witnesses and American officials who have described the approach. Dispensing with the plodding pace typical of many white-collar investigations, Mr. Muellers team has used what some describe as shock-and-awe tactics to intimidate witnesses and potential targets of the inquiry.
(end snip)
malaise
(268,949 posts)Oh Yes!!
greeny2323
(590 posts)Ms. Toad
(34,065 posts)The special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, then followed the house search with a warning: His prosecutors told Mr. Manafort they planned to indict him, said two people close to the investigation.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/18/us/politics/mueller-russia-investigation.html?_r=0
In July (in the past), prosecutors told him they planned to indict him.
That doesn't mean it won't happen - but it isn't a statement that they currently (present tense) plan to indict him in the future. Even if something was planned in July, it may no longer be planned. It could also just as easily be a threat in connection with execution of the subpoenas to coerce cooperation (which the article pretty much implies).
Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)Is this standard procedure?
trof
(54,256 posts)Doesn't make sense to me.
Don't you just show up with the warrant and they do the perp walk?
DonaldsRump
(7,715 posts)Who really gives a sh*t about Paul Manafort when there are much, much bigger fish out there?
trof
(54,256 posts)R B Garr
(16,950 posts)character, and he is the real POS.
Wow,
Tiggeroshii
(11,088 posts)procon
(15,805 posts)The warning, allegedly a shock-and-awe tactic, came as federal agents combed through his computer files, documents and any other potential pieces of evidence that could help them in their federal investigation, The New York Times reported Monday, citing two people close to the investigation.
The jarring comment is part of the approach Mueller and his team have embraced since May when the Justice Department named them to lead the high-profile investigation earlier, which aims to intimidate witnesses and possible targets of the probe, the newspaper reported.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/351268-nyt-mueller-warned-manafort-to-expect-an-indictment
Welcome to MacMuellers Burger Palace, we're open all night!