President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

A lefty lawyer on twitter noted that in both Flynn's plea and that of the guy with the Greek name I'm not gonna try to spell from memory, the defendant admitted to two violations, each equally serious, but was only charged with one. This is not DOJ policy, but it is what Mueller has done in both cases. Why? Neither the lawyer nor I have a clue.

 

I'll repeat here what I wrote a few months ago, which was from the distilled views of several senior admin officials, generally from the Goldman wing, at that time.

– They were not that worried about collusion charges. They seemed to feel that the Donald Jr meeting with the Russkies was as dramatic as that would get.

– They were, however, worried about Mueller delving into Trump's personal finances. The expressed feeling is that he was in (and maybe still is) fairly deep to some Russian oligarchs, and that some of that depth had been laundered, at least as the layman would use that word – and perhaps as Mueller might.

– The salacious bits of the dossier are mostly true. And a definite rookie move – any savvy international operator knows that the Russkies are always watching you when in their hood, and if it looks too good to be true, it is.

Now, maybe they'd be more worried today about obstruction; again, this was a few months back. But they were already very worried about the financial angle, and this was before stories about that came out and Trump went ballistic.

FWIW.

 

The Russian lawyer who was at Don Jr's meeting saying he asked for dirt on the Clinton Foundation is pretty dramatic all right. In fairness to the dim namesake, the Russkies would certainly not be above spreading disinformation to hurt Trump if they are seeing their bet on him as a lost investment.

 

Thanks @Pete

The Deutsche angle seems soft at this point. Hopefully the story is correct.

When the probe is about possible collusion and influence of a foreign government, following the money is a no-brainer.

I can’t believe anyone, especially the Team Trump, would be shocked by this.

 

The law governing subpoenas of financial institutions allows a judge to order the fact of its issuance be kept secret from the subject of the investigation. Don't know if that's in play here, but it could be. Trump's lawyers could be denying in good faith because they don't know. The Financial Times broke the story. That's as reputable a media outlet as there is, so if they got it wrong, many heads will roll.

 

If he is in deep to the Ruskies it would certainly explain why he's not releasing his taxes.

 

I have always believed he won't release his returns because they'll show he's nowhere near as rich as he always says.

 

Same here.

 

Could be more than one thing. Trump could be concerned people will find out he’s not as rich as he says and he’s in deep debt to Russians leaving him open to blackmail.

He’s always been a con man.

 

I'll one-up you. I was asked that question by an AD as time expired in regulation once. A college AD. In a game featuring the AD's team.

 

Who will Trumpists cheer for now?

 

That's the best. I'm sure he was good at separating alums from their wallets though.