The interesting thing is how this builds and in particular that the focus this time is to “divide the Dems” by throwing negative stuff into comments threads on blogs and news sites, as well as doing stuff on Twitter.
Here’s a couple of snippets from the article:
[quote]A recent analysis from the social media intelligence firm Storyful detected spikes in misinformation activity over social media platforms and online comment boards in the days after each of the 2020 candidates launched their presidential bids, beginning with Warren’s announcement on Dec. 31.
…
An official with the Harris campaign said they suspect bad actors pushing misinformation and false narratives about the California Democrat are trying to divide African Americans, or to get the media to pay outsized attention to criticism designed to foster divisions among the Democratic primary electorate.[/quote]
The reason I found this interesting was because, looking at the threads over the past couple of days concerning Bernie Sanders entering the fray, suddenly there was a lot of activity and slamming of the new entrants to the race (like Harris) and quite a number of the individuals who were very vociferous were not really the “usual crowd”. Not that that particularly means anything, but found it quite interesting that this article appeared right after we had some very heated threads that were far longer than usual and in many ways more divisive than usual.
What makes you think a Democratic President will do this? The last one did nothing to expose the corruption and crimes in the previous Republican administration. Nothing.
There are a lot of secondary and tertiary investigations now in different areas (inauguration, the Trump Organization). Those have mostly been passed off to other offices for prosecution.
If we look a the layers of onion on the Russia collusion, he’s basically indicted everyone outside of the Trump family proper. Last layer is the Trumps (for obvious reasons, and as discussed in other threads).
I’m hoping for a doozy of an indictment round either tomorrow (or please, Santa Mueller, can Christmas come a day early? I’ve been a good boy) or next Friday.
Yeah, I seem to remember (but could be wrong) that some left but that a smaller number of new ones (with different areas of expertise) came on board, so there was a net loss, but the new ones were indicative of a new direction.
Mueller need only say in his report that Trump repeatedly obstructed justice, engaged in witness tampering, and cite circumstantial evidence showing awareness of his campaign’s conspiracy with Russian espionage. He can say DOJ guidelines forbid him from indicting Don the Con, but name him as an undicted co conspirator.
These are more than sufficient grounds to impeach and, when he leaves office, criminally prosecute Don the Con.
Meanwhile, Trump’s myriad other crimes will be prosecuted by the SDNY and the state of New York.
Would he indict Kushner or Don Jr without first having had them in front of a grand jury for questioning? Seems they’re the biggest fish left untouched among all the various players, and there are strong indications they certainly broke some laws somewhere along the way. Court observers seem to somehow stay on top of those testifying before Mueller’s grand jury, but I don’t recall report either of them appeared. Did they? Is it common to indict someone but not first iquestion them before a grand jury? I guess it might be. Any lawyers out there?
According to Barr such findings would not be made public, since it would unfairly tarnish the reputation of someone neither charged or indicted as a result of the findings.
As I keep saying, if Trump has not obstructed justice, then no one could ever obstruct justice. We may as well remove that particular crime from the books.
Say a prosecutor is convinced he has the goods on someone, to the point he can indict them. What harm could come to the case by questioning them before a grand jury before indictment? Seems to me they might lie, and now in addition to whatever charges are pending you have them on perjury if they’re convicted. Conversely, they may actually testify to something that genuinely casts a new light on the prosecutor’s intention to indict, and alters his plans, either for the good or bad of the accused. They could additionally reveal information about the conduct of others that might assist other prosecutions. What reason would there be for not questioning a person in the grand jury forum before indicting?
And that’s the $60K question. And we’re basically at three options I see, and only Mueller and Barr know the answer:
Does Mueller force it into the open by requesting it from Barr, having Barr deny, and then Barr has to report his denial and the reasoning to Congress.
Does Mueller not force it into the open, and Barr excises material that implicates Trump.
Mueller doesn’t force it, but Barr releases it under his interpretation of the DOJ rules.
Mueller and Barr want to get this shit done so they can go fishing while their wives go shopping, so they just dump the whole thing over to Congress and flee the Capitol before Trump attempts to declare martial law to prevent his arrest for treason.
The House is in Democratic hands now and has skillful, determined leadership including experienced federal and state prosecutors. Trump has lashed out at the people who started the original FBI investigation, but if he’s slowed it down much despite all the help the GOP gave him I can’t think how. A lot of seasoned observers say it’s really beyond his control now. And I think that’s a factor in Mueller’s seeming lack of urgency about all this. I’m pretty sure he had every contingency and scenario planned for. The Special Counsel investigation was a kind of government-produced antibody but the fundamental problem was political and needed a political solution, which the voters (thanks folks) have taken a long step toward providing back in November. We watch, wait, and do what we can on the home front. Letting change get you upset is not productive.
So long as the Senate is in GOP control Trump is essentially immune to any negative consequences for his actions. No one is going to do a damned thing to rein Trump in. He’s a bull in the china shop, and everyone is in the shop with him. We’re all saying “Screw the china, the fixtures, the walls, screw it all, I’m just trying to steer clear of those horns.”
There’s literally too much bullshit and criminality for anyone to know how to coherently focus and react.