# A Thread for the Mueller Investigation Results and Outcomes (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 28, 2017, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093 "2017-10-28T20:14:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 224
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4462 "2018-05-07T14:04:28Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Nobody stopping you from delivering a few snappy lines! Maybe use one of those symbol things that let people know that its funny. I would give you the same advice I gave VT - stick to being funny where you have some talent, and leave the thinking to others. But in your case, I see you’ve already taken that approach on your own. > [@Kimstu](#): > > And that tendency is exactly what my post attempted to explain as basically inherent in the nature of news reporting in general. Did you not get that? Well in that case, you would disagree with Vinyl Turnip’s implication that this was about the “other direction […] for a story like this”, and would be along the lines of an overcorrection. You were unclear about this. In sum, the question that “_a certain segment of our news consumers seems to have trouble with_”, as someone put it, is whether the media is as likely to err in relying on shaky or ambiguous evidence when the story is negative about liberals or Democrats as compared to when it’s about conservatives or Republicans. And the relevance in the context of this discussion is that to the extent you believe there’s a skew here, it not inconsistent with believing that NBC was forthright in retracting this story. That’s been my point here, beginning in post #4413. It’s unclear whether you disagree with this. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4463 "2018-05-07T14:36:00Z")
In other news which doesn’t seem to have attracted much attention here, see a couple of Politico links: > **[Russian firm charged in election interference case hires attorneys](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/russia-company-concord-obtain-lawyers-515432)** > > The move could be a gambit to obtain evidence from the U.S. and force a public trial without putting individuals at risk of prison. > **[Judge rejects Mueller's request for delay in Russian troll farm case](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627)** > > Russian firm linked to Putin's chef accuses special counsel of ‘pettifoggery.’ In brief, it looks like Mueller’s indictment of the 13 Russians and 3 Russian firms may have been something of a PR stunt, and one of those firms is calling his bluff, by demanding a trial and discovery. Could get interesting. ---
**Author:** ![simster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/simster/32/1047_2.png) [@simster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/simster)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4464 "2018-05-07T14:44:39Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > In other news which doesn’t seem to have attracted much attention here, see a couple of Politico links: > > [https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/russia-company-concord-obtain-lawyers-515432](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/russia-company-concord-obtain-lawyers-515432) > > [https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627) > > In brief, it looks like Mueller’s indictment of the 13 Russians and 3 Russian firms may have been something of a PR stunt, and one of those firms is calling his bluff, by demanding a trial and discovery. Could get interesting. your ‘brief’ is not backed up by the articles you link to. not that that should surprise anyone familiar with your posting history and lack of regard for facts. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4465 "2018-05-07T14:54:35Z")
The “brief” is very much backed up by the articles. Sorry if that causes any cognitive dissonance for people who prefer a sanitized safe space. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4466 "2018-05-07T15:30:57Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > … I’ve long suspected that the real fear that Trump has is Mueller finding out that he’s a fake billionaire. … Ditto. Mueller and the rest of the world. I think this is The Biggest Secret. Hmm…what a good idea for a new reality show. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4467 "2018-05-07T15:55:17Z")
A decent percentage of Trump’s wealth, per his own assessment, was the supposed value of the name “Trump”. This has undoubtedly taken a huge hit and may be at zero or close to it, based on stories like [this](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-removes-name-from-hotels/). (Or [this](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-removes-trump-family-hotel-business-from-trump-panama-city-hotel/), or [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/27/world/canada/trump-hotel-toronto-name-change.html) …) ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4468 "2018-05-07T15:58:36Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > In other news which doesn’t seem to have attracted much attention here, see a couple of Politico links: > > [https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/russia-company-concord-obtain-lawyers-515432](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/11/russia-company-concord-obtain-lawyers-515432) > > [https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627](https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/mueller-russia-interference-election-case-delay-570627) > > In brief, it looks like Mueller’s indictment of the 13 Russians and 3 Russian firms may have been something of a PR stunt, and one of those firms is calling his bluff, by demanding a trial and discovery. Could get interesting. Looks more like Russian flailing to me. ---
**Author:** ![garygnu](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/garygnu/32/2924_2.png) [@garygnu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/garygnu)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4469 "2018-05-07T16:12:05Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > The “brief” is very much backed up by the articles. > > Sorry if that causes any cognitive dissonance for people who prefer a sanitized safe space. Your description is wildly speculative and not at all what is actually going on. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4470 "2018-05-07T16:14:52Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > Ditto. Mueller and the rest of the world. I think this is The Biggest Secret. > > Hmm…what a good idea for a new reality show. I wonder if “Who wants to be a Billionaire” has been trademarked? ---
**Author:** ![JackieLikesVariety](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackielikesvariety/32/296_2.png) [@JackieLikesVariety](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JackieLikesVariety)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4471 "2018-05-07T16:16:20Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > Ditto. Mueller and the rest of the world. I think this is The Biggest Secret. > > Hmm…what a good idea for a new reality show. what do you mean new? It’s BEEN on for over a year! :mad: ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4472 "2018-05-07T16:25:23Z")
I can’t believe that if even if the _only_ thing that the investigation discovers is massive Russian money laundering that this is something that the GOP can tolerate. But, I’ve been wrong before. Every single time. ---
**Author:** ![Crotalus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crotalus/32/41_2.png) [@Crotalus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crotalus)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4473 "2018-05-07T16:49:32Z")
While I was taking my post-lunch walk today, I listened to a podcast by Josh Marshall of Talking Points Memo. He and co-host David Taintor were talking about the series of interviews and apparent gaffes from Rudy Guiliani since he joined Trump’s legal team and Rudy’s effectiveness as a lawyer. It occurred to me that Guiliani is not really a lawyer in any meaningful sense of the word. From reading his bio, it appears that he has never practiced law in defense of the target of a criminal investigation. It appears that he has not practiced any law at all for around three decades. This led me to thinking about parallels to my occupation and how specialization and the passage of time effect a person’s position. I think the parallels I’m thinking of support the idea that, in the position Rudy currently finds himself, the only function he can serve is outspoken bullshitter. I’m a software developer, a programmer. I completed my education for this occupation thirty years ago, and have been continually employed ever since. My first job in programming was at a stock brokerage, and every job since has involved stocks, mutual funds, or banking. My particular platform and language expertise is mainframes, COBOL and DB2. If I applied for a job right now at a mainframe COBOL shop outside of financial technology, I would be at a severe disadvantage to anyone who had my level of experience in the relevant industry. If I applied for a job as a Java or .Net coder, I would be laughed out of the room. If I applied for a job now in my field using my technology, but after having spent ten or fifteen years not coding at all, I would not even be considered a programmer. Rudy appears to know nothing about campaign finance law, and what little he pretends to know is wrong. He prosecuted some corruption cases decades ago. Whatever lawyerly muscles he may have had have atrophied due to old age and lack of use. Trump hired him because he has been obsequious, is willing to blow smoke up the giant orange ass, and is willing to spout nonsense that sounds good to Trump on television. TLDR version: all the best people! ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4474 "2018-05-07T17:24:16Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > The “brief” is very much backed up by the articles. Not by my reading. Maybe it was “something of a PR stunt”, or maybe not, but I don’t see how these articles render this conclusion any more likely than before. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4475 "2018-05-07T18:55:10Z")
Well firstly, as Politico said “_the move appeared to be a bid to force Mueller’s team to turn over relevant evidence to the Russian firm and perhaps even to bait prosecutors into an embarrassing dismissal in order to avoid disclosing sensitive information_”. This suggests that it’s realistic to assume that Mueller’s team would drop charges rather than go to trial, which would imply that they never intended to go to trial in the first place. Couple that with the fact that the prosecutors just attempted to delay their own case based on reasoning which was rejected by the judge, implying that they were not prepared to actually go to trial on these charges, which suggests another purpose. It’s not like this is completely out there, considering that (again, per Politico) “_when the criminal case was filed, many legal experts predicted it would lie dormant indefinitely and never go to trial because none of the defendants were likely to set foot in the U.S. or in a country from which they could be readily extradited_”. So the case was likely either about a technical sense of obligation or about building public support for their overall efforts. The fact that they don’t seem ready to go forward with it when challenged to do just that suggests the second alternative, IMO. Could be wrong. Time will tell. ---
**Author:** ![Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9de0a6/32.png) [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambrosio_Spinola)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4476 "2018-05-07T19:12:13Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > It’s not like this is completely out there, considering that (again, per Politico) “_when the criminal case was filed, many legal experts predicted it would lie dormant indefinitely and never go to trial because none of the defendants were likely to set foot in the U.S. or in a country from which they could be readily extradited_”. So the case was likely either about a technical sense of obligation or about building public support for their overall efforts. The fact that they don’t seem ready to go forward with it when challenged to do just that suggests the second alternative, IMO. > > Could be wrong. Time will tell. I don’t do any criminal work and very little in federal court, but it seemed like the lawyers for the company are the ones screwing around based on the article. They’re being coy about whether the company is accepting service and they also aren’t committing to having any of the principals of the company actually appear, plus they’re asking for a bunch of invasive discovery and acting surprised that they don’t have detailed responses in two and a half weeks. It’s entirely possible that Mueller’s team didn’t expect to have to try this case so quickly, but I’d be surprised if they aren’t able to if necessary. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4477 "2018-05-07T19:14:12Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Well firstly, as Politico said “_the move appeared to be a bid to force Mueller’s team to turn over relevant evidence to the Russian firm and perhaps even to bait prosecutors into an embarrassing dismissal in order to avoid disclosing sensitive information_”. This suggests that it’s realistic to assume that Mueller’s team would drop charges rather than go to trial, which would imply that they never intended to go to trial in the first place. Realistic to consider? Maybe. Realistic to assume? I don’t see how. IANAL, but it sounds like guessing when we know so little of the actual facts and evidence of the case. > [@](#): > > Couple that with the fact that the prosecutors just attempted to delay their own case based on reasoning which was rejected by the judge, implying that they were not prepared to actually go to trial on these charges, which suggests another purpose. I don’t see how that “suggests another purpose”. The purpose could be what they state it is, and the requested delay could be for a million different reasons. Or not. I’m not saying one way or the other, but your speculation looks like no more than guessing. There could be many explanations mired in legal minutiae for these various strategic/tactical moves that have nothing to do with “PR moves” or anything other than legitimate prosecutorial considerations. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4478 "2018-05-07T19:36:23Z")
> [@Ambrosio\_Spinola](#): > > I don’t do any criminal work and very little in federal court, but it seemed like the lawyers for the company are the ones screwing around based on the article. They’re being coy about whether the company is accepting service and they also aren’t committing to having any of the principals of the company actually appear, plus they’re asking for a bunch of invasive discovery and acting surprised that they don’t have detailed responses in two and a half weeks. IANAL, but it sounds like you are. My interpretation was based on the fact that they prevailed on this motion, which made me assume the judge didn’t think they were “screwing around”. (Mueller’s team seemed to be making the exact same arguments that you are.) > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > IANAL, but it sounds like guessing when we know so little of the actual facts and evidence of the case. I don’t know that it has anything to do with the “actual facts and evidence of the case”. The notion that Mueller never really intended to go to trial isn’t based on the notion that the “actual facts and evidence of the case” wouldn’t support a conviction. Rather, on the notion that the discovery would be damaging enough that it wouldn’t be worthwhile. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4479 "2018-05-07T20:10:13Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I don’t know that it has anything to do with the “actual facts and evidence of the case”. The notion that Mueller never really intended to go to trial isn’t based on the notion that the “actual facts and evidence of the case” wouldn’t support a conviction. Rather, on the notion that the discovery would be damaging enough that it wouldn’t be worthwhile. Perhaps, but that’s just speculation. The truth could involve a myriad of legal minutiae and strategic moves that we aren’t aware of. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4480 "2018-05-07T20:13:21Z")
Agree on all counts. It’s speculation. (Which is why I said “it looks like … may have been …”) But I think it’s pretty good speculation, and better than 90% of the speculation in a thread which is full of it. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [May 7, 2018, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/4481 "2018-05-07T21:07:11Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Agree on all counts. It’s speculation. (Which is why I said “it looks like … may have been …”) But I think it’s pretty good speculation, and better than 90% of the speculation in a thread which is full of it. YMMV. “It looks like” strikes me as a bit more confident than mere speculation. You also said “realistic to assume”, which is far beyond speculation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=223) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=225)