# 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:** 403
**Author:** ![carlb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carlb/32/5930_2.png) [@carlb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carlb)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8043 "2018-12-05T13:23:42Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > The committee can subpoena him for his testimony. If they were to compel him to testify, he could be forced to say something incriminating, which in turn could then be used in criminal proceedings. He’s got the right to keep silent generally, not just in courts. [Popehat’s “Lawsplainer”](https://twitter.com/Popehat/status/1070082687614935040) regarding invoking the Fifth around document production. In short, you _may_ have Fifth Amendment protections when subpoenaed for document production, depending on the nature of the subpoena and the documents requested. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8044 "2018-12-05T13:34:57Z")
Meanwhile, in Fox News Build-Your-Own-Reality Adventureland, the Flynn sentencing memo is [yet more proof](https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mueller-strikes-out-trying-to-nail-trump-flynn-sentencing-memo-is-a-big-nothing) that Trump did absolutely nothing wrong, that Mueller is obsessed with “nailing Trump” in any way possible, that the entire Mueller investigation is an illegitimate nothingburger, and that Rudy Giuliani was right about something. Ignorance is strength, Oceanians! ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8045 "2018-12-05T13:59:20Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Personally, I think the most slam-dunk case is the tax evasion one. It worked well enough with Al Capone. > [@Aspenglow](#): > > The Emoluments case is the one that is going to take Trump apart, even if nothing else does. That works for me as well, even better in fact. It sends a clear message that we don’t like anyone using the office of the President to line his pocket. Drain the swamp, my ass. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8046 "2018-12-05T14:25:08Z")
> [@Skypist](#): > > Awful lot of redacted information, dang it. They aren’t redactions. Robert Mueller just has a real bad potty mouth. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8047 "2018-12-05T16:40:34Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > It carries the same weight. They can hold him in criminal contempt and jail him in a federal prison for up to a year and fine him up to $100,000 unless/until he changes his mind. > > They can also issue subpoenas for documents from other organizations that may have what they want, such as his phone provider, ISP, etc. Federal _court_ subpoenas are executed by The U.S. Marshals Service, IIRC, with its 5000+ employees, all reporting to Trump crony Matt Whitaker. The House of Representatives? I guess they appoint one Bailiff. Does he even have deputies? They pass a subpoena over to Trump’s DoJ and get laughed at — what happens next? ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8048 "2018-12-05T16:47:30Z")
T-shirts, anyone?: [https://www.northernsun.com/It's-Mueller-Time-TShirt-(8579).html](https://www.northernsun.com/It%27s-Mueller-Time-TShirt-%288579%29.html) ---
**Author:** ![Nava](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/da6949/32.png) [@Nava](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nava)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8049 "2018-12-05T17:27:27Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > You don’t know much about subpoenas duces tecum, do you? “Subpoenas ‘may il Duce be with you’” I suspect is not a correct translation. Mind explaining for the legally mainly-illiterate? (I know, I could google, but if I do I’ll probably find word walls of legalese) ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8050 "2018-12-05T17:44:41Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Federal _court_ subpoenas are executed by The U.S. Marshals Service, IIRC, with its 5000+ employees, all reporting to Trump crony Matt Whitaker. > > The House of Representatives? I guess they appoint one Bailiff. Does he even have deputies? They pass a subpoena over to Trump’s DoJ and get laughed at — what happens next? I haven’t seen much evidence that the DOJ is bending to Whitaker’s will. Have you? In fact, I think they are pretty angry at the extent to which their institution has been politicized by Trump. As for the actual arrest of Stone, I expect they will simply refer it to the DOJ. Whitaker may have some control over what happens to Mueller’s investigation – although we’ve seen no evidence of that at this point and I keep hearing that Rod Rosenstein remains in charge. But he (Whitaker) has no jurisdiction to prevent the DOJ from carrying out the will of a house of Congress. I mean, unless he wants to go full-on coup and risk jail time himself. > [@Nava](#): > > “Subpoenas ‘may il Duce be with you’” I suspect is not a correct translation. Mind explaining for the legally mainly-illiterate? (I know, I could google, but if I do I’ll probably find word walls of legalese) It’s simply a subpoena for documents and/or other items such as tapes, emails, records, etc. These items don’t enjoy Fifth Amendment protections, and even if Stone attempts to destroy this evidence, Congress can issue subpoenas to other places that would have copies, such as his phone company, internet service provider, etc. Stone is powerless to prevent these companies from complying with such a subpoena. Hope this clarifies. May il Duce be with you. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Railer13](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/railer13/32/9742_2.png) [@Railer13](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Railer13)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8051 "2018-12-05T18:14:58Z")
[Here](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-if-we-already-have-the-mueller-report/) is a pretty good summary of what Mueller has done thus far and what we might expect in the near future. From FiveThirtyEight. > [@](#): > > So stay tuned. We don’t know how much longer Mueller’s investigation will last or how many more indictments or other public documents he will file. His investigation could end with a lot of indictments, but with little said about Trump. Or it could make Trump look so bad that congressional Democrats, the press and the public start to talk more openly about impeachment. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8052 "2018-12-05T18:53:41Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > I haven’t seen much evidence that the DOJ is bending to Whitaker’s will. Have you? In fact, I think they are pretty angry at the extent to which their institution has been politicized by Trump. Slate has a worthwhile piece pointing out that Whitaker might be [holding back](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/12/matthew-whitaker-obstruction-mueller-probe-nixon-watergate.html?) to avoid being like Nixon’s lawyers/DOJ. Let’s hope that is true. > [@Aspenglow](#): > > It’s simply a subpoena for documents and/or other items such as tapes, emails, records, etc. These items don’t enjoy Fifth Amendment protections, and even if Stone attempts to destroy this evidence, Congress can issue subpoenas to other places that would have copies, such as his phone company, internet service provider, etc. Stone is powerless to prevent these companies from complying with such a subpoena. > > Hope this clarifies. May il Duce be with you. 🙂 According to PopeHat on Twitter - there are some protections for documents under the Fifth. > **[Read and Share Twitter Threads easily!](https://threadreaderapp.com/authenticate)** > > Thread Reader helps you read and share the best of Twitter Threads ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8053 "2018-12-05T18:55:50Z")
> [@Nava](#): > > “Subpoenas ‘may il Duce be with you’” I suspect is not a correct translation. Mind explaining for the legally mainly-illiterate? (I know, I could google, but if I do I’ll probably find word walls of legalese) The wiki article is pretty accessible. The phrase is translated there as “under [threat of] penalty, you will bring [it] with you.” Essentially, a court order to a witness, directing them not only to come testify, but to bring relevant documents in their possession, potentially to be admitted into evidence. > **[Subpoena duces tecum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subpoena_duces_tecum)** > > A subpoena duces tecum (pronounced in English /səˈpiːnə ˌdjuːsiːz ˈtiːkəm/ sə-PEE-nə DEW-seez TEE-kəm), or subpoena for production of evidence, is a court summons ordering the recipient to appear before the court and produce documents or other tangible evidence for use at a hearing or trial. In some jurisdictions, it can also be issued by legislative bodies such as county boards of supervisors. > The summons is known by various names in different jurisdictions. The term subpoena duces tecum is use... ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8054 "2018-12-05T20:13:47Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > I haven’t seen much evidence that the DOJ is bending to Whitaker’s will. Have you? In fact, I think they are pretty angry at the extent to which their institution has been politicized by Trump. An imaginary DOJ employee was quoted saying, “Whitaker’s a lame duck. Screw him.” ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8055 "2018-12-05T20:26:01Z")
Whitaker has no legal authority anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [December 5, 2018, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8056 "2018-12-05T20:27:44Z")
> [@dropzone](#): > > An imaginary DOJ employee was quoted saying, “Whitaker’s a lame duck. Screw him.” I do get the sense that, at least so far as Mueller is concerned, he was essentially told by the Senate or FBI or someone that they’d go to town on him if he tried to do anything but be Mueller’s yes-boy. Potentially, Mueller has more freedom now than he did under Rosenstein, since Rosenstein was probably trusted to say “no”. On the other hand, I’d still say that there’s a decent likelihood that Whitaker is going to fire everyone in the DOJ, before he can be replaced, so that he can hire back in Trump loyalists and crooks. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [December 6, 2018, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8057 "2018-12-06T23:56:09Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I do get the sense that, at least so far as Mueller is concerned, he was essentially told by the Senate or FBI or someone that they’d go to town on him if he tried to do anything but be Mueller’s yes-boy. Potentially, Mueller has more freedom now than he did under Rosenstein, since Rosenstein was probably trusted to say “no”. > > On the other hand, I’d still say that there’s a decent likelihood that Whitaker is going to fire everyone in the DOJ, before he can be replaced, so that he can hire back in Trump loyalists and crooks. Mass firings by Whitaker would have to pass the usual tests of firings “for cause.” “Because this will help the President escape accountability for his crimes” will not be seen as an acceptable rationale. As has been intimated by several, Whitaker will have been fully informed of his own legal vulnerability to charges of obstruction of justice. And dude is no mastermind. He’s not going to find any loopholes that would let him derail Mueller while keeping out of trouble himself. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 2:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8058 "2018-12-07T02:10:49Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > Mass firings by Whitaker would have to pass the usual tests of firings “for cause.” “Because this will help the President escape accountability for his crimes” will not be seen as an acceptable rationale. > > As has been intimated by several, Whitaker will have been fully informed of his own legal vulnerability to charges of obstruction of justice. And dude is no mastermind. He’s not going to find any loopholes that would let him derail Mueller while keeping out of trouble himself. So far as I know, there’s no one in the DOJ between Whitaker and Mueller. He can’t fire Mueller, but everyone _in the DOJ_ is unrelated to the Mueller investigation. Even Rosenstein is no longer relevant to the Russia case. Now, that said, the Russia investigation is almost certainly not the only potentially damaging case for the President and his allies. But Trump has never spoken of them and so long as he leaves no paper trail and talks to Whitaker directly, there’s nothing to stop him from clearing the DOJ in the hope of throwing a wrench into everything else against him. All he has to do is bring up the “anonymous” article about how there is a resistance in the Executive Branch, and he needs to clean house to ensure that his employees are actually working for him. ---
**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:** [December 7, 2018, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8059 "2018-12-07T03:20:14Z")
\*\*Trump Weighs Bringing Back William Barr as Attorney General \*\* > **[Trump Weighs Bringing Back William Barr as Attorney General (Published 2018)](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/06/us/politics/william-barr-attorney-general-trump.html)** > > William P. Barr, a supporter of executive power who served as attorney general in 1991-93, is a front-runner to lead the Justice Department again. > [@](#): > > …With Democrats vowing oversight hearings into Mr. Whitaker when they take over the House in January, the president is said to be under pressure — including from allies like Republican senators Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, the departing and incoming chairmen of the Senate Judiciary Committee — to quickly nominate a viable successor to Mr. Sessions. > > Mr. Barr is seen as the leading candidate for the nomination if Mr. Trump does not decide to stay with Mr. Whitaker for an extended period, several Justice Department officials said this week. And while Mr. Trump is known for changing his mind capriciously, he likes to poll advisers and confidants about potential nominees and has asked several people about Mr. Barr recently. > … Whatever. ---
**Author:** ![dasmoocher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@dasmoocher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dasmoocher)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8060 "2018-12-07T04:50:15Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > \*\*Trump Weighs Bringing Back William Barr as Attorney General \*\* > [https://nyti.ms/2E3d57r](https://nyti.ms/2E3d57r) > Whatever. Maybe Trump thinks he’s related to Roseanne? ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8061 "2018-12-07T06:33:08Z")
> [@dasmoocher](#): > > Maybe Trump thinks he’s related to Roseanne? Nice. Stealing. ---
**Author:** ![Superdude](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/superdude/32/13450_2.png) [@Superdude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Superdude)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2018, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/8062 "2018-12-07T07:26:38Z")
> [@dasmoocher](#): > > Maybe Trump thinks he’s related to Roseanne? “Of course he’s a good choice! They named that lawyer test after him!” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=402) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=404)