A Thread for the Mueller Investigation Results and Outcomes (Part 1)

This was before Mueller, it was shortly after Rosenstein took office. Supposedly, anyway. I guess we won’t know for sure until the memo gets out.

Something doesn’t make sense because the FISA warrant was supposedly granted in September 2016 and they have to be renewed every 90 days. It must have been renewed in December 2016, then again in March 2017, but Rosenstein didn’t take office until April 25, 2017. It’s possible that Rosenstein’s signature was on the *third *renewal application.

You’re right, that would have been applied for under Comey originally, then. And it is curious about the dates and how they fall.

I’m sure we’ll see the memo, since Trump absolutely plans to declassify the information, over objections of his personally-appointed Republican FBI Director Wray and Deputy AG Rosenstein, for his partisan purposes of smearing his own FBI and DOJ in an effort to weaken or stop the Mueller investigation.

I wonder how many obstruction charges will arise out of this little caper.

I was just looking at that timeline and something that may be good to make note of before the Nunes memo comes out, and likely says the opposite, is that the Page FISA warrant was issued after he left the campaign.

From a tweet that nearly had me shooting Hawaiian Punch out my nose:

If you don’t remember John Yoo, cast your memory back to torture memos. Yep, that guy.

I’ll never forget that guy. And yes, the irony there is… I can’t shake my head hard enough.

Good point about the ‘accusation’ concerning renewal. But of course it doesn’t matter how thin the accusation is. The memo could have said that Rod Rosenstein was once curt to his mother on the phone. The point is that the screaming right-wing masses have a word of no-more-than-three syllables available to shout to the rooftops.

The MEMO! Rosenstein must GO! The MEMO!!!1!!!

The memo, her e-mails, Benghazi, oh my!

Oh, you mean the guy who wrapped John Stewart up so badly that Stewart had to apologize to his fans for not being able to ‘get’ him?

John Yoo is a chaired professor of law at Berkeley, and he has a first-rate legal mind.

John Yoo wrote legal opinions in a memo that “justified” torture and narrowly defined habeas corpus. Fuck him, even if he’s got it right this time.

If only he’d used his powers for good, instead of evil.

Not sure who John Stewart is, but Yoo was the guy that justified the use of torture. He was on a show called The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, in which he demonstrated that he was a lawyer, and that as a top ranked lawyer, he managed to outmaneuver a TV show host on a matter related to the law.

It probably does require someone fairly intelligent to find ways of bending the law in order to justify torturing human beings, but that doesn’t really mean that you should be idolizing him.

You don’t have to be much of a lawyer at all to dismiss the law and pretend to write your own version.

The main villain there was Jay Bybee, but Yoo was the primary supporting actor. Yoo’s primary flouting of of the law was

It’s all revolting reading, but not nearly as revolting as the knowledge that it still has its supporters.

I don’t know much about him, but he does have a prestigious position. I was more just wondering why Sam Stone seems so highly impressed that he managed to outlawyer a TV show host.

I understand being a supporter if you actually like torture. If it is something that you want to see more of, and even participate in. I don’t understand how people who are not sociopaths support it though.

FBI director Wray told the House he opposes release of the Nunes memo because it’s partisan bullshit

https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/articles/2018-01-31/trump-says-100-percent-after-he-s-asked-to-release-gop-memo?__twitter_impression

It makes more sense if you realize he’s a simple cheerleader for the Republican Party, from his no-skin-in-the-game perch up in Canada. It’s just another case if “Hey lookit, one of ‘our’ guys really took it to a Dem hero!”

If in fact that’s what happened.

The point remains that the guy who thought that enabling torture wasn’t a misuse of executive power thinks that Trump’s release of a memo is, and that there is a certain amount of :dubious: that springs therefrom.

You know, I go back and forth on Wray. But I’m starting to think he’s going to be ok.

His association with Chris Christie and Bridgegate made me very suspicious when Trump appointed him.

Watched his confirmation hearing and sure, he said all the right things and seemed sincere. But so did Gorsuch, and he’s totally in the bag for Trump. So…

Then he made a little-noted statement reported by Reuters but wasn’t mentioned anywhere else that I saw, saying he’d seen no evidence of wrongdoing by Trump re the Russia investigation. And I thought, hoo boy.

Then he said he’d resign before firing Andrew McCabe. Good. A week later, McCabe is out and Wray is still around, obviously not resigning. Not good.

But then he appoints David Bowdich as acting FBI Director – another real truth-and-justice feller. It’s a pick that Comey or Mueller would have made. Career agent, well regarded, made from within the ranks.

And Fubaya’s link makes it clear that Wray is against release of the stupid Nunes memo for the very good reason that it’s full of misleading bullshit.

Wray seems bright enough to realize his 10-year appointment will likely far outlast Trump and his dangerous antics. Let’s hope so.

It was some time back, and I don’t remember details, or even if I saw that particular interview, but it was fairly well acknowledged that Yoo prevented Stewart from getting to any of his points through obstruction and obfuscation. Imagine arguing with Bricker, but in real time, so he can interrupt, and in order to respond to a point he makes before going on to the next you have to interrupt him, and with a limited time available for the whole thing. Now, imagine a Bricker who is so Bricker that the president would appoint him to justify his desire to inflict pain and suffering upon other human beings.
Many on the right saw (and still see, apparently) that as a “win”. They don’t seem to acknowledge that what they were playing for is the ability to intentionally cause harm and injury to other human beings as a form of punishment to people who are not given the due process of law. And they consider that managing to “win” an interview with a TV host to justify a mandate.

If Yoo thinks this is a misuse of executive power, it must be really bad!

And a real live law professor pushes the same idea (and says it is protected).