Don McGahn Has Been Covering for Roger Stone's Pro-Trump Rat-F*****g for Seven Years
Should Trump Run: Don McGahn Has Been Covering for Roger Stone’s Pro-Trump Rat-Fucking for Seven Years
August 18, 2018/38 Comments/in 2012 Presidential Election, 2016 Presidential Election, emptywheel, Mueller Probe /by emptywheel
https://www.emptywheel.net/2018/08/18/should-trump-run-don-mcgahn-has-been-covering-for-roger-stones-rat-fucking-for-seven-years/
It has become clear to me that today’s big puff piece in the NYT about Don McGahn was designed to hide that Mueller is challenging the White House Counsel, former FEC Commissioner, and Trump campaign finance advisor on past work he has done for Trump.
One of those things must be McGahn’s effort, while at FEC in 2011, to stymie any investigation into a PAC involving Roger Stone and Michael Cohen, called Should Trump Run.
As I’ve noted, in 2011, one of the people closely involved in Stone’s 2016 rat-fucking, Pamela Jensen, was involved in a 527 called ShouldTrumpRun that listed Michael Cohen as President.
The organization was apparently laundering Trump corporate cash into campaign spending. But when the issue came before the FEC, Commissioner Don McGahn helped kill an investigation into it.
<<snip>>
Jensen, her family, and Stone teamed up on a number of equally dubious efforts in 2016, including a 527 called Stop the Steal, which McGahn provided legal protection for in both its early (convention focused) and its late (Democratic voter suppression) incarnations. The latter effort at least paralleled Russian voter suppression efforts.
In other words, White House Counsel Don McGahn — the subject of a Maggie and Mike puff piece suggesting he would only be of interest on the obstruction investigation — has for at least seven years been right in the thick of defending Roger Stone’s legally dubious rat-fucking on behalf of Donald Trump.
And Roger Stone has been the focus of Mueller investigation for six months.
Those are the same six months during which Maggie and Mike have been pushing an increasingly absurd claim that Trump and his associates are only at risk in an obstruction investigation, not the conspiracy investigation McGahn has surely been questioned in.
= new reply since forum marked as read
