Grasswire2
Grasswire2's JournalSeth Abramson's NEW thread about the ending of Mueller investigation here. 2/20/2019
[link:https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1098328381999976451|
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
1/ The first important thing is to understand that—as NBC has done with a similar report over the last two days—CNN hedged its bets on its report in every way possible:
(a) Barr's actions are merely "preparations."
(b) CNN treats the news as merely an "indication" of the future.
14 replies 152 retweets 819 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
2/
(c) If true, it means Mueller's "nearly" done.
(d) "The precise timing of the announcement is subject to change."
(e) "The scope and contours of what Barr will send to Congress remain unclear."
(f) "Also unclear is how long it'll take Justice to prepare what it will submit."
18 replies 113 retweets 702 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
3/ As someone who teaches journalism as well as legal advocacy, I'd say that's a heck of a lot of hedging. We got the same thing—admittedly on a more sparse report—from NBC's Pete Williams yesterday when he said "it's just our [NBC's] speculation" as to when Mueller will finish.
8 replies 114 retweets 792 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
4/ A last hedge from CNN—and previously NBC—is that neither Justice nor Mueller will comment on these reports, and the sources are (of course) anonymous, so we have no idea how strong the sourcing is. The sources are at Justice—but whether they're in-the-know/biased we can't say.
12 replies 111 retweets 691 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
5/ Some of CNN's report is rehashed—reading signs about Mueller possibly finishing up it's noted before (e.g., 4 of Mueller's 17 prosecutors being reassigned). CNN also says it saw "special counsel's office employees carry boxes and push a cart full of files out of their office."
14 replies 86 retweets 568 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
6/ In making that second observation (about files leaving Mueller's office), CNN issued a *warning* about how we should understand what's happening—noting that the movement of files may signal a "hand-off" of certain cases (to other federal prosecutors) rather than their closure.
7 replies 119 retweets 664 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
7/ This is why some inexact language being used by very good reporters at CNN should be checked, including one journalist who said (erroneously) that this report, if true, meant "the completion of the Russia investigation." If we know one thing, we know that that's not accurate.
9 replies 126 retweets 772 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
8/ One reason many attorneys (me, Preet Bharara, and many others) saw Mueller delivering a report to DOJ this summer rather than this spring—keeping in mind that when *we* see it, and how much of it we see, is a different matter—is because certain things can't be wrapped up yet.
8 replies 104 retweets 684 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
9/ Russian spy Maria Butina's boyfriend Paul Erickson was just charged, and we don't know what he'll reveal; Roger Stone was just charged, and we don't know what he'll reveal; Manafort may face new charges or may balk when he gets his sentence, so we don't know what he'll reveal.
9 replies 152 retweets 853 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
10/ Mueller's office previously told Jerome Corsi it would indict him, and that still hasn't happened; Congress has sent transcripts to Mueller indicating felony perjury or lying to Congress by Erik Prince, Donald Trump Jr. and others, and those charges have not yet been brought.
14 replies 142 retweets 846 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
11/ Mueller is still fighting with one individual and one corporation to compel grand jury testimony, and just extended his grand jury 6 months, so those matters must be litigated, as must outstanding subpoenas for document production—apparently internationally—that Mueller sent.
9 replies 148 retweets 784 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
12/ Even taking all this—and more—into account, Mueller is entitled to issue a "final" report saying who he prosecuted, who he *plans to prosecute* or *is about to prosecute*, and who he chose not to prosecute (which could include the president, non-prosecuted due to DOJ regs).
10 replies 96 retweets 609 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
13/ So a "final" report from Robert Mueller could be issued at the same time as any number of indictments are brought or pursued, with DOJ knowing that Mueller's office will have to supplement any "final" report with anything it learns from current or future indicted individuals.
8 replies 88 retweets 591 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
3h3 hours ago
14/ At the same time, as DOJ doesn't comment on ongoing investigations, any "hand-off" cases that go to other federal prosecutors (say at SDNY, EDVA or DC) will not necessarily be addressed in any "final" report, or, if mentioned, may appear partly or wholly redacted pre-release.
5 replies 75 retweets 526 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
15/ What those who've been reporting that Mueller is close to issuing a final report have been saying is simply that: that he's close to issuing a "final report." That doesn't mean "the Russia investigation is complete" in anything like the way most people will hear that phrase.
3 replies 105 retweets 585 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
16/ We also know that Robert Mueller may or may not close (or be involved with, or even know about) every *counterintelligence* case that may remain open about Trump and his campaign—possibly leading to new criminal cases down the line—as opposed to Mueller's *criminal* inquiry.
6 replies 85 retweets 511 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
17/ Mueller's report, if indeed issued in March, could include information that leads to new counterintelligence investigations, new criminal investigations, new Congressional hearings that lead to new security concerns and new criminal referrals—we just have no idea whatsoever.
11 replies 97 retweets 596 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
18/ We don't know if Mueller was forced to end his work by Barr; if Mueller chose not to indict certain Trump compatriots because they're cooperating witnesses in an impeachable-offense (collusion-related) allegation against Trump; if Mueller handed off explosive cases, or what.
13 replies 101 retweets 531 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
19/ The upshot: lawyers and investigators (or, like me, lawyers and former investigators) have consistently said that *on the facts* Mueller can't be done with his work or even 3 months from done; CNN and MSNBC are reporting that *administratively* Mueller may be closing up shop.
12 replies 84 retweets 502 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
20/ So if the reports are right, as @neal_katyal says we're only at the "end of the beginning," not the end of the end. And depending upon how and why we got here now, and what Mueller says in his report—or else sees redacted—we may well be at the beginning of a year of scandals.
13 replies 122 retweets 614 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
21/ I'm only scratching the surface of this topic here. We still may have up to 20 sealed indictments per the DC docket (or none, or more) and even CNN notes that "even with signs of a wrap-up, the DC US Attorney's office has stepped in to work on cases that may continue longer."
9 replies 81 retweets 485 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
22/ Just one probe *alone*—of Trump's inaugural committee—has many of the same witnesses as the Russia investigation "proper" (e.g., Barrack, Flynn, Gates, and more), so how and whether charges emanate from those cases will determine how much more such cases produce on collusion.
3 replies 76 retweets 443 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
23/ Certainly, we know that people like Flynn and Gates have provided the feds with enormous cooperation with secret intel only they (or they and few people) have—and we've seen *no indictments* from that information, which means other shoes *have* to drop. That's how this works.
6 replies 87 retweets 474 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
24/ So if you're seeing attorneys scrambling a bit here, it's because reporters have the easy job in this instance—simply saying whether they're hearing a report is coming—and attorneys the much harder job: to explain how that could be the case when it *factually* makes no sense.
7 replies 71 retweets 417 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
25/ (And/or to explain how the news the reporters are reporting doesn't actually mean what some of the reporters are implying—as I've tried to do here by emphasizing how many different explosive directions this situation could go in over the next month, many harrowing for Trump.)
6 replies 54 retweets 389 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
PS/ Those of us *also* in the midst of researching books are in a particularly fraught place—as we need to get our research done and *know* a book-length treatise is required to explain what's happened, but *also* know how bad the truth is and that therefore this isn't near over.
3 replies 61 retweets 433 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
PS2/ For instance, I did a thread a week ago summarizing that we have *all ends* of an illegal "quid pro quo" of pre-election collusion involving the Trump campaign and an Israeli business intelligence operation that successfully sold Trump Jr. on a Saudi-funded disinfo campaign.
1 reply 77 retweets 428 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
PS3/ So (taking that as just one example of many), I could take today's news as meaning that Trump Jr. will be charged with Lying to Congress by March and then leaned on for more info on Wikistrat/Psy-Group; that this is all part of the ongoing counterintel op; or something else.
7 replies 62 retweets 371 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
PS4/ I can't give you an answer on where these clear lines of federal inquiry are going, and neither can anyone else—but I know they exist and I know they cannot and will not be blithely closed with a simple report in March. *Many* of these threads are *far* too explosive to end.
6 replies 60 retweets 395 likes
Seth Abramson
?Verified account @SethAbramson
2h2 hours ago
PS5/ For all we know, Robert Mueller will dump tons of raw intel into the laps of Congress and the CIA and tell them to investigate it all because he doesn't want to exceed his mandate. We just can't know now and *won't* know for many, many more months—and maybe not even in 2019.
15 replies 92 retweets 530 likes
STOP REPEATING THAT MUELLER REPORT IS IMMINENT!
The story from CNN is misleading.
Look for the word "could" and think about it.
Geez.
CNN's click bait.
What IS coming is a section of the Manafort sentencing report on collusion.
Calm down. Remember "Fitzmas"?
[link:http:// https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/02/20/questions-to-ask-before-reporting-a-breaking-mueller-report/|
NYT: Justice Thomas makes a move against freedom of the press.
[link:https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/19/us/politics/clarence-thomas-first-amendment-libel.html|
WASHINGTON — Justice Clarence Thomas on Tuesday called for the Supreme Court to reconsider New York Times v. Sullivan, the landmark 1964 ruling interpreting the First Amendment to make it hard for public officials to prevail in libel suits.
He said the decision had no basis in the Constitution as it was understood by the people who drafted and ratified it.
“New York Times and the court’s decisions extending it were policy-driven decisions masquerading as constitutional law,” Justice Thomas wrote.
NYT today: Trump raised with Whitaker the idea of getting US Atty NY to unrecuse
Trump raised with acting AG Whitaker the idea of getting the U.S. attorney in New York to "unrecuse" himself from Cohen investigations.
[link:https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/19/us/politics/trump-investigations.html|
Seth Abramson wants us to emphasize this: Gang of Eight had no objection to investigation of Trump
(And Nunes was in the room when they were briefed.)
[link:http://|https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1097886286793359360
If you haven't read Seth Abramson's thread on NY rogue FBI "resistance" -- better do so.
This is a topic that has pestered us for a very long time. McCabe gives us more info, analyzed here by Abramson.
[link:https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1097539215800352768|
outstanding cartoon re: Trump's attack "Enemy Of The People"
Great for sharing to get this message out on social media.
[link:https://twitter.com/WestWingReport/status/1097257972332457984|
Who is on Bill Maher tonight? I hope it's goooood. nt
so the control on the bathroom wall heater is apparently stripped...
....it just goes round and round and nothing happens.. It has been difficult for a while getting it to turn the heater off, and this is likely the culmination of that problem.
What would I have to do to replace that knob and have the heater working again? What if I take it off and it is not the knob stripped, but the metal part worn down that extends into the knob when it's in place?
The knob is plastic, by the way.
Any ideas appreciated! I currently have the breaker switch off.
From Neal Katyal, who wrote the rules for Special Counsel office
[link:https://twitter.com/neal_katyal/status/1083203987468357635|
First 15 points:
New conversation
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
1.The special counsel rules, which I drafted at DOJ 20 years ago, contemplate 2 kinds of reports. One is a report from Mueller to the AG, at the close of his investigation: “a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.”
30 replies 1,341 retweets 4,567 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
2. That document is to be confidential. But there is a second, separate reporting requirement, which forces the AG to notify Congress “with an explanation for each action…upon conclusion of the Special Counsel’s investigation, including…
14 replies 995 retweets 4,162 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
3. ... a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the AG concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued.”
10 replies 794 retweets 3,560 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
4.That report must explain why the investigation has concluded, and any instance in which the AG overruled the Special Counsel. The provision was designed to ensure “Congressional and public confidence in the integrity of the process.”
8 replies 881 retweets 4,184 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
5.Notably, we wrote the circumstances for an AG to overrule a Special Counsel very tightly—it has to violate “established Departmental practices.”
7 replies 769 retweets 3,649 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
6. So, to take one hypothetical example, generic DOJ opinions about whether a sitting President could be indicted do not create an “established Departmental practice” about whether an individual could be indicted for successfully cheating in a Presidential election.
15 replies 925 retweets 3,871 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
7.There is no DOJ established practice that says if a Presidential candidate cheats enough and wins the Presidency, that he gets a get-out-of-jail-free card.
32 replies 1,566 retweets 5,338 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
8.There is one other important aspect to the regulations. If a Special Counsel is worried that the AG may cover something up, the regs give him an important weapon.
9 replies 909 retweets 3,897 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
9.Because they require a mandatory report to Congress about any instance of the AG overruling a Special Counsel, they put the thumb on the scale of a Special Counsel telling the AG he will take a sensitive act and waiting for AG to say no. That triggers the reporting requirement.
18 replies 983 retweets 4,172 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
10. It is a safeguard to prevent a cover-up, it creates a mandatory report to a separate and coequal branch of govt. So that is why I believe Mueller has a move left to play if Whitaker or Barr (if confirmed) try to stymie him and his full report.
27 replies 1,088 retweets 4,816 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
11. Now the President can try to claim executive privilege. Nixon tried that, it didn’t turn out so well. He got crushed in the Supreme Court. Trump’s claim appears even weaker—much wont even concern presidential deliberations&the part that might (Comey) has been waived by Trump.
37 replies 909 retweets 3,975 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
12.And here, there is another problem: Trump’s legal team has been saying they don’t think a sitting President can be indicted.
20 replies 672 retweets 3,078 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
13. Leaving aside the point above in (6) and (7), the only way that claim makes any sense is if the President must be impeached first. Every real scholar who says a sitting President can’t be indicted couples that with a view that impeachment is the remedy.
11 replies 787 retweets 3,568 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
14. So if the President asserts the view he can’t be indicted, he has to allow the turnover of all investigative material to Congress. Otherwise he would be no different than King George III, literally above the law.
43 replies 1,298 retweets 5,031 likes
Neal Katyal
?Verified account @neal_katyal
Jan 9
15.This point is fleshed out in my NYT op-ed below. The key point is that even if you think Trump won't be indicted, his legal claims about his immunity from indictment set up&invite the launch of impeachment investigation+eviscerate his exec priv claims.
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Jul 22, 2018, 03:20 PMNumber of posts: 13,569
