Tamper Tantrum (Mueller Thread v. 17)

[Strychnine]

I remember reading an (unpublished) case a while back about a prisoner who masterbauted so much he started bleeding. The prison has some degree of obligation to keep prisoners from hurting themselves, and there was a question of how much this qualified. Really fucking weird.

 

[Quequeg]

It proves that the court of public opinion holds no sway with Republican voters.

In law, logic, and life, that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

The fake "Russian collusion" conspiracy theory can be summed up thusly:

Sore losers will always make excuses.

Yeah, the Alzheimers defense worked, a pitiful period in American history.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

It proves that the court of public opinion holds no sway with Republican voters.

In law, logic, and life, that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

The fake "Russian collusion" conspiracy theory can be summed up thusly:

Sore losers will always make excuses.

Where's the logic in believing in a guy that lies constantly?

 

[Strychnine]

He sent encrypted text messages to witnesses while under house arrest. No getting around that now

One of the witnesses contacted the FBI saying "Manafort is trying to get me to lie for him in court." Manafort did all of this while wearing TWO ankle bracelets, using a cell phone.

But ANYONE would do that right?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Nixon was such an egomaniac that he actually had recordings of every word he ever uttered.

President Trump is a bit more savy with the times we're living in:

He uses his own personal cell phone so I'm not so sure savvy is an apt description.

 

[Strychnine]

yep didn't know him at all. Just some guy. Sure sounds like he wants him to know something is going down.

Why does President Trump keep going on about "Crooked Hillary", when while he was campaigning he was all...



He needs to either $hit or get off the pot!

 

[LangfordBarrow]

I think you confuse me, I could care less what happens to Montafort, as he has been entrenched with many establishment politicians for decades. I have an issue with people trying to shit on President Trump because this guy was part of his campaign for a few months and the media ignores that he has been a career campaign contributer, not some guy Trump picked out of nowhere.

The other issue is the Mueller investigation as s whole but that's another thread.

This guy has links to Russia. He was working in Ukraine with their installed president in much the same manner. While he was heading Trump's campaign, they had a meeting with Russian agents that promised dirt on his opponent, that included Jr and Jared. Soon after the emails the Russians hacked are disemminated by Wikileaks just in time to counter the pussy grabbing video that came out. I don't know about his work on other campaigns but can we investigate this first and not act like it's no big deal?

 

[Juventud]

I remember very early on in the campaign when Flynn & Manafort were brought on being praised by the media as respected military members/campaign runners.

Now they're the 2 most corrupt people in the campaign selling U.S. interests for money. Truly traitors to the state.

Bannon was working with Cambridge Analytica.

Donald Jnr was in contact with Wiki leaks and meeting with Russian operatives.

But totally...'nothing to see here'.
Right guys?

We should just ignore all this.
It will turn up nothing.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

No not irrelevant, this has been this guys career for decades

And the investigation has so far found alleged crimes that date back a decade. What's your point, that he hadn't been caught before?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Did he think they weren’t watching him like a hawk? What a fucking dumbass...

That foldering ploy seems like it would be pretty effective. They must have had a tip to nab him.

 

[M3t4tr0n]

Potato sharpens potato

Lmao. I don't know why this made me laugh so hard

 

[D3thr0n3d K1ng]

Either we're mostly a nation of still fairly reasonable people, or we're officially a cult of personality that stands for nothing.

My money is on the second. The question is when Trump pardons Manafort or if any evidence comes out that implicates him more will anyone in Congress do anything about it?

Im thinking no. I feel like Murka is slipping into Brazil 2.0 and this Presidency is gonna prove it with all the corruption that will go unpunished.

 

[Cojopi Extomino]

My money is on the second. The question is when Trump pardons Manafort or if any evidence comes out that implicates him more will anyone in Congress do anything about it?

Im thinking no. I feel like Murka is slipping into Brazil 2.0 and this Presidency is gonna prove it with all the corruption that will go unpunished.

I'm feeling the same way but hoping we're both wrong. But I can't say I've ever seen people so willing to ruin their country over a culture war that isn't happening in 99% of the country.

 

[Deleted member 429137]

A lot of Trumptards are trying to say that Manafort was a political swamp monster who only recently and briefly crossed Trump's path. Not true.

Trump has been working with Roger Stone and Paul Manafort since 1980 when he became one of their first clients.

Black, Manafort, Stone and Kelly, Formed in 1980 it merged with Martin B. Gold's Gold & Liebengood to form BKSH & Associates in 1996. The firm has represented, and lobbied the US Congress on behalf of, numerous foreign governments and heads of state from both representative democracies and unelected dictatorships including Mohamed Siad Barre of Somalia, dictator Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines,[4][5] dictator Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire,[6] and Jonas Savimbi of Angola.

During the 1988 presidential campaign in the United States, it was disclosed that Black, Manafort retained the island nation of the Bahamas as a client at a time its leadership was being attacked for alleged ties to drug traffickers. BMSK officials insisted that they intended only to help the Bahamas obtain more United States aid for efforts to curb drug smugglers.[1] In 2003, it was internationally criticized for its representation of Ahmad Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress for their support of the War on Iraq, which was primarily based on intelligence provided by the group which was later proved to be false.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black,_Manafort,_Stone_and_Kelly

Also this new layout is giving me cancer.

 

[Grok]

Potato sharpens potato

*Mashes

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Lmao. I don't know why this made me laugh so hard

 

[M3t4tr0n]

I just pictured a mentally unstable gentleman rubbing two boiled potatoes together till the point of frustration then smashing them into each other because of autistic rage.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

I just pictured a mentally unstable gentleman rubbing two boiled potatoes together till the point of frustration then smashing them into each other because of autistic rage.

Trump and Manafort used to pound each other's potatoes behind the White House, right Joe?

 

[TankAbbott]

*gulp*

https://www.lawfareblog.com/terrible-arguments-against-constitutionality-mueller-investigation

Calabresi has made his argument in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, on a Federalist Society teleconference and in a more detailed paper he styles as a “Legal Opinion.” He contends that all of Special Counsel Mueller’s work is unconstitutionally “null and void” because, in Calabresi’s view, Mueller’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause 2.

The Appointments Clause distinguishes between two classes of executive-branch “officers”—principal officers and inferior officers—and specifies how each may be appointed. As a general rule, the clause says that “Officers of the United States”—principal officers—must be nominated by the president and appointed “with the Advice and Consent of the Senate.” At the same time, however, the Appointments Clause allows for a more convenient selection method for “inferior officers”: It goes on to add, “but the Congress may by law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of law, or in the Heads of Departments.”

Calabresi argues that Special Counsel Mueller is acting as a principal officer and that, accordingly, Mueller’s appointment violates the Constitution because Mueller was appointed by the acting attorney general, and not by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate. In support of this broad point, Calabresi makes first a specific claim and then a more general one.

His specific claim, made at the outset of his “Legal Opinion,” is that “Robert Mueller has behaved like the 96 [sic] U.S. Attorneys who are principal officers of the United States and who must be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.” His more general, and overarching, claim is that under Supreme Court case law applying the Appointments Clause, Special Counsel Mueller is a principal officer because “because Mueller does not have a boss who is supervising and directing what he is doing.”

 

[Andy Capp]

*gulp*

https://www.lawfareblog.com/terrible-arguments-against-constitutionality-mueller-investigation

Calabresi has made his argument in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, on a Federalist Society teleconference and in a more detailed paper he styles as a “Legal Opinion.” He contends that all of Special Counsel Mueller’s work is unconstitutionally “null and void” because, in Calabresi’s view, Mueller’s appointment violates the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, Article II, Section 2, Clause 2.

The Appointments Clause distinguishes between two classes of executive-branch “officers”—principal officers and inferior officers—and specifies how each may be appointed. As a general rule, the clause says that “Officers of the United States”—principal officers—must be nominated by the president and appointed “with the Advice and Consent of the Senate.” At the same time, however, the Appointments Clause allows for a more convenient selection method for “inferior officers”: It goes on to add, “but the Congress may by law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of law, or in the Heads of Departments.”

Calabresi argues that Special Counsel Mueller is acting as a principal officer and that, accordingly, Mueller’s appointment violates the Constitution because Mueller was appointed by the acting attorney general, and not by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate. In support of this broad point, Calabresi makes first a specific claim and then a more general one.

His specific claim, made at the outset of his “Legal Opinion,” is that “Robert Mueller has behaved like the 96 [sic] U.S. Attorneys who are principal officers of the United States and who must be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.” His more general, and overarching, claim is that under Supreme Court case law applying the Appointments Clause, Special Counsel Mueller is a principal officer because “because Mueller does not have a boss who is supervising and directing what he is doing.”

Interesting that you are attempting to imply the opposite of the purpose of the article.
"Unfortunately for the president, these writings are no more correct than the spelling in his original tweet. And in light of the president’s apparent embrace of Calabresi’s conclusions, it is well worth taking a close look at Calabresi’s argument in support of those conclusions."

"Calabresi’s first point—the illustrative comparison between Mueller and the U.S. attorneys—begins with a badly mistaken premise. Without citing anything at all, he repeatedly assumes, in both his op-ed and his “Legal Opinion” paper, that “Congress has specified that the 96 [sic] U.S. Attorneys are all principal officers who must be nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.” (Emphasis mine.)

This assumption is just wrong—uncomplicatedly, flatly wrong. It is true that, typically, the 93 (not 96) U.S. attorneys are presidentially nominated and Senate-confirmed. But Congress has established an alternative method of appointment. Title 28 U.S.C. § 546provides that, until the Senate confirms a presidential nominee, U.S. attorney vacancies can be filled for up to 120 days by an appointment made by the attorney general and then indefinitely by local district courts. Such non-presidential, non-Senate-confirmed appointees are, as one court of appeals has put it, “fully-empowered United States Attorneys, … not subordinates assuming the role of ‘Acting’ United States Attorney.” And such fully-empowered, non-presidentially-appointed U.S. attorneys are not all that uncommon. Today, the sitting United States attorneys in two of the most important judicial districts in the country—the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York—were appointed by the judges of those districts under Section 546(d)."