WWTBAM Bored

New York Times wrote:The F.B.I. on Monday raided the office of President Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, seizing records related to several topics including payments to a pornographic-film actress.

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan obtained the search warrant after receiving a referral from the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, according to Mr. Cohen’s lawyer, who called the search “completely inappropriate and unnecessary.” The search does not appear to be directly related to Mr. Mueller’s investigation but likely resulted from information he had uncovered and gave to prosecutors in New York.

“Today the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York executed a series of search warrants and seized the privileged communications between my client, Michael Cohen, and his clients,” said Stephen Ryan, his lawyer. “I have been advised by federal prosecutors that the New York action is, in part, a referral by the Office of Special Counsel, Robert Mueller.”

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

Somebody's got to replace Chuck Rhoades.

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

Somebody's got to replace Chuck Rhoades.

Chuck Rhodes still has a job. I have yet to meet the man he can't outmaneuver. --Bob

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

My understanding is that this isn't Mueller's office that conducted the raid but the "standard" FBI investigators. It's pretty clear, based on my reading that (1) they had Trump's personal selection Geoffrey Berman issue the warrant to avoid any possible claims of deep state conspiracy theories, (2) the FBI doesn't raid an attorney's office unless there's some very compelling reason to do so because it is far too easy to have a judge subsequently toss the evidence as a violation of attorney-client privilege, and (3) the case in favor of the raid must be very compelling to have Berman sign off on it, not to mention the other safeguards that are in place for this type of a warrant in this particular district.

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

It looks like I was mistaken about this. ABC News is reporting that U.S. Attorney Berman recused himself from the Cohen investigation and had no involvement in the raid. On the other hand, the New York Times is reporting that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein personally approved the search. --Bob

Rod J. Rosenstein, the veteran Republican prosecutor handpicked by Mr. Trump to serve as deputy attorney general, personally signed off on Monday’s F.B.I. decision to raid the office of Mr. Cohen.

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

It looks like I was mistaken about this. ABC News is reporting that U.S. Attorney Berman recused himself from the Cohen investigation and had no involvement in the raid. On the other hand, the New York Times is reporting that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein personally approved the search. --Bob

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:The United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York -- who had to have approved the application for the search warrant -- was appointed and personally interviewed by Donny. The fact of a personal interview for this position (by the occupant of the Oval Office, rather than someone in the AG's office) was highly unusual, though perhaps not quite as unusual as firing the Director of the FBI because he refused to end an investigation into potential criminal conduct by members of the Administration. I'm sure it's purely coincidental that the candidate he chose to interview was applying to be the U.S. Attorney with jurisdiction over Donny's conduct in New York. --Bob

It looks like I was mistaken about this. ABC News is reporting that U.S. Attorney Berman recused himself from the Cohen investigation and had no involvement in the raid. On the other hand, the New York Times is reporting that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein personally approved the search. --Bob

Mueller is no fool. He had to know what kind of blowback that would result from the Trump camp, and I have to believe that he made sure he had a paper trail of people who were above suspicion signing off on this.

This also ups the stakes tremendously as I think that some people are going to buy into the Trump line that Mueller is so desperate that he is willing to violate attorney-client privilege to go on a fishing expedition. We are getting very close to the point where either Trump fires Mueller or Mueller puts some of his cards on the table (in the form of sealed indictments he has been sitting on).

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

Bob78164 wrote:It looks like I was mistaken about this. ABC News is reporting that U.S. Attorney Berman recused himself from the Cohen investigation and had no involvement in the raid. On the other hand, the New York Times is reporting that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein personally approved the search. --Bob

Mueller is no fool. He had to know what kind of blowback that would result from the Trump camp, and I have to believe that he made sure he had a paper trail of people who were above suspicion signing off on this.

This also ups the stakes tremendously as I think that some people are going to buy into the Trump line that Mueller is so desperate that he is willing to violate attorney-client privilege to go on a fishing expedition. We are getting very close to the point where either Trump fires Mueller or Mueller puts some of his cards on the table (in the form of sealed indictments he has been sitting on).

I can't wait. I am so tired of all this bullshit. If trump 'colluded' with the russians, then impeach him. Let's see some evidence. If mueller has anything, he needs to stop sitting on it and let us know, rather than trying to find crimes to validate his position.

You are soooo excited, aren't you, hockey puck? I can see you salivating. But you don't know anything more than anyone else. You just hope there is something there because you hate trump.

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:
Mueller is no fool. He had to know what kind of blowback that would result from the Trump camp, and I have to believe that he made sure he had a paper trail of people who were above suspicion signing off on this.

This also ups the stakes tremendously as I think that some people are going to buy into the Trump line that Mueller is so desperate that he is willing to violate attorney-client privilege to go on a fishing expedition. We are getting very close to the point where either Trump fires Mueller or Mueller puts some of his cards on the table (in the form of sealed indictments he has been sitting on).

I can't wait. I am so tired of all this bullshit. If trump 'colluded' with the russians, then impeach him. Let's see some evidence. If mueller has anything, he needs to stop sitting on it and let us know, rather than trying to find crimes to validate his position.

You are soooo excited, aren't you, hockey puck? I can see you salivating. But you don't know anything more than anyone else. You just hope there is something there because you hate trump.

He's already indicted 19 people, obtained guilty pleas from five of them, and had one of them sentenced to jail. That seems like pretty good evidence that there's some there there. --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Anything having to do with trump and the russians colluding? No. Nothing at all.

flockofseagulls104 wrote:
Anything having to do with trump and the russians colluding? No. Nothing at all.

If they find any credible, provable evidence that somehow trump got elected because of the russians, I'll be right there with you demanding he be thrown out of office.

silverscreenselect wrote:But if he discussed the commission of future crimes, that would not be protected and Cohen would be free to testify about it.

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:Anything having to do with trump and the russians colluding? No. Nothing at all.

You mean aside from Donny publicly asking the Russians to hack Democrats, and the Russians doing exactly that?

But let's leave that aside for the moment. Are you saying that you're okay with leaving Donny in office if Mueller finds, for example, that Donny used his official position to engage in obstruction of justice? Or other crimes? Because as far as I'm concerned, that view is really pretty flocked up. It was good enough to force Nixon to resign, and it should be good enough to force Donny out as well. --Bob

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I have stated several times that I will go with the evidence.

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:I have stated several times that I will go with the evidence.

You've claimed several times that you'll go with the evidence, but your behavior belies your claim. There is no dispute that Donny publicly urged a foreign power to hack Democrats' e-mails and we now know that foreign power in fact did so. We know that Donny asked the Director of the FBI to stop investigating Michael Flynn, and when Director Comey failed to do so, Donny fired him. We also know (as of today) that Donny has already tried on at least two occasions to get Mueller fired and that he is seriously contemplating firing Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein, all in an effort to obstruct justice by impeding the investigation into his conduct. But you are willfully refusing to see this evidence.

And you're in no position to complain about name-calling, hockey puck. --Bob

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said during a news conference here in an apparent reference to Mrs. Clinton’s deleted emails. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

flockofseagulls104 wrote:First of all, President Trump JOKED about the 30,000 emails that Hillary couldn't find.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said during a news conference here in an apparent reference to Mrs. Clinton’s deleted emails. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Maybe you are referring to a different quote. If so, let me know when he asked Putin to hack into his opponents computers and publish the dirt he found. I know you have trouble with sarcasm, but that's what it was. Wikileaks published Podesta's emails. Two different things, bob-tel. No proof that Podesta's emails came from Russia. In fact, Assange, another flocking scumbag, but who's never been proven wrong, says it wasn't the russians.

I understand it's your OPINION that Comey was fired over Flynn, but that doesn't make it the truth. There were hundreds of reasons to fire Comey, and most of the leadership in your illustrious democrat party called loudly for him to be fired months before he actually was. You and hockey puck don't seem to understand that your opinions aren't fact, no matter how convincing George Soros is. I have explained this concept to you before, but still you persist.

Maybe trump did want to fire mueller. Has he been fired? Did trump call you up and tell you he wants to fire rosenstein? I don't think so. So how do you know this as fact? Maybe he does want to fire him. But has he done it yet? Is it a crime to wish people who you believe are doing you ill would go away? I wish you would take a long walk off a short pier sometimes, but you haven' yet. (disclaimers, since I am addressing a lawyer: 1. the previous sentence was sarcastic, and should not and was not meant to be taken literally. 2. Do not take any medicine if you are allergic to it. 3. Coffee may be hot.) Should I be arrested? Is that grounds for a law suit?

Bob78164 wrote:

flockofseagulls104 wrote:First of all, President Trump JOKED about the 30,000 emails that Hillary couldn't find.

“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said during a news conference here in an apparent reference to Mrs. Clinton’s deleted emails. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Maybe you are referring to a different quote. If so, let me know when he asked Putin to hack into his opponents computers and publish the dirt he found. I know you have trouble with sarcasm, but that's what it was. Wikileaks published Podesta's emails. Two different things, bob-tel. No proof that Podesta's emails came from Russia. In fact, Assange, another flocking scumbag, but who's never been proven wrong, says it wasn't the russians.

I understand it's your OPINION that Comey was fired over Flynn, but that doesn't make it the truth. There were hundreds of reasons to fire Comey, and most of the leadership in your illustrious democrat party called loudly for him to be fired months before he actually was. You and hockey puck don't seem to understand that your opinions aren't fact, no matter how convincing George Soros is. I have explained this concept to you before, but still you persist.

Maybe trump did want to fire mueller. Has he been fired? Did trump call you up and tell you he wants to fire rosenstein? I don't think so. So how do you know this as fact? Maybe he does want to fire him. But has he done it yet? Is it a crime to wish people who you believe are doing you ill would go away? I wish you would take a long walk off a short pier sometimes, but you haven' yet. (disclaimers, since I am addressing a lawyer: 1. the previous sentence was sarcastic, and should not and was not meant to be taken literally. 2. Do not take any medicine if you are allergic to it. 3. Coffee may be hot.) Should I be arrested? Is that grounds for a law suit?

Of course, wanting to fire Special Counsel Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein (if necessary to get to Mueller) is pretty good evidence that Donny's reason for firing Director Comey was to obstruct the investigation of Flynn, who has proved to be a felon. And the evidence that he really wants to fire Mueller has become compelling enough that the Senate Judiciary Committee is now taking steps to advance a bill that will protect the Special Counsel by providing (a) only a senior member of the Justice Department can fire him, and only for good cause, and (b) if he is fired, he's entitled to judicial review within 10 days to determine whether he was, in fact, fired for good cause. --Bob

If I wanted to fire Robert Mueller in December, as reported by the Failing New York Times, I would have fired him. Just more Fake News from a biased newspaper