General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFormer FBI-agent explains why Mueller-investigation is harder to shut down than Trump imagines.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/opinion/rod-rosenstein-trump-robert-mueller-russia.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=HomepageTo begin with, there is no such thing as a single Russia investigation. The F.B.I. pursues cases against individuals and organizations, not topics this allows each case to have the flexibility to go in the direction the evidence leads, regardless of what happens with other, related cases.
...
Thats why the current Russia investigation, originally referred to in the F.B.I. as Crossfire Hurricane, isnt just a single case on Russian election meddling. Rather, at this stage it is a spider web of tens or dozens of cases on intelligence officers, their agents and individuals and organizations helping Russia that are investigated independently, cross-referencing pertinent information to other cases as necessary.
Nor is an investigation of this magnitude limited to a single office. Each case generates leads threads of inquiry, like an interview or surveillance of an intelligence officer who might be traveling to another state that span the country. When this happens, F.B.I. agents dont hop on a plane. Rather, the home office for the case (called the office of origin) will send a lead to the field office with jurisdiction over that area.
Mr. Muellers investigation is more closely held than most, but its tentacles have already clearly spread to other field offices consider the investigation against President Trumps personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, run out of the Southern District of New York office, or the plea deal of a California man, Richard Pinedo, who assisted Russia in executing its disinformation campaign on social media. Field offices are evaluated in part based on their success in following through on leads and making cases that result in arrests and convictions. No case agent worth their salt would remain quiet if their cases were closed in the face of a continuing threat. To shut down the investigation at this point would require not just a face-off with Mr. Mueller but also with special agents in charge of multiple field offices with a vested interest in seeing their responsibilities through, and possibly even a battle with the F.B.I. director, Christopher Wray.
Finally, many of the most critical parts of the Russia investigation have already entered the judicial system. Mr. Mueller has already indicted numerous individuals and companies and secured several convictions. Five members of the Trump campaign have pleaded guilty to federal charges and are actively cooperating with prosecutors. Grand juries have seen evidence, judges have signed off on warrants, and there are likely subpoenas and indictments waiting in the wings. Whatever happens now, there is no doubt that the F.B.I. has already collected hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence in the form of documents, interviews, electronic surveillance and foreign intelligence shared by our allies that are stored in the F.B.I.s tamper-proof system and cannot be destroyed.
lark
(23,123 posts)shuts it down nd orders all the evidence destroyed? What is there to stop that? FBI agents did not violate the orders to only question Deborah Ramirez & 4 of Kav's friends who had already lied for him. There was no peep of public complaint or any actions at all taken, why would the Mueller investigation be any different? I hope you have a great answer because this is really causing me anxiety now that SCOTUS would not even let him be indicted with positive proof of treason.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)It was a background-check.
Background-checks are a service the FBI provides to the WH and as the FBI's client, the WH gets to set the parameters for the background-check.
Declaring the investigation illegal, ordering the evidence to be returned or destroyed, that would take time. Considerable and precious time. No FBI-agent would be willing to do his unless he absolutely has to.
Because this is not just Mueller anymore. Even if Mueller's mandate and investigation end, there are already many more new investigations which have been kicked off and which do not depend on Mueller's legal authority as special counsel.
If the WH and the new AG tried to shut down Mueller, it would go to the courts whether he can even do that.
Maybe he can. We would find out weeks and months later.
Then there's all of the investigations into Kushner and DT Jr and Roger Stone and Kislyak and Wikileaks and Alfabank and the Internet Research Agency and Maria Butina and the NRA and Natalja Veselnitskaya and Oleg Deripska and Trump's many, many, many connections to the russian mob and the russian government. And the NYT-story how Trump is a tax-cheat has spawned new financial investigations that could end up at the doorstep of his russian investors.
Each of those investigations has their own life now and each of them could unearth evidence that makes the investigation circle back to russian collusion.
The whole process would drag out endlessly. All the while the media and the Democrats would attack the Republicans for yet again getting in the way of investigations.
And even if they could shut it down, by the time the investigation has actually been shut down, it's 2020.
With each day, with each piece of evidence, the investigation is moving more and more away from the limits of Mueller's mandate. These are new investigations, new cases, that will be pursued by others even if Mueller goes away, because they aren't Mueller's cases to begin with.
Mueller could investigate those cases. He has the authority to do so. But, as the example of Manafort has shown, he already has outsourced cases to others.
shanny
(6,709 posts)and the "client" requesting it was the administration...which is why it was so easy to limit the scope. They didn't "find" anything because they weren't asked /allowed to look. iow, total figleaf and something else that needs to be fixed, come the day.
rainy
(6,092 posts)about hacked voting machines.
Hekate
(90,721 posts)Elections systems are not federal. But as with other crimes in the jurisdiction of states, info would be turned over to said states, as has been done already with crimes committed in New York's purview.
At that point, you have to ask yourself how differently California would handle such info from, say, Louisiana or Alabama.
0rganism
(23,958 posts)if our voting systems are clearly compromised on a wide scale, the country is good as dead. i hope beyond hope that a truly thorough investigation into such matters reveals complete electoral integrity in the overwhelming majority of precincts.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)As long as the fbi isn't independent, any investigation can be shut down or neutered. Just look at the instructions given in the kav probe.
Sure, he might have to fire a bunch of agents in dozens of probes, but he can do that. He can also fire prosecutors. How do you try a case without a prosecutor.
He can order evidence and testimony sealed. Even destroyed.
All it takes is someone viscous enough to carry out those orders. Someone like lindsay graham.
I won't relax till the fat lady is singing her heart out in open court.
This is going to end up as a shooting war, with them doing the shooting. It can't end any other way.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)The FBI does probes for the US.
But they do background-checks for the WH. As the client, the WH gets to dictate how the FBI does that background-check.
In a probe, that client is not the WH, but the US as a nation.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)I argued about it during the confirmation process. I said that about 20 times.
But it does point out how the fbi internal process's can be thwarted. FBI agents can be taken off of active investigations and reassigned to other priorities - say an email probe. They can't refuse any more than any employee can refuse a work assignment and keep their job.
They can quite literally kill every investigation, in every department, just by removing the agents from the case.
They can quite literally, destroy the work product by classifying it at a level nobody can see it. Even the agents that worked on it.
Most people don't realize it, but classified information can be destroyed. It wouldn't matter there are laws that say records can't be destroyed, classified data can be. It changes once it becomes a national secret.
And so the process can very efficiently kill every thread of muehlers work. All evidence can disappear.
This hasn't happened because sessions recused himself and rosenstein is standing firm. If graham, or someone like him gets in, that will change in an instant.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Mueller has undoubtedly reached out to multiple state Attorneys General. And the NYT exposé of Trump's tax fraud has set multiple state AGs in motion. Trump's in deep.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)until scotus rules that states can't indict a president, or bring charges when a pardon has been granted. Which can happen depending on what the scotus decides to hear and how they want to write an opinion.
Kaleva
(36,314 posts)and while scotus may rule that states can't indict a sitting president, I very much doubt scotus would rule that states cannot indict members of Trump's family and inner circle.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)That is about whether a state can bring a charge that the feds already brought. Right now there is a standing decision that astate can bring charges even if the feds have also brought charges.
The court could let it stand, they could decide it is a form of double jeopardy and deny the states the ability to bring a case also brought by the feds, or they can extend the decision to include that states can't bring charges if someone has a federal pardon for a crime (which could also be a form of double jeopardy).
Scotus could quite literally make it possible for a potus to pardon someone and prevent a state from charging them for a crime covered by the pardon.
Note that NYS already has a law on the books that would prevent them from bringing charges against someone pardoned at the federal level, so there is precedant for it.
NY is considering changing the law, but scotus could make it irrelevant.
bigbrother05
(5,995 posts)In Manafort's case, there were 10 charges that ended in a hung jury. The info in that trial could be a part of a state case on state charges on ones not decided.
Also don't think the Feds could stop a state case for state tax violations, fraud, etc.
Remember during the early civil rights era local juries often acquitted folks on murder charges, but the Feds would prosecute on violation of civil rights laws. 2 different ways of charging the same action.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)If they make it part of the ruling that a federal pardon prevents state charges, then that will be the law of the land. period.
But as the case is presented, it does apply to specific charges or ones very similar. Bank fraud for example.
In the end, the scotus is the final say in what is constitutional. And they can write a broad or a narrow ruling. It only matters what five of them will agree to.
zentrum
(9,865 posts)Kaleva
(36,314 posts)Trump could pardon someone for federal tax evasion but that wouldn't clear them of state and municipal tax evasion charges because there'd be no double jeopardy.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)I'm not arguing the position, I believe quite the opposite, but I do see the argument.
For the same crime, it is possible to be charged in either or both venues. So their argument will be that not only is that double jeopardy for the crime itself, but that if you are pardoned at the fed level, that should apply to the rime and not the venue.
The only exception would be a violation of a crime that does not exist at the federal level. Like sppeding, dui, building code violations, etc. But the universe of crimes which can both be felonies and not have a federal equivalent has to be very small.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)the federal gov't couldn't bring a charge for a state crime, and vice-a-versa. Since the tax codes are different, that might be an exception. Might - I'm not a lawyer.
But since there are both federal and state tax fraud laws, and the same crime could trigger both, it might be problematic. What was the crime, rather than what is the charge.
For example, is fraud the crime or just not paying your taxes? Not paying taxes isn't necessarily criminal (though penalties do apply). Fraud is.
Kaleva
(36,314 posts)And operating a corporation incorporated in say the state of New York illegally and in violation of state laws wouldn't be a federal crime either.
Most murders, while felonies, are not federal crimes. Trump has no power to pardon most of the people sitting on death row because it was the individual state that put the person on death row and not the federal government.
getagrip_already
(14,766 posts)At least in some cases, you can be federally charged for murder.
But what if the scotus rules that a federal pardon has supremacy over a state charge?
They could make that finding.
What then?
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)Hekate
(90,721 posts)When I get reminders like this, I recall VP Joe Biden telling us that he and President Obama had spread the evidence all over the place, and that it would be impossible for someone to just walk into a room and scoop it up to take to the shredder/incinerator.
This article is evidence of the so-called "deep state" that TrumpPutin hates with such a passion. This deep state -- and Mueller -- are doing their jobs on our behalf.
DetlefK
(16,423 posts)Isn't a deep-state supposed to be secret?
What is a deep-state good for if its actions are business as usual that can be found in a employee's handbook?
Skruffy
(48 posts)After the fact, it is clear that the FBI is willing to not do their job in support of conservatives. Confirmation does leave me hopeless.
OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)JohnnyRingo
(18,636 posts)...if Trump fires Mueller and shuts his office down, the evidence in the investigation will suddenly end up on a pallet in front of The New York Times.
One has to figure that the agents who worked for two years and know what the president is doing are not going to walk away and work on cases of bootlegged Beyonce CDs.
saidsimplesimon
(7,888 posts)Just want to ask all of those who collected a "file" on citizens reported for civil disobedience, how does it feel?
treestar
(82,383 posts)Things are simple. They want them to be. That is the only way they can Play know-it-all.
SWBTATTReg
(22,144 posts)aren't conservative when it comes to cutting taxes and not paying for them. Or spending way too much on the military when the military didn't request all of the money...no, they are not conservatives any longer, but instead the ultimate hypocrites.
treestar
(82,383 posts)astronomically due to Orange Cheetoh's stupid tax cuts.
Skruffy
(48 posts)It is why it is so hard for us liberals. A little more complex. See jane run, doesn't work for us.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Welcome to DU!
OhNo-Really
(3,985 posts)llmart
(15,541 posts)and those who voted for him are exactly that and I've said it on here before. They don't have a logical thought process and they need things told to them in very simple words and terms. After all, most of them are rather uneducated. Anyone who's an "elitist" in their simple minds makes them feel uncomfortable in their stupidity, so the only way they can feel smart is by being loud in their ignorance. Example: why the "lock her up" chant appeals to them. They don't have to think any deeper than that.
The smart ones of this country have to prevail.
SergeStorms
(19,204 posts)The swamp, it seems, is full of scum-bag Republican con-men, thieves and traitors to our country. There's never been an investigation this thorough, this far reaching, and it's going to take time to rid our country of only a fraction of them. Take your time, Mr. Mueller. Get as many as possible and - like cockroaches scurrying when the lights are turned on - the rest will run and hide. For a while, anyway.