Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

allgood33

(1,584 posts)
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 09:04 AM Jan 2019

Can or will someone please explain the issues surrounding "Country A" that Mueller wants info from?

What did I miss? For what country would the US go to such extreme lengths to protect from having to turn over information needed by Mueller for his investigation?

9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Can or will someone please explain the issues surrounding "Country A" that Mueller wants info from? (Original Post) allgood33 Jan 2019 OP
Most likely countries JT45242 Jan 2019 #1
Also, what is the information?? kentuck Jan 2019 #2
a reporter from Politico on Morning Joe just said that chief justice Roberts mucifer Jan 2019 #3
Roberts stayed a lower court order holding the company in contempt onenote Jan 2019 #4
that's what I thought. But, it wasn't how it was presented by Nelson Cunningham from Politico: mucifer Jan 2019 #5
But if the Supreme Court does not rule on it... kentuck Jan 2019 #7
There is nothing remarkable that it was Roberts. onenote Jan 2019 #9
Maybe it's under our very noses? getagrip_already Jan 2019 #6
Could it be the Old Post Office Building?? kentuck Jan 2019 #8

JT45242

(2,280 posts)
1. Most likely countries
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 09:12 AM
Jan 2019

Most pundits have speculated that country A is:
1. Russia. Bank records would show contribution to campaign,NRA, or Facebook buys.
2.Saudi Arabia. Bank records would show MSB has influence on Trump.
3. UAE. Again money that would show Trouble owes money or favors to another foreign power.
4. Turkey. This might explain the weird caving in to demands to not protect the Kurds who were the bests ISIS fighters.(I think that was done to keep Erdogan from spilling info about Kushner having knowledge of the Kashoggi murder).

But the basic premise is the same. Follow the money because this is a RICO investigation.

mucifer

(23,550 posts)
3. a reporter from Politico on Morning Joe just said that chief justice Roberts
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 09:26 AM
Jan 2019

ruled against Mueller in this case. I haven't hear anyone else say that. I have only heard that Roberts asked for more information from Mueller and Mueller quickly replied.

I hope the Politico reporter was wrong. Wait and see. Wait Wait Wait. Oy vey.

onenote

(42,714 posts)
4. Roberts stayed a lower court order holding the company in contempt
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 09:33 AM
Jan 2019

for failing to comply with a Mueller subpoena. The stay is temporary and does not represent a ruling on the merits challenge to the contempt citation and underlying subpoena. Roberts was the justice issuing the stay because he is the justice assigned to handle emergency requests arising from decisions by the DC Circuit. The temporary stay is not that unusual and doesn't necessarily indicate how Roberts, or the full court if the matter is referred to the full court, will rule on the merits.

mucifer

(23,550 posts)
5. that's what I thought. But, it wasn't how it was presented by Nelson Cunningham from Politico:
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 09:39 AM
Jan 2019

But we can read a good deal into his decision to intervene at all. Although every judge below agreed there was ultimately no merit to the Corporation’s legal claims, Roberts evidently harbors some doubt. Something in the Corporation’s papers caught his attention. So rather than consigning this appeal to the discard pile with thousands of others, he has blocked the lower courts’ decisions until he can receive the government’s briefs defending those decisions. Those papers must be filed no later than New Year’s Eve. Once he receives the full briefing, he can reject the Corporation’s appeal or he can advance the matter to the full court for consideration.

Until then, we can only wonder at the remarkable circumstance that the chief justice of the United States has personally intervened, at the request of a foreign government through its corporate entity, in Mueller’s investigation. Only two days before, court observers noted that in a high-profile asylum decision, Roberts had sided with his four liberal colleagues against the Trump administration. Many observers took that as evidence that Roberts was carefully seeking to preserve the court’s institutional neutrality, integrity and balance.


https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/12/30/supreme-court-john-roberts-robert-mueller-investigation-223569

kentuck

(111,103 posts)
7. But if the Supreme Court does not rule on it...
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 09:59 AM
Jan 2019

then it goes back down to the lower Court. I think it was an Appeals Court and they ruled unanimously in favor of Mueller? Did I hear that wrong?

onenote

(42,714 posts)
9. There is nothing remarkable that it was Roberts.
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 03:24 PM
Jan 2019

He wasn't intervening as Chief Justice. He was handling the motion because he is the Justice assigned to hear motions with respect to DC Circuit decisions.

If the decision below had come from the third or fifth circuits, Alito would have handled it. If it come from the 7th Circuit, it would have been Kavanaugh, if from the 8th it would have been Gorsuch, and if from the 11th it would have been Thomas.

getagrip_already

(14,764 posts)
6. Maybe it's under our very noses?
Wed Jan 2, 2019, 09:44 AM
Jan 2019

Most people don'r realize it, but the US Gov't actually owns a number of businesses. Is it possible all the secrecy is because it's a US owned Corporation?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Government-owned_companies_of_the_United_States

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Can or will someone pleas...