Benjamin Wittes et al Lawfare Blog take on BuzzFeed story

[AndJusticeForSome]

Last edited Fri Jan 18, 2019, 05:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Here are just the first paragraphs of the three points, but there is much more exposition at the link, worthy of a read.

https://www.lawfareblog.com/latest-revelation-buzzfeed-news-trump-reportedly-directed-cohen-lie-congress

The story’s importance is threefold:

First, the criminality alleged in this story is—if true—unsubtle and unambiguous, directly related to the president’s conduct as president, and concerning matters of great import.
........(snip)
Second, the story also suggests much deeper involvement by Trump and his family in the Trump Tower Moscow deal than was previously public. The criminal information against Cohen and the sentencing memo Mueller filed in Cohen’s case described the extent to which candidate Trump—who claimed on the campaign trail that he had “ZERO investments in Russia”—was personally involved in what prosecutors describe as the “Moscow Project.”
.....(snip)
Finally, third, the leak itself is independently a big deal. In contrast to the vast majority of stories about L’Affaire Russe, it is clearly sourced to “law enforcement” officials investigating the matter. Indeed, the very first sentence of the story attributes the story “to two federal law enforcement officials involved in an investigation of the matter.” The body of the story contains repeated references to “the two sources,” “the two law enforcement sources,” “the sources,” and “law enforcement sources familiar with [Cohen’s] testimony,” apparently all referring to the same people. It is thus going to give rise to allegations about Mueller leaking, opening up a new front in the confrontation between the special counsel and the president.

[Claritie Pixie]

1. So....an INTENTIONAL leak by Mueller, designed to make Individual-1 feel even more trapped?

I like that idea.

[WeekiWater]

2. I've had thoughts it was from Muellers team from the moment it broke.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11688503

[erronis]

10. And I've had thoughts that it was crap from the WH. That's all they do is crap.

Most of the law enforcement mentioned is 99% trustworthy.

The trump WH is 1% trustworthy.

Do the statistics.

[WeekiWater]

18. I don't see how your LE statistic correlates to anything.

Agree with you about Trump.

I don’t have the same level of certainty about where it comes from than you do. That said, I’m working under the assumption that Leopold did his homework as he did last November when he broke a major story and schooled the WH. They sent Giuliani out to debunk Leopold just to be upstaged days later with proof.

I think we will know in pretty short order on this one.

[Honeycombe8]

6. Absolutely not. Mueller doesn't play games. He's doing an investigation.

He is impartial. His job is not to sway public opinion or Congress. His job is to investigate and do a report. He would not leak. Ever. Integrity.

[3_Limes]

8. OTOH,

I've been told that prosecutors will occasionally feed pieces of their case to a subject in order to gauge their reaction, and sometimes, to let the subjects inadvertent 'tells' in their reactions guide the prosecution to further evidence. Because the case is complex, and bec' Individual-1's lies are so very transparent and projectionist, it's not an impossible scenario.

[Honeycombe8]

13. Prosecutors also lie to perps and witnesses. That is legal.

In any case, I would wait for confirmation before jumping on a bandwagon of a story that is a smoking gun. The chair of the House Judiciary Committee is going to "get to the bottom" of the Trump telling Cohen to lie story, he said.

[WeekiWater]

19. There can be a lot of reasons for an investigator to leak.

It’s a tool and I guarantee Mueller wouldn’t tie his own hands. There is nothing unethical about the general concept of leaking controlled information. The thought that leaking alone is unethical is wrong.

[Danascot]

16. Went to Lawfare to read the aeticle and this was at the top of the story

Update: The special counsel's office has taken the unusual step of issuing a statement disputing BuzzFeed News's report. Mueller spokesman Peter Carr stated, "BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate."

[Claritie Pixie]

17. Interesting. Thank you for replying.

[Duppers]

20. Hmmmm.

They've never confirmed or denied a story before. However, not just stating that they did not leak this, they are now stating this BuzzFeed story is not accurate.

Things that make me go hmmm.

Remember, there are many people in the DoJ.




I'm not calling anyone a liar. It's just interesting that Peter Carr previously worked as press secretary for Sen. Orrin Hatch.

[emulatorloo]

3. Note that further down, Wittes says could be FBI, or SDNY ( i.e. NOT FROM Mueller)

“In this story, the attribution is intentionally fuzzy, and the wording, careful. Cormier and Leopold describe their two sources as “federal law enforcement officials” who are “involved in an investigation of the matter” (emphasis added). Note that they don’t say they are involved in the investigation of the matter—that is, the special counsel’s investigation. It is almost as though Cormier and Leopold are flagging that their sources are involved in a different investigation, through which they collaterally have insight into what Cohen is telling Mueller. Note also that Mueller’s point of view is not reflected in the story. In other words, while the wording is certainly consistent with a Mueller leak, it very much leaves open the possibility that the information here is coming from the Southern District of New York or the FBI or some other federal law enforcement component interacting with the special counsel’s office.”

So far Mueller’s office hasn’t leaked, that is not his style.

[DeminPennswoods]

12. That is my read as well

The sources are somewhere in the intersection of the SDNY and Mueller, and maybe even Congressional investigations. The phrasing "read in" jumped out at me, meaning whatever their function, the sources needed to know details of the Trump Tower Moscow project, but not anything else related to Mueller's investigation.

[More_Cowbell]

4. I think that the SDNY, especially, is following Mueller's lead

Mueller is passing off parts of the investigation to them, and I believe they wouldn't leak without his permission. I feel a little less confident about the FBI, especially the NY office. Still, I think this is an authorized leak.

[Pantagruel]

5. May be even more damning

Suborning perjury is obstruction- period.

Also,I believe POTUS, hearing Cohen misrepresent the timing of the Moscow deal, then has an affirmative duty to correct the congressional record , failure to do so violates his oath. Not speaking up involves him in a conspiracy v. congress (American people).

[Fuzzpope]

7. GOP and Trump

Are going to launch an all out offensive against the Mueller investigation on the charge of leaking.

This may end up causing more harm than good.

[coti]

14. Maybe they got word he was going to fire Mueller soon anyway

and this was pre-emptive. Or maybe they wanted it out before the Barr vote.

[Fuzzpope]

15. Your guess is as good as any.

I don't know, I just wish this was behind us all.

[SayItLoud]

9. A real "who done it?"It was only a matter of time before someone at one of the agencies that tRUMP

constantly insults, bashes, demeans and calls liars decided; enough is enough with this slob. The insiders know so much more than we readers of news. They have probably seen evidence that would make our hair stand up. I'm betting we will see more of these insider leaks. tRUMP and team traitors are trapped like rats on a sinking ship. They will bitch and moan and call deep state over and over again. Problem for them is they called deep state to soon and too often. Same with fake news. We are desensitized to these phrases now.

[erronis]

11. That's a bs argument. Professionals can deal with insults, etc. Only wannabe aristocrats

and their tail-hanging minions have problems with truth spoken.

Maybe I misread your intent, but to impugn the real people working at the agencies with some type of vendetta is not correct or helpful.

[Duppers]

21. Bump

[Duppers]

22. Anyone just listen to Rachel interview editor-in-chief

of BuzzFeed?

Really interesting.