zaphod reborn

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The truncated report in the OP misses a number of essential points:

 

Firstly:

Yes McGahn was the White House attourney. The point about this is he was employed by the Federal Government to provide legal counsel to the White House Adminstration, he was not Trump’s personal attorney.

 

There exists no client/attorney privilege between Trump and McGahn.

 

There may be ‘Executive Privilege’ between Trump and McGahn but Trump would have to assert ‘Executive Privilage’.

 

Executive privilege does not cover illegal or unconstitutional acts.

 

Secondly:

 

John Dowd (Trump’s actual attorney at the time McGahn gave evidence to Mueller) has admitted he and Trump were outsmarted by Mueller’s interview of McGahn.

 

Trump did not give McGahn permission to speak to Mueller, he could not prevent him doing so.

 

Trump did not choose to withhold ‘executive privilege’, he never knew McGahn speaking to Mueller was a likelihood.

 

And then there is this:

 

McGahn’s meetings with Mueller where reported by the NYT this weekend.

 

McGahn’s meetings with Mueller took place ten months ago.

 

Whatever McGahn told Mueller, has been on the record for ten months, scrutinised for ten months and compared with Trump’s words, actions and inactions for ten months.

 

Perhaps Trump mis-spoke again.

 

’Nowhere to hide from Mueller’

Good insight, but not entirely correct.  Trump waived both attorney-client and executive privileges under the advice of John Dowd, as Trump's initial legal team thought it was best to cooperate.  Once waived, the privileges are gone and can't be reinstated.

McGahn realized that he had criminal liability as a result of his White House Counsel duties.  He reluctantly drafted NDAs/non-disparagement agreements to be signed by WH staffers.  The agreements were for the benefit of Trump and Pence, personally, their families and the Trump Organization.  They had nothing to do with Trump as President.  The agreements were drafted in violation of civil rights statutes and were also unethical, as McGahn was performing personal legal work for Trump while paid by the government.

Trump and his current legal team weren't aware that McGahn had actually entered into a cooperation agreement with Mueller.  That resulted in him giving over 30 hours of interviews to Mueller.  That's the reveal in the NYT article, and what is triggering Trump and Giuliani. 

McGahn had key personal knowledge about the obstruction claim against Trump, as Trump had asked him to fire Mueller.  He was also involved in obtaining the cover-up letter from Rosenstein for Comey's firing.  McGahn was probably in dozens of meetings in which various acts of coercion, witness tampering and intimidation were discussed.  Because McGahn has cooperated with Mueller on the obstruction investigation, there is no longer any need to interview or subpoena Trump.

McGahn is under a continuing obligation to cooperate with Mueller, as Trump continues to obstruct justice, but now that the NYT reported this (probably leaked by McGahn's lawyer), Trump and Flood know to exclude McGahn from any Russia-gate discussions.

46 minutes ago, pmarlin said:

No, according to other news sources and from the Lawyer the OP is about he was defending the President and talked to them with the Presidents approval.

That's a cover story from John Dowd.  McGahn was forced to cooperate with Mueller or he would have been in deep legal doo-doo.  McGahn engaged in illegal conduct when he drafted and had White House staffers sign NDA's in early 2017 which, if enforceable, would have prohibited staffers exercising 1st amendment free speech rights for perpetuity with respect to their WH experience.  McGahn represents the office of the President, not the Trump Org, Trump and Pence as individuals, and the families of the Prez and VP, which were the specified beneficiaries of the NDAs.  It's illegal and unethical for WH Counsel to do personal work for any other parties.  McGahn felt that Trump was going to pin the obstruction charge against him on McGahn (ala James Dean from Watergate).

Quote

A number of White House aides were urged to sign NDAs in early 2017 by White House Counsel Donald McGahn, according to current and former aides, who requested anonymity to discuss internal West Wing deliberations. Trump was obsessed with leaks to the news media and repeatedly demanded that McGahn draft the agreement, the aides said.

 

Initially, McGahn told Trump he would not draft or give aides the NDAs because they were not enforceable, White House officials said. But in the end, McGahn created a document that said aides would not divulge any confidential or nonpublic information to any person outside the building at any time, according to three people who signed it.

 

Under one agreement from the 2016 campaign, signers promised not to “demean or disparage publicly” Trump, his company or any member of his family — and also not to assist any other politician exploring a federal or state office.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/everyone-signed-one-trump-is-aggressive-in-his-use-of-nondisclosure-agreements-even-in-government/2018/08/13/9d0315ba-9f15-11e8-93e3-24d1703d2a7a_story.html?utm_term=.5381c78bc042

4 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

You, and people like you, are the reason that the media is being kept away from the Jurors. 

I'm a lawyer, so I not only have access to the jurors, but had background checks and handwriting analysis performed on them.

7 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Yeah this little snippet should make any objective observer a little pissed off. CNN leading the charge of media douchebaggery, naturally. 

 

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/402369-manafort-judge-says-hes-received-threats

 

Another snippet:

 

http://thefederalist.com/2018/08/17/federal-judge-denies-cnn-request-dox-jurors-manafort-trial/

The media always supports full disclosure.  The policy of the courts is that the juror's names become public record once the verdict is delivered.  I suspect that Judge Ellis' announcement yesterday, that he received death threats from your cohorts, will result in the names being sealed until Trump has been behind bars for a few years.

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Yes our criminally corrupt Swamp King president is clearly signaling that he will pardon Manafort if convicted.

When Manafort went to trial instead of flipping, it was obvious he had a pardon in his pocket.  Fortunately, the NY State AG can bring tax evasion charges against him (not double jeopardy even under the prior NY double jeopardy law, because the act of filing a state tax return is different than the act of filing a federal tax return https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/schneiderman-double-jeopardy/558389/), and there's no way Andrew Cuomo is going to pardon him.  Unless he flees the country before his state trial, he will spend the rest of his life behind bars.

17 minutes ago, bluesofa said:

Is this much different to 'playing' the stock market - apart from the fact the stock market is legalised gambling?

 

Just like the government lottery, that's not gambling, it's a 'game of chance' - because that's how the government describe it every time to defend it.

 

Running an unregulated forex binary options website is considered gambling, even in the West.  https://www.nasdaq.com/article/binary-options-gambling-or-financial-instrument-cm560900

The app is only usable if you can read Thai language (you can see from the screenshot that the guide is only indexed in Thai).  It only goes from Thai to another language, not the reverse.  Yes, it could be useful for tour guides, but no, it is useless for tourists and most ex-pats.

1 hour ago, webfact said:

Mr Sakolthee said the decision was made at  a meeting between the BMA and representatives of the Sports and Tourism Ministry, Commerce Ministry, Metropolitan Police Bureau and other agencies concerned.

 

It was agreed at the meeting that vending on the sidewalks of Khao San road will be legalised under Section 20 of the law on public hygiene and order which empowers the BMA to designate areas for vending.

Agreement was also made about the distribution of proceeds from tea money envelopes, which was the ultimate cause for the decision to disrupt the merchant vendors.

2 hours ago, CiaranKL said:

2000 euro a month

 Hardly over the top.  There are rules and if you wish to be one a citizen then you follow them.  

I'm a licensed professional, and it took me over 5 working in Thailand to meet that income requirement, and I would still need to prove that income level, without interruption, for an additional 3 years.  Retirement money, pensions, stock trading, bank account deposits, etc. do not enter into the calculation.  It is purely a matter of paying PIT on THB 80,000 per year for at least the past 3 years and having a valid work permit during that period.  Mr. Udom is the son of a missionary and probably makes a living for his family by helping his wife work the family's land.  He seems a far better candidate for Thai citizenship than a scumbucket masquerading as an English teacher in an "international school."  

Trump doesn't understand California water management.  The issue has always been whether water should be diverted to irrigate the Owens Valley in the south (so that Gallo can grow wine grapes), or allowed to run its natural course, to preserve the unique environment in Northern California.  There never has been any discussion of somehow damming waterways in the north so that the north can have some protection from wild fires (not even sure this is a viable option).  Wish the wild fires would spread to the White House (burn it down again) and let Trump blame it on the Canadians.  

I can empathize with his plight of not being granted Thai citizenship.  He probably can't meet the ridiculous income requirement (proof of taxes paid on at least THB 80,000/mo of income for 3 years).  If he has community support, and is not a burden on the state, he seems like he would make a stand-up foreigner admitted as a citizen.  Thai bureaucracy is stuck in the 19th century.

3 minutes ago, webfact said:

The BTS Skytrain operator has warned passengers against leaning on doors after the door of a train opened between stations on Thursday.

The video shows no one was leaning against the doors.  BTS should be ashamed trying to blame their poor maintenance routine on passengers.

4 hours ago, riclag said:

America knows the Russians sowed discord in this election and past elections. Goin on 3 years Comey - Mueller!The best a special Council has proven  is several liars,a accused tax fraud and 23 out of 24 Russian's that are accused but will never ever come to testify or be tried to god knows what.All of these investigations can be done with US DOJ  prosecutors.It's a  political witch hunt  

Let's go beyond the spin and examined what really happened.  When Manafort went to trial, Mueller had to turn over to Manafort's attorneys all of the statements and reports of interviews that the FBI and DOJ obtained from Rick Gates.  Few of these related to Manafort, almost all incriminated Trump, Trump Jr and Kushner.  That's because Manafort and Gates were charged together, and Gates subsequently flipped.  It's pretty obvious now that Manafort has been promised a pardon from Trump, but that won't come until the end game of Trump's failed presidency.  As Manafort is cooperating with Trump, the Gates' statements were given to Trump's real defense attorney, Emmet Flood.  Giuliani gave up a very warped reaction to those statements in his interview with Alysin Camerota on CNN.  Giuliani and Fox News have been reduced to claiming that receiving foreign aid in an election campaign is not a crime and everyone does it.  They know there is a solid conspiracy case (election fraud, bribery, money-laundering, and election financing) against Trump and his inner circle.

Trump also has vaguely reasserted his "conflicts" claim against Manafort.  He previously claimed 3 conflicts that aren't conflicts at all. 1) the day prior to being selected as the Special Counsel, Mueller and Trump discussed Mueller being nominated as head of the FBI.  Trump of course is spinning this as Mueller asking for the appointment.  The opposite is true.  Mueller had already served for 12 years as head of the FBI and he is in his 70's.  More likely, Trump asked Mueller to serve, but Mueller informed Trump he wouldn't be able to serve the full 10-year term.  Regardless, this is not a basis for a conflict of interest under the DC Bar Rules of Conduct.

2) From 2014-2016, prior to becoming Special Counsel, Mueller worked at WilmerHale, a law firm with thousands of attorneys.  In 2016, Jared Kushner hired WilmerHale to reprsent him with respect to the DOJ probe.  In 2016, Mueller was assigned to the defense of VW in the emissions scandal case.  Mueller never worked on Kushner's defense and received no conifential information about Kushner.  The DOJ has cleared Mueller of any possible conflict.  Trump has no standing to assert a conflict, only Kushner has standing.  WilmerHale recommended Kushner get outside counsel to determine if WilmerHale's continuing representation of Kushner would be a conflict of interest.  Not only has Kushner continued with WilmerHale, he added the outside counsel to his defense team.

3) About 10 years ago, Mueller signed up for a membership at the Trump golf course in Sterling, Virginia.  In 2011, Mueller sent a fairly standard letter requesting refund of annual dues.  The annual dues range from $15,000-450,000 and almost all of it goes into Trump's pocket.  When Mueller didn't get a response, he resigned.  That's it, but Trump paints this as some ugly personal business dispute.  Go figure.          

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Thai Rath said in their headline that the victim was at the age of "benjaphaet" - most Thais believe that when someone is 25 something dramatic is bound to happen.

That's what I thought.  It was her fault for turning 25.  Because it would be too hard to identify the cable/telephone line installer from the hundreds of somchais that climbed up those poles and were too lazy to sort the wiring, so instead, just added a flimsy cable which was likely to come down even in moderate windy conditions.

3 hours ago, webfact said:

Last month, Mueller's team disclosed in a court filing what it said was a $10 million (7.61 million pounds) loan to Manafort from Oleg Deripaska, a magnate with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Journalists always fail to connect the dots.  Trump recently indicated he is going to have the Treasury Dept exempt Deripaska's aluminum company, Rusal, from the sanctions that Congress imposed against Deripaska.  Manafort serves as campaign manager at no salary, gets $10 mil loan from Deripaska, Trump gives Deripaska's aluminum company an exemption from sanctions.  Quid Pro Quo, case closed.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/07/27/politics/mnuchin-russia-sanctions-rusal/index.html