From "With a Picked Lock and a Threatened Indictment, Mueller’s Inquiry Sets a Tone" (NYT).
“They are setting a tone. It’s important early on to strike terror in the hearts of people in Washington, or else you will be rolled,” said Solomon L. Wisenberg, who was deputy independent counsel in the investigation that led to the impeachment trial of President Bill Clinton in 1999. “You want people saying to themselves, ‘Man, I had better tell these guys the truth.’”This story is also very well discussed in the NYT podcast this morning, here, strongly underscoring Wisenberg's point.
पोस्ट्स
७० टिप्पण्या:
There's a very short distance between "Man, I had better tell these guys the truth," and "Man, I had better tell these guys what they want to hear."
I think it is becoming clear that the Russians were running what they considered, I am sure, retribution for Radio Free Europe and Voice of America. I still don't see how they could have somehow engineered the election of Trump, but they may well have been trying to weaken Hillary, whom they believed, like everybody else except for Mick and Scott Adams, and possibly Michael Moore, if he wasn't lying (doubtful) had a lock on the presidency.
I still don't get how Wikileaks was "fake news" though.
Sounds like a good plan.
How many people were threatened with indictment during early morning raids as part of the investigation of Hillary's email server?
How many people were threatened with indictment during early morning raids as part of the investigation of the IRS targeting Tea Party groups?
"'It’s important early on to strike terror in the hearts of people in Washington...' said Solomon L. Wisenberg...."
I'm pretty sure this is the kind of behavior by the British that compelled the colonists to cast off their connection to the British government.
Picking locks to serve search warrants? Declaring that they must "strike terror in the hearts" of people they're investigating? Sounds like the thoughts and actions of a tyranny to me.
The Democrats live under "alternative law."
He would have been wishing his rights to shoot them if they came in without announcing themselves.
Robert Cook said...
Sounds like the thoughts and actions of a tyranny to me.
Sound's like Wisconsin's John Doe investigations.
Get ready for the Trumpkin proclamation; He was RIGHT! Obama DID tap his "wires" in Trump Tower!
Really? Wouldn't it be first necessary to understand what Trump claimed originally, in order for Trump to be "right" later on?
The Trump Tweets were that "Obama" ordered the wiretapping. (If the current story in the press is correct, it was a federal court judge, hearing a FISA warrant application.)
The Trump Tweets were that Obama was a weird or sick guy for doing such wiretapping. (See above for any personal role on the part of Obama; but if I were a FISA judge and a wiretap warrant that I approved resulted in a federal indictment and a conviction, I wouldn't much consider myself "weird" or "sick.")
I remember well at the time of the Trump tweeting on the "wire-tapp" story, some of my harshest complaints about Trump were that no one could actually tell what he was claiming at any time because of the nature of his strange, opaque phrasing.
If Trump knew about all of this at the time, he could have and should have been clear about it. There's no way I am going to credit Trump as having been right about this story long ago, when long ago no one could rightly understand what Trump was even saying.
There's a very short distance between "Man, I had better tell these guys the truth," and "Man, I had better tell these guys what they want to hear."
You can believe this or not, but I doubt his competent, expensive lawyer advised him to do that.
What Robert Cook said.
I don't think “setting a tone" and "strik[ing] terror" is acceptable conduct by a prosecutor, ethical for any lawyer, or consistent with due process; particularly if the purpose is "compelling" testimony from the target of the investigation.
Those were his exact words? That Obama ordered the wiretapping by with his pen and his phone, not that Obama created the kind of atmosphere that led to the IRS abuses, or the abuses at the FEC, allowed Hillary to use her own email server beyond the reach of Congressional oversight.
Oddly, when I read Trump's tweets, I saw nothing including the term "ordered." But putting words in his mouth makes it a lot easier to make the case against him.
Mueller working to flip Manafort to testify against Trump. But Trump is way too smart to have gotten too close to Manafort. IOW, Manafort has nothing to give up on Trump.
Manafort only worked for Trump for a very short period of time.
And imagine if the FBI broke into Robby Mook's apartment.
it was a federal court judge, hearing a FISA warrant application.)
So the federal judge cooked up the whole idea to wiretap Trump? If I were you, I wouldn't try to go into business playing three-card monty, or hide the pea, you are just not subtle enough. Amazing how agency just disappeared in your analysis.
I am assuming, of course, that the prosecutors are all over how Hillary's campaign manager got all of those shares of GazProm, and the millions of dollars that Putin's cronies gave to the "Clinton Foundation" which was a parking place for Clinton political operatives.
The non specificity of the search shows they were on a fishing expedition. Who ordered it? Nobody knows, except Chuck. But it couldn't have been Obama, no siree. Befire this is over, you will see many other warrants were issued and surveillance was conducted on many people around Trump during the election campaign. Who ordered it? Who knows? Only Obama has been cleared. By Chuck.
I'm amazed that nobody is amazed that the law allows cops to routinely break into houses and put homeowners in such danger.
Were this to happen in a lot of homes, there would be gunfire. I'm not saying that is true in my house (certainly not saying that in public) but it certainly would be possible. And the home owner, who is not wearing armor, loses every time.
Plus the cops always shoot your dog, and have been known to burn your children.
Less Stazi please.
-XC
Weren't no knock warrants supposed to be used only for terrorism cases?
According to the NYT podcast, they photographed his suits because it might be useful to show that he's living at a standard not supported by his ostensible income (and it signals that they're trying to charge him for tax evasion).
How many suits would Manafort need — did they photograph the labels? — to seem out of line with his reported income? He makes a lot of money, doesn't he?
What's the largest number of suits you've ever seen in a guy's closet?
tim, before we get too far into the weeds about what Trump did or did not Tweet, let's remind everybody that they can search them and read them for themselves.
You are correct that Trump did not use the word "ordered" in connection with the wiretapping that he was writing about. Of course Trump didn't even use the word "wiretapping" in any sort of consistent, accurate, technical way.
And again I say to you, this is exactly why I find Trump to be so slippery, so unreliable and so loathsome. An important person can craft careful language to communicate clearly and elevate all of our thinking. An important person should do that. Trump didn't do that, and I criticized Trump for it at the time.
What Trump did was to personalize the surveillance in a way that no careful lawyer would. Trump claimed that "Obama" did it. Not the FBI or the DoJ or a FISA judge. Trump claimed that personally, Obama was a "Bad (or sick) guy!" for the activity.
tim, you and the other Trumpkins seem to want to give Trump all sorts of credit for communicating effectively. But it can only be because you give Trump credit for what you think he means when he is unclear, and you won't accept Trump critics when they point out that Trump really is unclear.
Trump wrote that he "just found out that Obama had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower just before the victory. Nothing found. This is McCarthyism!"
and:
How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
The cyndi archer treatment ratified by the 7th circuit is standard procedure, except when it comes to John podesta, he gets a nice letter, or the chairman of Steve schmudts firm, mercury,
Expat(ish) said...
I'm amazed that nobody is amazed that the law allows cops to routinely break into houses and put homeowners in such danger.
What kind of alt-right fever swamp has Althouse created here?
The law DOESN'T allow cops "to routinely break into houses and put homeowners in such danger"!
Cops need a warrant. From a neutral magistrate; in Manafort's case, a United States district court, and likely a federal grand jury.
They had such a warrant in Manafort's case. It wasn't "routine" at all.
How naive you are chuck, after delay, Stevens mcdonnell and walker supporters like cyndi archer
http://donsurber.blogspot.com/2017/09/the-medias-wiretap-dancing.html?spref=tw
See--Trump didn't do anything I said he did and THAT's what makes him a slippery whoreson. Yeah. Yeah. That's the ticket!
Man, we became Soviet America so gradually that I didn't even notice it happening. Paul Manafort wasn't some kind of armed-and-dangerous desperado, but the FBI sure treated him like one. Contemptible.
Althouse,
I am not rich and I do not wear a suit every day. But I have a dozen suits and a handful of sports coats. They last a long time if you buy quality.
Pictures of a closet prove fuck all.
The first thing I would do is put a stop order on Mueller's payroll. Then I would bring in somebody above reproach to examine ALL the FISA warrants related to the Trump campaign and report back to the American people withing 72-hours. I want a definitive answer as to number and the identity of those surveilled. If they have to assign a SEAL team with automatic weapons to work with the designated investigator to get every Federal employee to co-operate, I would grant that.
Mueller probably went to Oberlin. We all learned to pick locks in the first two weeks of freshman year.
Could it be Mueller is the one feeling the pressure to charge Manafort with a crime in order to justify tapping the phone of a presidential campaign manager?
Yes they ultimately went after menwndez but mostly because no longer useful to them, having expressed crimethink on Cuba and the Iran deal. Take harry Reid has been on the take from everyone from frank rosenthal to jack abramoff.
"Man, we became Soviet America so gradually that I didn't even notice it happening."
It's progress has been quite apparent to those paying attention. America's poor and minority populations have always known this, as it has always been true for them. It is simply progressing now to everyone else.
Since when does the FBI pick the lock to enter a home when the owner is asleep inside? It may be that the warrant they had authorized that method of entry, but it doesn't seem normal and causes my #fakenews antennae to go up. A no knock warrant for a small potatoes white collar criminal who isn't going to be flushing the evidence?
Photographs of clothing as evidence? Why not just take them if they're really using that very thin gruel as proof that he's living above his income level?
Deputy AG Rosenstein already cautioned that we should not believe the leaks that are supposedly coming from the investigation so I will assume he's doing his job and providing the requisite oversight. As for the entire NY Slimes story I'll wait for the movie.
They used to do surreptitious entry (black bags) under hoover, this is what got mark felt almost a ticket to prison. When he did it against the weather underground.
Chuck said...
I remember well at the time of the Trump tweeting on the "wire-tapp" story, some of my harshest complaints about Trump were that no one could actually tell what he was claiming at any time because of the nature of his strange, opaque phrasing.
That's what you remember?
I remember you posted this: "And, I don't believe that Obama had any personal involvement in in any surveillance of Trump. But Trump has been such a prick, I might forgive Obama if he did."
It appears it didn't matter what Trump's tweet specifically referenced, because whatever it was you'd be OK with it.
"tim, you and the other Trumpkins seem to want to give Trump all sorts of credit for communicating effectively. But it can only be because you give Trump credit for what you think he means when he is unclear, and you won't accept Trump critics when they point out that Trump really is unclear."
That's funny. Half the population understands him just fine.
And, at least, he's not conjuring the definition of "is".
Mueller probably went to Oberlin. We all learned to pick locks in the first two weeks of freshman year.
They gave us keys, but we never used them because we such nice kids. I still sometimes dream about not being able to find mine. Now they have pass cards for each dorm.
Look, Kevin, I'll make this as plain and as simple as it needs to be for Trump-world:
If Donald Trump knew these details way back in March, he should have said so then. If Trump knew about a wiretap of Manafort, and if Trump was not breaking FBI/DoJ procedures to say so, Trump should have been clear. Instead of weird little quips about Obama being a "Bad (or sick) guy." And if what Trump was doing at that time was breaching confidentiality and information security of the DoJ, then he should have kept his Twitter-yap shut.
I stand by the notion that nobody has as yet linked Obama to any surveillance of Trump, and obviously that was the popular gist of Trump's March Tweeting. I also stand by my personal view that Trump is a prick. Personally -- not a legal opinion -- I'd still like to see Trump get hurt for his reckless, hateful rhetoric.
Obama didn't have to order it. Just like the IRS scandal, they knew what needed to be done.
The scandal remains: the Obama administration spied on a political opponent using state apparatus. Worse than Watergate.
"That's funny. Half the population understands him just fine."
That's no recommendation.
The FBI/CIA wanted access to the suits to plant tracking/listening devices and probably swab the clothing for illegal substances and trace evidence, while they were at it. Suits can be purchased at any price or even second hand. The government would have access to your credit card purchases anyway, and your bank records for checks and debit card purchases.
Rusty said...
"tim, you and the other Trumpkins seem to want to give Trump all sorts of credit for communicating effectively. But it can only be because you give Trump credit for what you think he means when he is unclear, and you won't accept Trump critics when they point out that Trump really is unclear."
That's funny. Half the population understands him just fine.
And, at least, he's not conjuring the definition of "is".
I read Rusty's comment and thought it so weird at first. Because I never carried any brief for Bill or Hillary Clinton. I've never voted for either one of them, having had about five chances to do so. I don't like them, never did, and when I was given the ugly choice of Trump or a Clinton, I chose Trump.
And of course, "Half the population" understood Bill Clinton, too, it seems. (Less than half, actually; less than half for Clinton, and less than half for Trump.)
But I never gave Bill Clinton a pass for his moral failing and his assault on the English language, and I am not giving Trump a pass for his abuses of people and his own corruption of language. I'm consistent. Rusty seems to want to give both Trump and Clinton a break. (Or does Rusty think it's okay for Trump, but not for Bill Clinton?)
I remember well at the time of the Trump tweeting on the "wire-tapp" story, some of my harshest complaints about Trump were that no one could actually tell what he was claiming at any time because of the nature of his strange, opaque phrasing.
It isn't really opaque, it's figurative. People have been using figurative language throughout recorded history. It's extremely effective. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you get to put words in his mouth to try to invidiously force some meaning on his words. We all knew he meant the administration that he had eight years to populate with his political allies. What really galls you is that he was right. Or at least there was a possible interpretation by which one could conclude he was. right, so whatever happens, you must make. sure that the. interpretation that makes Trump right could not have been what he meant.
Trump has lots of shared assumptions with his supporters, it makes his tweets easier to understand for us. The way you interpret them makes no sense at all unless you start out with the premise that Trump is a moron who doesn't understand his own political interests.
BTW, not only do I wake up every morning giving thanks that Hillary is not president, I do the same for Cruz.
Ann Althouse said...
What's the largest number of suits you've ever seen in a guy's closet?
9/19/17, 7:34 AM
The largest number I ever saw first hand was my own closet. At one time I had 18 suits. I was a computer consultant, had to wear a suit every day, and also made business trips over seas where I was able to acquire a number of custom made suits at VERY low prices. This was in the mid/late 80s. Loved the custom made eel skin shoes (while they lasted).
Worse than Watergate? It is the difference between a knife fight in a bar parking lot and the Korean War. Everyone in Trump's campaign was looked at. And everyone they came in contact with by phone or email. And so on. You think chain immigration is bad? At the very least, this is a mass invasion of privacy on a massive scale. The ill effect could linger on if the data gathered got put in a NSA database that is available to local LEOs across the country.
ILook, Kevin, I'll make this as plain and as simple as it needs to be for Trump-world:
If Donald Trump knew these details way back in March, he should have said so then. If Trump knew about a wiretap of Manafort, and if Trump was not breaking FBI/DoJ procedures to say so, Trump should have been clear. Instead of weird little quips about Obama being a "Bad (or sick) guy." And if what Trump was doing at that time was breaching confidentiality and information security of the DoJ, then he should have kept his Twitter-yap shut.
I guess I'll have to make this as plain and simple as it needs to be for Lifelong Republicans:
We already know the Trump team was spied on. We already know the names of US Citizens were illegally unmasked. We already know Susan Rice, Obama's closest confidant, was at the center of it. We already know she lied about it to the American people because she knew it was wrong. And we already know Obama personally changed the rules about who could see that very information right before he left office.
We know all those things. The only thing we don't know is whether Trump himself was included or just the people around him. That's it. It's the only thing. And without releasing the information that was collected and dragging the intelligence community through a public spanking, Trump let everyone know that yes he was.
Most of us knew this when Trump tweeted it. For the rest of you, now you know.
I got to laugh, if the argument is that Trump was wrong because, "Trump were that no one could actually tell what he was claiming at any time because of the nature of his strange, opaque phrasing."
What non-lawyer, non=IT or non-security specialist person born before 1960 would call it anything but a "wire tap"? It's phrase we are familiar with. Splitting hairs doesn't change a thing, the Obama Administration was SPYING on a the opposition party's campaign. Fuck the Russians, the FBI was SPYING on Trump before during and even after the inauguration. Comey needs to go to jail.
The first black bag operations were carried out against the America First and German-American Bund organizations. Any harmful information that J. Edgar gleaned about these organizations was leaked to Walter Winchell who printed the info in his column. This was done with the knowledge and, indeed, encouragement of FDR. Later on, Hoover and Winchell used the same m.o. against the Communists. These later operations were considered an unpardonable infringement on the civil rights of all Americans.
What's the largest number of suits you've ever seen in a guy's closet?
On TV or in the movies? Probably about 30 or more. At the moment there are two in my closet, both black, and about 5 sport coats with coordinating slacks. At my age you expect to attend multiple funerals per year, plus sooner or later one of your own.
"Declaring that they must "strike terror in the hearts" of people they're investigating? Sounds like the thoughts and actions of a tyranny to me."
What Cook said. But then, this is America.
Shorter version of Chuck: " I was wrong, but really I was right because -- there's a squirrel over there!"
Chuckie, when you're in a deep hole, stop digging.
Ann Althouse said...
What's the largest number of suits you've ever seen in a guy's closet?
30, all the same parson's grey worsted three button, 3-2 roll special ordered Corbin Ltd suit. 10 assorted sport coats and blazers with assorted trousers. 4 pair black English make cap toe shoes, a pair of Alden cordovan dress tassels and a pair of Weejuns.
He was a very successful Harvard lawyer here in the Midwest, probably retired by now. Very nice guy. I sold him clothing when I was young and every year he would order the same suit, a dozen white and a dozen blue oxford cloth Gitman shirts. I only saw him wear something different once at a football game, a tweed jacket far more bespoke than a Corbin suit.
My father, being a Teamster, gave me sound advice very young.
#1 don't snitch, someone will kill you or break your eating hand.
#2 don't talk to cops, you don't know what's against the law.
#3 don't talk to other prisoners, even if it's your best friend.
Anyone you find inside your home or office, you can kill.
Even if they say they are cops, or private detectives. Take the money from their wallets before you call the cops to come pick them up.
Robert Cook said...
"That's funny. Half the population understands him just fine."
"That's no recommendation."
It is when you consider that the people that voted for him were on the right side of the bell curve.
Chuck @ 8:43
You obfuscate with faint praise.
You were decrying the lack of accuracy of Trumps language. Being a lawyer you use language to either enlighten or hide meaning depending on what you want people to believe. not really an endorsement for your opinion.
I would have thought that, to an intelligent person, my intent was obvious.
It's scary how weaponized the government. Unfortunately the government workers have become part of the Democratic Party. Not good for our future.
Expat(ish) said, "I'm amazed that nobody is amazed that the law allows cops to routinely break into houses and put homeowners in such danger."
I'm hardly amazed. It's been going on for years, if not decades. It is regularly decried by civil liberties supporters (both left and right). But nothing changes.
So, no, I'm not amazed. Angry, yes. Amazed, no.
And, Etienne, I fully agree with your father on point number two. Don't talk to cops, you don't know what's against the law. This is especially true nowadays, with thousands of pages of federal, state, and local laws, plus countless court decisions (case law), rules, regulations and so forth. Never talk to the cops. It can only hurt.
Authority for me but not for thee (truth for me but nazism for thee). The liberal playbook is old.
Chuck said...What Trump did was to personalize the surveillance in a way that no careful lawyer would.
Yeah, almost like he was acting as a politician trying to score a (possibly unfair/overbroad/unsupported) political point against his political opponents, huh? Not like a careful lawyer at all!
And since we all know Trump is a careful lawyer, and tweets as a careful lawyer and not some big time politician, the imprecision of his tweets just doesn't make any sense.
Bizarre!
Manafort may well deserve to go to jail. The only question that matters is whether that has anything to do with Donald Trump.
Not mentioned is how expensive it is to defend against the government/ Mueller's investigation. And GOPe is not helping, yet Aswan got a friend of Hillary's as a lawyer.
William said...The first black bag operations were carried out against the America First and German-American Bund organizations. Any harmful information that J. Edgar gleaned about these organizations was leaked to Walter Winchell who printed the info in his column. This was done with the knowledge and, indeed, encouragement of FDR. Later on, Hoover and Winchell used the same m.o. against the Communists. These later operations were considered an unpardonable infringement on the civil rights of all Americans.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the HUAC first set up to investigate Bund and related activities? I know I've chuckled a bit to hear the call for "investigate the Nazis!" lately from the same people who hold that McCarthyism is America's most terrible sin.
@Chuck:The Trump Tweets were that "Obama" ordered the wiretapping. (If the current story in the press is correct, it was a federal court judge, hearing a FISA warrant application.
So your story is, the FBI went rogue, seeking a FISA warrant, and they never informed Obama they were doing that.
Is that of no concern to you?
If they informed Obama of what they were doing, and he did not forbid them, then of course they did so with his authority.
To assist some of our Life Long Republican friends, a couple of concepts to help explain common human communication:
Wiki: Metonymy
Wiki: Synecdoche
Wiki: Metalepsis
Consider those concepts when deciding whether, in context, "Obama" might mean "the Obama Administration doing Obama's will", whether "Trump Tower" might mean "members of the campaign residing in Trump Tower" or "discussions occurring in Trump tower among people working to elect Trump", and whether "wiretap" might mean "covert surveillance techniques and methods."
Consider how plainly stupid it is to insist that a POLITICIAN acting as a politician always use precise, lawyerly language to communicate every idea...especially when politicians who are in fact lawyers have been known to intentionally mislead during actual depositions on topics such as what the meaning of "is" is.
At my age you expect to attend multiple funerals per year, plus sooner or later one of your own.
Who was it that said, "If you don't go to my funeral, don't expect me to go to yours?"
The FBI has been spying on everyone since Hoover. Mark Felt proved that they had been surveilling the White House when he retaliated against Nixon for not appointing him Director.
If they had picked the locks on my home and come in unannounced I would have been on the second magazine of .45 CAP by the time they hit me. Especially if they shot my dog.
Funny how that works. The new was full of headlines like "Bush under fire over hurricane aid" as if President Bush was individually responsible for all aspects of hurricane Katrina response. He took the hit for the perception of how his administration responded to that crisis. Fast forward to Obama and not only is he not in any way responsible for anything that his administration does but he has to find out what his administration does from the news.
It is clear to anyone with any sense of even-handedness that what was being referred to with the "wiretapping" was the Obama administration, with our without Obama's direct involvement and approval. It actually matters NOT whether Obama said to do it, simply approved it, was briefed after the fact, or never even knew it happened. Does NOT matter.
It is common and standard practice to refer to a President's administration as the President because all that it does, it does in his name. He is ultimately responsible for all that his administration does as in "the buck stops here!". It is NOT that hard.
Doc, is that. 45 ACP, or. 45 GAP, the Glock variant?
Either way, keep in mind that the, I'm sorry to say, jack-booted thugs wearing the insignia of the United States, will surely be wearing body armor, because they guy with the illegal stamp collection may have a poodle or even, gasp, a chihuahua. So the pistol won't do the job.
When you finally get serious, go nothing less than AR with, ideally, black-tip rounds (M995), if you could get them, which probably not. This is also MS-13/other gang medicine, so you needn't feel bad about preparing to shoot Federal agents, even those who deserve it.
Just keep in mind that they don't like to lose, so either plan your escape and evasion carefully, or plan to go down fighting, in which case you might want to target the command element, which will be where they think it's safe.
Bad Lieutenant said......I'm sorry to say, jack-booted thugs wearing the insignia of the United States, will surely be wearing body armor...
Legs and head, artery or brain, these generally offer unarmored targets.
"If they had picked the locks on my home and come in unannounced I would have been on the second magazine of .45 CAP by the time they hit me. Especially if they shot my dog."
And, you know, you would be dead.
"It is when you consider that the people that voted for him were on the right side of the bell curve."
Rusty, just making up shit to make a quip doesn't cut it.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा