|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 17 2017 13:52 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2017 13:40 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 17 2017 13:35 xDaunt wrote:On December 17 2017 13:27 TheTenthDoc wrote:On December 17 2017 13:24 xDaunt wrote:On December 17 2017 13:18 TheTenthDoc wrote:
Isn't this contingent on the information actually being privileged and the request unauthorized? It can't be executive privilege since they weren't in office yet. No. This was an unauthorized seizure of information. Privilege is besides the point at this initial stage. The one thing that I wonder is whether it matters that this was done with an RFP as opposed to a subpoena. But the root problem is that this is confidential information that Mueller's team obtained through improper channels, violating the expectations of privacy of the owners of the information. And then his team lied about it to Trump's team. That's bad, bad behavior -- like the kind of shit that gets prosecutors sanctioned. Don't those expectations have to be real, though? If there really is a box they checked saying "we understand none of these will be held back in law enforcement actions" ( as Langhofer at GSA claims) then there's no expectation of privacy. Edit: even gsa's homepage says that "no expectation of privacy is to be assumed." Yes, the expectation of privacy has to be real. I'm highly dubious of the idea that transition team communications and materials would not be so protected. I'm sure we'll see the relevant documents soon enough. EDIT: I highly doubt that that disclaimer applies to Trump's people. That site links to the sign-in system for the gsa email system as well as the intranet and the disclaimer applies to all internal systems accessed from that page. Do you think they were given special assurances they weren't going to be monitored that overrode it? Like I said, I’d have to see the contract documents and get a better understanding of what services the GSA was providing. But it just seems bizarre to me that transition team documents would not be considered private or confidential at all.
One has to wonder then why this was brought up on the 15th of june. If all documents are flatout considered confidential, it seems odd to seek confirmation (or rather, a concession) from the chief, no? Even more so if you're part of the team that planted said guy?
edit, stealing from a tweet
Earlier this year, Trump appointed the top attorney at the office responsible for providing all the electronics and email accounts the Trump transition team used.
That attorney's name was Richard Backler.
The guy who Langenhofer is arguing gave a verbal acknowledgement of everything being sent to the legal team first.
edit: i'm assuming verbal, since there don't seem to be any records of it
|
I mean, when I was spending some time as an intern with the federal government I never had any ownership of any email sent using my official email. Not really sure what would make the transition team above this requirement as government contractors.
Heck, I'm not sure Trump even legally owns his tweets anymore after they declared them official government communications.
Privilege (attorney/client or executive)/classified would be another thing, but I confess I have no idea how and what the heck Trump and co mean when they talk about it.
|
On December 17 2017 13:51 mozoku wrote:
I'm pretty skeptical that a transition team that was likely full of attorneys was communicating on non-private communication platform on sensitive matters related to a presidential transition and/or potential major crime.
A high schooler probably could have told them that's a bad idea.
Have you seen the shit that's been uncovered already? The genius that is Manafort? These people are fucking morons.
|
How long before this guy's death is spun out to Seth Rich Part 2?
|
On December 17 2017 13:51 mozoku wrote:
I'm pretty skeptical that a transition team that was likely full of attorneys was communicating on non-private communication platform on sensitive matters related to a presidential transition and/or potential major crime.
A high schooler probably could have told them that's a bad idea.
Yes, but Trump's team has repeatedly proven they're dumber than children, so...
|
On December 17 2017 14:03 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2017 13:51 mozoku wrote:
I'm pretty skeptical that a transition team that was likely full of attorneys was communicating on non-private communication platform on sensitive matters related to a presidential transition and/or potential major crime.
A high schooler probably could have told them that's a bad idea. Have you seen the shit that's been uncovered already? The genius that is Manafort? These people are fucking morons.
There's also tons of on the surface innocuous things ("I can't meet at such and such time, I'm busy" or "I'll be out of town that day" or "P.S. See you Thursday") that could pop up and be relevant in some of these investigations, since so much has to do with who knew what when and they would help confirm external evidence.
Conspiracies are hard work!
On December 17 2017 14:04 Gahlo wrote:
How long before this guy's death is spun out to Seth Rich Part 2?
Better to call it Hcir Htes, since it'll probably be a conspiracy about Trump and co killing him.
|
Actually, if we go by what Loewentritt (great german name btw, Loewe = Lion, tritt = kick) says, it's pretty clear that these documents were obtained legally - or at least, that the emails were not considered confidential/private.
GSA Deputy Counsel Lenny Loewentritt disputed a claim by Langhofer that the GSA's general counsel had agreed in June that any requests for transition records would go to the Trump campaign
Loewentritt said transition officials were told that "in using our devices," materials "would not be held back in any law enforcement" requests. He added there was a series of agreements between the transition and GSA for using its goods and therefore there was no expectation of privacy.
edit
To be clear once more:
Washington, D.C. - The U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) announces Richard W. Beckler as General Counsel. Beckler, an appointee of President Donald J. Trump, will oversee the Office of General Counsel and serve as the chief legal advisor to the Administrator.
So i'm assuming the "agreement" they're talking about is that their guy in the agency promised to shield them, which didn't really work since Beckler died. I'm not sure trump won't fire (or push for it) Mueller over this, but i can't see it justified at this time. Not that it would stop trump supporters, or trump itself.
|
I like the idea of referring to Trump as an "it" lol. I think we should keep that.
|
On December 17 2017 14:27 NewSunshine wrote:
I like the idea of referring to Trump as an "it" lol. I think we should keep that.
I feel like it's appropriate.
Sidenote, if Mueller gets fired, do we call that Saturday Night Massacre 2: the incompetence strikes again?
|
|
|
Unsurprisingly.
I mean, only a daft person would think that a team with that much knowledge and experience would do such a dumb mistake, jeopardising everything.
|
On December 17 2017 14:03 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On December 17 2017 13:51 mozoku wrote:
I'm pretty skeptical that a transition team that was likely full of attorneys was communicating on non-private communication platform on sensitive matters related to a presidential transition and/or potential major crime.
A high schooler probably could have told them that's a bad idea. Have you seen the shit that's been uncovered already? The genius that is Manafort? These people are fucking morons.
Not to mention the genius of Jared Kushner and Donald Trump Jr in writing down their goddamn conspiracy with Russian officials. These guys have gotten away with so much on the basis of them having access to billions of dollars that they think they can get away with everything. And I wouldn't be surprised if they still get away with everything, its just how the American justice system treats white collar crime.
|
On December 17 2017 14:42 m4ini wrote:
Unsurprisingly.
I mean, only a daft person would think that a team with that much knowledge and experience would do such a dumb mistake, jeopardising everything.
Unfortunately, it's already out there swirling in the morass of right-wing media, where no contradictory information can penetrate and defeat the word of a group of stupid serial liars. They could have screengrabs of what the Trump team clicked forfeiting their privacy and they would be assumed to be doctored.
"Poison tree" will be the next "unmasking."
|
emails are basically public but usually most people don't care unless the person is important or successful or wealthy
|
Let me get this straight:
- Trump appoints a yes man to the GSA to protect the transition team emails from investigative eyes.
- Said yes man dies before he can enact his plan, leaving all the emails available unbeknownst to the Trump team.
- Mueller's team requests government property (emails) from the government agency which is the caretaker of them as part of a sanctioned investigation.
- General Counsel of said organization aquiest on the premise that the transition team was explicitly given notice these could be used in an investigation (it seems maybe they even signed waivers?) and executive privilege doesn't apply.
- Mueller used information from these emails in questioning Trump people.
- Trumps people were caught off guard during questioning since they were asked about content they assumed had been kept secret from Mueller (which implies they had something to hide since all of the questions would be investigation relevant).
- Based upon these questions Trumps team learns Mueller got all of the emails.
- Trumps team sends a complaint to Congress asking for a legislative remedy (which seems to be tacit admission no actual law was violated, but we'll see what comes of this part).
- GSA general counsel says lol, no.
If Trump fires Mueller based up on this, then there is good reason to think there is devastating information in those emails. Also, even if some are privileged, I'm pretty sure that can't be used to protect evidence of a crime or the cover up of a crime.
|
Fox News is certainly going in on the Crooked Mueller theme. That is a level of propagandizing you just don’t see in the liberal media.
|
|
|
I'm actually partial to the theory below. So when "no collusion" comes up, as seems more and more likely, it works even better for them.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
Those emails aren't privileged lol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
