• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mystery Mueller mayhem at a Washington court

Could it be the Chinese phone company Huewei?

Maybe Meng, the Chinese executive that was recently arrested, has offered info about Trump in exchange for immunity? :shrug:

1) Odd that this issue suddenly sprung up even though Mueller has been on the case for over a year

2) If Huewei is as involved in spying as they have been accused of, it is possible they picked up communications relating to Muellers investigations
Interesting track you're on. ZTE would fall into this category, too. Trump always struck me as amazingly suspicious here, with them.
 
I'm thinking it may have something to do with the possibility of money-laundering charges against Trump and his relationship with Deutsche Bank:

https://www.ibtimes.com/could-trumps-relationship-deutsche-bank-lead-money-laundering-charges-congress-may-2744125

Jared Kushner's firm received $370 million in new loans from Deutsche Bank on Oct. 8, 2016 - just a month before the election:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/22/business/kushner-deutsche-bank-subpoena.html
On this line, there's also Russia's VTB, which worked with Felix Slater to attempt to put together the financing for Trump's Russia Trump Tower project (of Micheal Cohen fame).
 
As a matter of fact, yes, to answer your question, they will and they have.

Rod Rosenstein is not the only leftist swamp creature in DC to reject Congressional subpoenas.
 
On this line, there's also Russia's VTB, which worked with Felix Slater to attempt to put together the financing for Trump's Russia Trump Tower project (of Micheal Cohen fame).

Deutsche Bank may have sold some of Trump's debt to VEB:

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-deutsche-bank-mueller-2017-12

Either way, Deutsche Bank has had a cozy relationship with both Trump and various Russian Oligarchs and has already paid substantial fines for violating the sanctions regime against Russia. I'm thinking there's a lot of worms in that can.
 
On this line, there's also Russia's VTB, which worked with Felix Slater to attempt to put together the financing for Trump's Russia Trump Tower project (of Micheal Cohen fame).

Here's another thought. It might be a Saudi bank that's under scrutiny because of ties to Jared Kushner. The Kushner company was deeply in debt on their property at 666 Fifth Ave. They were just about to go under when suddenly, practically at the last minute, a prominent Saudi investor bailed them out.
 
Deutsche Bank may have sold some of Trump's debt to VEB:

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-deutsche-bank-mueller-2017-12

Either way, Deutsche Bank has had a cozy relationship with both Trump and various Russian Oligarchs and has already paid substantial fines for violating the sanctions regime against Russia. I'm thinking there's a lot of worms in that can.
Well then, those worms recently got raided for money laundering! :doh

Last week, 170 law enforcement officials descended on the lender to raid it in connection with suspected money laundering. The pictures of police cars with flashing lights lined up in front of the bank’s Frankfurt headquarters sent the share price to a record low as investors considered the possibility of new distractions for top management and the potential of fines. Here’s what we know so far.

Source: (Bloomberg News) What We Know About the Case Behind the Deutsche Bank Raids
 
Here's another thought. It might be a Saudi bank that's under scrutiny because of ties to Jared Kushner. The Kushner company was deeply in debt on their property at 666 Fifth Ave. They were just about to go under when suddenly, practically at the last minute, a prominent Saudi investor bailed them out.
I believe their also was suspicions stuff going down with the Qatars, too.
 
Yes, he tried to get money from Qatar but they turned him down for a half billion $ loan. Just a month after their rejection of loaning him 500k, he backed the Saudi's and UAE and their blockade of Qatar.

The high-stakes racketeering that's going on - not just behind our backs, but right out in plain view, right in our faces, is all going to blow back onto them come January. 'Winter is here' in more ways than one.
 
I'd call the timing of that raid and the mysterious events in Washington involving a "foreign corporation" as a little too coincidental.
The best I can say, is:

"Perhaps"
 
Supreme Court Intervenes In Apparent Mystery Mueller Case

Chief Justice John Roberts stayed a contempt order in a case that likely arose from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation on Sunday night.

Roberts’ order could mark the first time that the Supreme Court has intervened in the Mueller inquiry.

Very little is known of the case, which reached the justices on Saturday, because the matter has proceeded through the federal courts under seal, meaning strict confidentiality prevails over every detail.

The scant facts which are available about the case are these: a grand jury issued a subpoena to an unnamed company owned by a foreign government some time during the summer of 2018. That firm, referred to in court filings as “the corporation” has been fighting the subpoena in federal court since August.

The Department of Justice must submit a response to the foreign company’s application by Dec. 31.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/12/23/robert-mueller-john-roberts/
 
I believe their also was suspicions stuff going down with the Qatars, too.

I heard an analyst, who spent many years in government foreign policy analysis, who believes it's not the Russians or the Chinese; he says quashing a subpoena wouldn't do them any good since they wouldn't get anything of value out of the money spent to fight the case all the way to SCOTUS and frankly, it's in their interests to just ignore the whole thing.

His guess? Saudi Arabia, which is up to its eyebrows in U.S. Investment, thanks in no small part to business conducted with the Trump Org. over the past decades, and a cozy relationship with Kusher that the WH would not want to be part of a grand jury investigation. Also, Kusher is involved in the Qatar blockade, which was slapped on after Kusher asked Qatar for a loan and was refused.

Me, I have no clue, but this guy seemed to know his stuff, so it will be interesting to see if he's correct in his assessment.
 
I heard an analyst, who spent many years in government foreign policy analysis, who believes it's not the Russians or the Chinese; he says quashing a subpoena wouldn't do them any good since they wouldn't get anything of value out of the money spent to fight the case all the way to SCOTUS and frankly, it's in their interests to just ignore the whole thing.

His guess? Saudi Arabia, which is up to its eyebrows in U.S. Investment, thanks in no small part to business conducted with the Trump Org. over the past decades, and a cozy relationship with Kusher that the WH would not want to be part of a grand jury investigation. Also, Kusher is involved in the Qatar blockade, which was slapped on after Kusher asked Qatar for a loan and was refused.

Me, I have no clue, but this guy seemed to know his stuff, so it will be interesting to see if he's correct in his assessment.
I'm aware of the above, in general terms. This is why you require a candidate's tax returns, before you give him or her your vote to install them as the most powerful man in the world! :doh

BTW, who's the analyst?
 
Is there a citation for this?

If so... sounds like it’s a matter of National Security and the White House...which is a clear tee-up for borderline Treason.

I will admit that that is ONE OF the possibilities.

At present I'm only willing to go as far as saying that it is highly unusual - in fact unique in the history of the United States of America.
 
I will admit that that is ONE OF the possibilities.

At present I'm only willing to go as far as saying that it is highly unusual - in fact unique in the history of the United States of America.

So... no citation.
 
I'm aware of the above, in general terms. This is why you require a candidate's tax returns, before you give him or her your vote to install them as the most powerful man in the world! :doh

BTW, who's the analyst?

I honestly can't recall; they kinda blur in my mind, lol. He was distinguished looking, appeared to be in his 40's, wore glasses, was black, and I believe had authored a book about foreign relations under Trump. That's all I can recall about him, but I found his hypothesis intriguing.
 
So... no citation.

Citation for what?

That something has never happened?

Gosh, I'll have to Google "things that the us supreme court has never done"

However, if you can find me a single instance of the US Supreme Court ever holding an entire trial in secret, I will be more than willing to change my opinion from "to do so is highly occurrence" to "this has only happened __[fill in the blank]__ times before - and out of the number of court cases that the US Supreme Court has heard that would make it highly unusual".

Or are you going to try telling me that it is quite routine for the US Supreme Court to conduct trials in secret (but most people don't know that because those trials are **S*E*C*R*E*T**).
 
Just a little update to this speculation fest....From Politico today....

"This month's three-page summary D.C. Circuit decision revealed a fairly dry set of legal issues that just might conceal a juicy core. The dry issues involved matters of jurisdiction and statutory interpretation fathomed only by elite appellate lawyers, but the potentially juicier underlying issues hinted of fascination: Somewhere, a corporation (a bank? a communications firm? an energy company?) owned by a foreign state (Russia? Turkey? Ukraine? United Arab Emirates? Saudi Arabia?) had engaged in transactions that had an impact in the United States and on matters involved in the special counsel’s investigation.

Intriguingly, the decision revealed that a regulator from Country A had filed a submission claiming that compliance with the subpoena would cause the Corporation to violate Country A’s law. So whoever Country A is, this matter captured its officials’ attention and prompted them to send filings to a faraway country to block the subpoena. Why does Country A care? And, what is it trying to hide?

So, from the D.C. Circuit's decision we learned that a foreign government was actively involved in blocking Mueller’s investigation. That fact is intriguing enough. In the ordinary course, that should have been the end of it. The state-owned Corporation filed an appeal with the Supreme Court, which receives roughly 7,000 petitions a year but acts in fewer than 200 of them. There was unanimity below — all four judges (the District Court judge and the three Circuit Court judges) had agreed that the Corporation and Country A’s legal claims of sovereign immunity and of contrary foreign law were without merit. There was little reason for judicial watchers to expect anything beyond a quiet return to the grand jury and further proceedings there. We headed off for the holidays.

And then came Roberts’ surprise Sunday decision. He is the “circuit justice” for the D.C. Circuit, meaning he is the justice assigned to receive emergency and other petitions arising from that circuit. Under Supreme Court rules, the circuit justice may act without consulting his or her colleagues to dispose of routine rulings. So, we should not read too much into the fact that it is the chief justice in particular who acted here.

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.

What are we to make of his pre-Christmas intervention on behalf of Country A and the Corporation, and against Mueller’s office? We may know soon. Mueller’s office filed its submission early, on Friday evening. We’ll keep our eyes glued to the docket."

https://www.politico.com/magazine/s...n-roberts-robert-mueller-investigation-223569
 
Back
Top Bottom