More CNN fake news

[easyt65]

Maybe the Trumpsters are right about all the fake/biased news coming from CNN. I mean look at this crazy article!!!

Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far — CNN

Every once in a while CNN goes completely insane, their Editor falls asleep at the wheel, and they actually put out an honest report.

 

[Slade3200]

Maybe the Trumpsters are right about all the fake/biased news coming from CNN. I mean look at this crazy article!!!

Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far — CNN

the author of the piece is a conservative, as noted at the top of the piece.

No shit... Why would a fake news network that is anti-conservative and pro-liberal have a conservative op-ed?

 

[Slade3200]

They probably didn't report it because it's all based on assumptions. Mueller and the DOJ haven't made any public statements about the investigation. I realize that they do report many stories on leaked/unconfirmed info, which is where the bias comes in, but this whole "Fake News" discredit the MSM campaign that Trump is leading is waaaaaaay overblown

Rosenstein said yesterday, much of what was being reported is wrong, of course he wouldn't elaborate, but there is a lot of fake crap out there. Also the OP-ED was done by a former federal prosecutor who is familiar with the DOJ regulations for special counsels, and his opinions were confirmed by Rosenstein himself.


.

I watched Rosensteins interview yesterday and it didn't confirm the theory in this op ed, it contradicted it

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

True, Rosie clarified the procedures taken in the investigation but didn't comment on any of the accusations of inappropriate behavior or substance that is being investigated. The Op Ed was talking about the "ifs" and he "could be" looking into inappropriate financials, spreading the narrative of the witch hunt.

The be honest, I have no problem with the Op Ed. It is the flip side of the coin of the "fake news" that isn't really fake news that y'all accuse CNN of engaging in. I was just pointing out the simple irony of it being from CNN.

Speaking of Irony... I just flipped on CNN and wolf is talking about this right now as I type

Yep the OP-ED was talking about several of the "ifs" that are currently being reported on now, like Rosenstein said, many are wrong.


.

So does that make it "Fake News" by your definition?

 

[BULLDOG]

The point of the whole article is summed up in the last sentence.

"This would not only be out of character for a respected figure like Mueller, but also could be damaging to the President of the United States and his family -- and by extension, to the country."

The right winger who wrote the article wants to protect Trump. The rest is just bullshit. Our country won't be hurt by Trump's lawlessness being exposed. Trump and his family would be, and should be.

but you were ok with hitlery's lawlessness.

You RWNJs are always making that claim, but after years of investigations, you got nothing to show for it.

 

[Slade3200]

He's a conservative commentator giving his opinion so it's no surprise it would be more supportive of Trump than the majority of what CNN puts out.

From the Rhetoric I've been hearing lately about CNN it makes no sense for an article like this to be posted on their site. Doesn't it go against their anti-trump pro-liberal agenda?

Yes it does my guess would be stuff like this will be put out ever so often by CNN so they can claim to still be an unbiased news organization. From what I have seen of their reporting since election night they have in fact decided to challenge MSNBC for the title of the anti Trump network.

Do you think Trump bares any kind of blame or responsibility for this shift in focus that CNN has undergone?

 

[OKTexas]

Rosenstein said yesterday, much of what was being reported is wrong, of course he wouldn't elaborate, but there is a lot of fake crap out there. Also the OP-ED was done by a former federal prosecutor who is familiar with the DOJ regulations for special counsels, and his opinions were confirmed by Rosenstein himself.


.

I watched Rosensteins interview yesterday and it didn't confirm the theory in this op ed, it contradicted it

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

True, Rosie clarified the procedures taken in the investigation but didn't comment on any of the accusations of inappropriate behavior or substance that is being investigated. The Op Ed was talking about the "ifs" and he "could be" looking into inappropriate financials, spreading the narrative of the witch hunt.

The be honest, I have no problem with the Op Ed. It is the flip side of the coin of the "fake news" that isn't really fake news that y'all accuse CNN of engaging in. I was just pointing out the simple irony of it being from CNN.

Speaking of Irony... I just flipped on CNN and wolf is talking about this right now as I type

Yep the OP-ED was talking about several of the "ifs" that are currently being reported on now, like Rosenstein said, many are wrong.


.

So does that make it "Fake News" by your definition?

"it", if you're talking about the things Rosenstein said were wrong, absolutely. The OP-ED was spot on.


.

 

[Slade3200]

I watched Rosensteins interview yesterday and it didn't confirm the theory in this op ed, it contradicted it

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

True, Rosie clarified the procedures taken in the investigation but didn't comment on any of the accusations of inappropriate behavior or substance that is being investigated. The Op Ed was talking about the "ifs" and he "could be" looking into inappropriate financials, spreading the narrative of the witch hunt.

The be honest, I have no problem with the Op Ed. It is the flip side of the coin of the "fake news" that isn't really fake news that y'all accuse CNN of engaging in. I was just pointing out the simple irony of it being from CNN.

Speaking of Irony... I just flipped on CNN and wolf is talking about this right now as I type

Yep the OP-ED was talking about several of the "ifs" that are currently being reported on now, like Rosenstein said, many are wrong.
.

So does that make it "Fake News" by your definition?

"it", if you're talking about the things Rosenstein said were wrong, absolutely. The OP-ED was spot on.
.

Great, just checking... Yall call analysis over unsubstantiated or anonymously sourced information, "Fake News". This Op-Ed does the same thing yet you think its spot on. Your blind partisanship is shown

 

[OKTexas]

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

True, Rosie clarified the procedures taken in the investigation but didn't comment on any of the accusations of inappropriate behavior or substance that is being investigated. The Op Ed was talking about the "ifs" and he "could be" looking into inappropriate financials, spreading the narrative of the witch hunt.

The be honest, I have no problem with the Op Ed. It is the flip side of the coin of the "fake news" that isn't really fake news that y'all accuse CNN of engaging in. I was just pointing out the simple irony of it being from CNN.

Speaking of Irony... I just flipped on CNN and wolf is talking about this right now as I type

Yep the OP-ED was talking about several of the "ifs" that are currently being reported on now, like Rosenstein said, many are wrong.
.

So does that make it "Fake News" by your definition?

"it", if you're talking about the things Rosenstein said were wrong, absolutely. The OP-ED was spot on.
.

Great, just checking... Yall call analysis over unsubstantiated or anonymously sourced information, "Fake News". This Op-Ed does the same thing yet you think its spot on. Your blind partisanship is shown

Funny how you deliberately misrepresent what I said. Rosenstein said the reports that claim Mueller could take the investigation anywhere he wants is fake, along with many other reports on the directions Mueller is taking, he used the word "wrong". Are you saying he lied?


.

 

[blackhawk]

He's a conservative commentator giving his opinion so it's no surprise it would be more supportive of Trump than the majority of what CNN puts out.

From the Rhetoric I've been hearing lately about CNN it makes no sense for an article like this to be posted on their site. Doesn't it go against their anti-trump pro-liberal agenda?

Yes it does my guess would be stuff like this will be put out ever so often by CNN so they can claim to still be an unbiased news organization. From what I have seen of their reporting since election night they have in fact decided to challenge MSNBC for the title of the anti Trump network.

Do you think Trump bares any kind of blame or responsibility for this shift in focus that CNN has undergone?

There is no question some of the stuff Trump says plays a part in it but that doesn't account for all of it. I think a lot of it is CNN and the most of the media can not come to terms with the fact Trump won for them Trump winning was never a possibility in their mind there was no way someone like Trump could defeat someone as great as Hillary. In my opinion this thought process has influenced how CNN and others have covered Trump and I really don't see it changing.

 

[Flopper]

They probably didn't report it because it's all based on assumptions. Mueller and the DOJ haven't made any public statements about the investigation. I realize that they do report many stories on leaked/unconfirmed info, which is where the bias comes in, but this whole "Fake News" discredit the MSM campaign that Trump is leading is waaaaaaay overblown

Rosenstein said yesterday, much of what was being reported is wrong, of course he wouldn't elaborate, but there is a lot of fake crap out there. Also the OP-ED was done by a former federal prosecutor who is familiar with the DOJ regulations for special counsels, and his opinions were confirmed by Rosenstein himself.


.

I watched Rosensteins interview yesterday and it didn't confirm the theory in this op ed, it contradicted it

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

If Mueller drifts into areas that go beyond Russian Interference in the election, the only recourse the administration has is to fire him and that could create a huge shit storm because the administration can't reveal any information about the grand jury investigation.

In a grand jury investigation, the prosecutor will explain the law to the jury and work with them to gather evidence and hear testimony. Normal court room rules of evidence, exhibits and testimony do not apply. The grand jury has broad powers to see and hear almost anything they would like. They can subpoena witnesses and documents. There is no judge to tell the jury or prosecutor what they can or can't do. All workings of the grand jury are sealed. The administration can not legally reveal anything that goes on within the grand jury sessions.

How Does a Grand Jury Work? - FindLaw

The scope of the investigation is determined by Rosenstein, the grand jury can't go off on their own, it's the prosecutors job to keep them focused, but if they try you'll see very public contests to their subpoenas, bet on it.


.

You can contest a grand jury subpoena but you will appear or go to jail. Trump's only alternative is to let the investigation follow the evidence or fire Mueller.

There are no legal or ethical reasons for the special counsel to turn away if he discovers indications of misconduct that are unrelated to the original Russia inquiry. Rosenstein's order establishing the special council is very broad. It states that the special counsel is “authorized to conduct the investigation” that includes “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” as well as “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” The statue also gives him the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.

The president can tweet and hold campaign rallies till the cows come home about being treated unfairly, Mueller, and the grand jury but in the end the only thing that is going to be remembered is Mueller's public report at end of the investigation. Today, the only thing most people remember about the Clinton email investigations is summed up in a couple paragraphs in Comey's report.


https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
28 CFR 600.4 - Jurisdiction.

 

[Slade3200]

He's a conservative commentator giving his opinion so it's no surprise it would be more supportive of Trump than the majority of what CNN puts out.

From the Rhetoric I've been hearing lately about CNN it makes no sense for an article like this to be posted on their site. Doesn't it go against their anti-trump pro-liberal agenda?

Yes it does my guess would be stuff like this will be put out ever so often by CNN so they can claim to still be an unbiased news organization. From what I have seen of their reporting since election night they have in fact decided to challenge MSNBC for the title of the anti Trump network.

Do you think Trump bares any kind of blame or responsibility for this shift in focus that CNN has undergone?

There is no question some of the stuff Trump says plays a part in it but that doesn't account for all of it. I think a lot of it is CNN and the most of the media can not come to terms with the fact Trump won for them Trump winning was never a possibility in their mind there was no way someone like Trump could defeat someone as great as Hillary. In my opinion this thought process has influenced how CNN and others have covered Trump and I really don't see it changing.

I think it is the medias job to scrutize and ask tough questions, not kiss ass and defend like programs like Fox and Friends, Hannity, and Judge Crazy Janine do. CNN came out hard against Trump during the election, they also hit Hillary hard about wikileaks, the server investigation, the foundation accusations (all were top headlines on CNN). Trump being the egomaniac that he is couldn't take the heat so he declared war against them and fought back. CNN as a news network is forced to play defense when the president is calling them Fake News on a regular basis and calling them out by name. They even took an offensive roll trying to stand up to him and not let his rhetoric influence their reporting... It isn't honest news, it is a petty squabble and ratings play a big part in it. I used to respect CNN as an objective outlet that sat in between MSNBC and FOX but they have definitely moved left with Trump in the WH. I don't think it is a "Left" and "Right" thing I think it is a fight with Trump thing and Trump feeds that fire and owns just as much responsibility as CNN. Arguably more responsibility... He is the POTUS

 

[OKTexas]

Rosenstein said yesterday, much of what was being reported is wrong, of course he wouldn't elaborate, but there is a lot of fake crap out there. Also the OP-ED was done by a former federal prosecutor who is familiar with the DOJ regulations for special counsels, and his opinions were confirmed by Rosenstein himself.


.

I watched Rosensteins interview yesterday and it didn't confirm the theory in this op ed, it contradicted it

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

If Mueller drifts into areas that go beyond Russian Interference in the election, the only recourse the administration has is to fire him and that could create a huge shit storm because the administration can't reveal any information about the grand jury investigation.

In a grand jury investigation, the prosecutor will explain the law to the jury and work with them to gather evidence and hear testimony. Normal court room rules of evidence, exhibits and testimony do not apply. The grand jury has broad powers to see and hear almost anything they would like. They can subpoena witnesses and documents. There is no judge to tell the jury or prosecutor what they can or can't do. All workings of the grand jury are sealed. The administration can not legally reveal anything that goes on within the grand jury sessions.

How Does a Grand Jury Work? - FindLaw

The scope of the investigation is determined by Rosenstein, the grand jury can't go off on their own, it's the prosecutors job to keep them focused, but if they try you'll see very public contests to their subpoenas, bet on it.


.

You can contest a grand jury subpoena but you will appear or go to jail. Trump's only alternative is to let the investigation follow the evidence or fire Mueller.

There are no legal or ethical reasons for the special counsel to turn away if he discovers indications of misconduct that are unrelated to the original Russia inquiry. Rosenstein's order establishing the special council is very broad. It states that the special counsel is “authorized to conduct the investigation” that includes “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” as well as “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” The statue also gives him the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.

The president can tweet and hold campaign rallies till the cows come home about being treated unfairly, Mueller, and the grand jury but in the end the only thing that is going to be remembered is Mueller's public report at end of the investigation. Today, the only thing most people remember about the Clinton email investigations is summed up in a couple paragraphs in Comey's report.


https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
28 CFR 600.4 - Jurisdiction.

I'm not going to argue about it. There are established boundaries for the investigation. IF Mueller finds something outside those boundaries he is REQUIRED to go to Rosenstein, Rosenstein has the option of letting Mueller run with it or refer it to someone else to handle. Those are the FACTS, do I need to bold it for your to understand?


.

 

[blackhawk]

He's a conservative commentator giving his opinion so it's no surprise it would be more supportive of Trump than the majority of what CNN puts out.

From the Rhetoric I've been hearing lately about CNN it makes no sense for an article like this to be posted on their site. Doesn't it go against their anti-trump pro-liberal agenda?

Yes it does my guess would be stuff like this will be put out ever so often by CNN so they can claim to still be an unbiased news organization. From what I have seen of their reporting since election night they have in fact decided to challenge MSNBC for the title of the anti Trump network.

Do you think Trump bares any kind of blame or responsibility for this shift in focus that CNN has undergone?

There is no question some of the stuff Trump says plays a part in it but that doesn't account for all of it. I think a lot of it is CNN and the most of the media can not come to terms with the fact Trump won for them Trump winning was never a possibility in their mind there was no way someone like Trump could defeat someone as great as Hillary. In my opinion this thought process has influenced how CNN and others have covered Trump and I really don't see it changing.

I think it is the medias job to scrutize and ask tough questions, not kiss ass and defend like programs like Fox and Friends, Hannity, and Judge Crazy Janine do. CNN came out hard against Trump during the election, they also hit Hillary hard about wikileaks, the server investigation, the foundation accusations (all were top headlines on CNN). Trump being the egomaniac that he is couldn't take the heat so he declared war against them and fought back. CNN as a news network is forced to play defense when the president is calling them Fake News on a regular basis and calling them out by name. They even took an offensive roll trying to stand up to him and not let his rhetoric influence their reporting... It isn't honest news, it is a petty squabble and ratings play a big part in it. I used to respect CNN as an objective outlet that sat in between MSNBC and FOX but they have definitely moved left with Trump in the WH. I don't think it is a "Left" and "Right" thing I think it is a fight with Trump thing and Trump feeds that fire and owns just as much responsibility as CNN. Arguably more responsibility... He is the POTUS

Yes Trump has called CNN fake news some of it because he's thin skinned I had the same issue with Obama and his attacks on FOX News and I don't mean Hannity who is not a reporter or journalist or unbiased and has never claimed to be. Let's remember in Trumps first 100 days and maybe little beyond that CNN was putting out a lot of Trump stories that were poorly researched and sourced and had to be corrected and some that were flat out wrong the most notable being the one that the three people had to resign over just like some of the stuff Trump says hurts him stuff like that hurt CNN. It does though seem like since the three had resign CNN has tightened things up some on the research and sourcing

 

[Slade3200]

From the Rhetoric I've been hearing lately about CNN it makes no sense for an article like this to be posted on their site. Doesn't it go against their anti-trump pro-liberal agenda?

Yes it does my guess would be stuff like this will be put out ever so often by CNN so they can claim to still be an unbiased news organization. From what I have seen of their reporting since election night they have in fact decided to challenge MSNBC for the title of the anti Trump network.

Do you think Trump bares any kind of blame or responsibility for this shift in focus that CNN has undergone?

There is no question some of the stuff Trump says plays a part in it but that doesn't account for all of it. I think a lot of it is CNN and the most of the media can not come to terms with the fact Trump won for them Trump winning was never a possibility in their mind there was no way someone like Trump could defeat someone as great as Hillary. In my opinion this thought process has influenced how CNN and others have covered Trump and I really don't see it changing.

I think it is the medias job to scrutize and ask tough questions, not kiss ass and defend like programs like Fox and Friends, Hannity, and Judge Crazy Janine do. CNN came out hard against Trump during the election, they also hit Hillary hard about wikileaks, the server investigation, the foundation accusations (all were top headlines on CNN). Trump being the egomaniac that he is couldn't take the heat so he declared war against them and fought back. CNN as a news network is forced to play defense when the president is calling them Fake News on a regular basis and calling them out by name. They even took an offensive roll trying to stand up to him and not let his rhetoric influence their reporting... It isn't honest news, it is a petty squabble and ratings play a big part in it. I used to respect CNN as an objective outlet that sat in between MSNBC and FOX but they have definitely moved left with Trump in the WH. I don't think it is a "Left" and "Right" thing I think it is a fight with Trump thing and Trump feeds that fire and owns just as much responsibility as CNN. Arguably more responsibility... He is the POTUS

Yes Trump has called CNN fake news some of it because he's thin skinned I had the same issue with Obama and his attacks on FOX News and I don't mean Hannity who is not a reporter or journalist or unbiased and has never claimed to be. Let's remember in Trumps first 100 days and maybe little beyond that CNN was putting out a lot of Trump stories that were poorly researched and sourced and had to be corrected and some that were flat out wrong the most notable being the one that the three people had to resign over just like some of the stuff Trump says hurts him stuff like that hurt CNN. It does though seem like since the three had resign CNN has tightened things up some on the research and sourcing

I think CNN's problem is more of bias and focus, they go wall to wall over gossip stories and fail to give a well rounded coverage of the real news of the world. But that isn't Fake News. They may have had a few poorly sourced stories but that happens in reporting. I don't think they had any more "false reports" than the other networks. Fox is being sued right now for the exact same thing. One of their most popular reports Bret Baer falsely reported that the FBI was going to indite Hillary a week before the election. These things happen but I don't think it smart or fair to label an entire media organization as Fake News because of it. I think its actually quite dangerous, especially since it is coming from the leader of our Government. Obama overstepped with Fox but is no where close to what Trump is doing to the MSM.

 

[blackhawk]

Yes it does my guess would be stuff like this will be put out ever so often by CNN so they can claim to still be an unbiased news organization. From what I have seen of their reporting since election night they have in fact decided to challenge MSNBC for the title of the anti Trump network.

Do you think Trump bares any kind of blame or responsibility for this shift in focus that CNN has undergone?

There is no question some of the stuff Trump says plays a part in it but that doesn't account for all of it. I think a lot of it is CNN and the most of the media can not come to terms with the fact Trump won for them Trump winning was never a possibility in their mind there was no way someone like Trump could defeat someone as great as Hillary. In my opinion this thought process has influenced how CNN and others have covered Trump and I really don't see it changing.

I think it is the medias job to scrutize and ask tough questions, not kiss ass and defend like programs like Fox and Friends, Hannity, and Judge Crazy Janine do. CNN came out hard against Trump during the election, they also hit Hillary hard about wikileaks, the server investigation, the foundation accusations (all were top headlines on CNN). Trump being the egomaniac that he is couldn't take the heat so he declared war against them and fought back. CNN as a news network is forced to play defense when the president is calling them Fake News on a regular basis and calling them out by name. They even took an offensive roll trying to stand up to him and not let his rhetoric influence their reporting... It isn't honest news, it is a petty squabble and ratings play a big part in it. I used to respect CNN as an objective outlet that sat in between MSNBC and FOX but they have definitely moved left with Trump in the WH. I don't think it is a "Left" and "Right" thing I think it is a fight with Trump thing and Trump feeds that fire and owns just as much responsibility as CNN. Arguably more responsibility... He is the POTUS

Yes Trump has called CNN fake news some of it because he's thin skinned I had the same issue with Obama and his attacks on FOX News and I don't mean Hannity who is not a reporter or journalist or unbiased and has never claimed to be. Let's remember in Trumps first 100 days and maybe little beyond that CNN was putting out a lot of Trump stories that were poorly researched and sourced and had to be corrected and some that were flat out wrong the most notable being the one that the three people had to resign over just like some of the stuff Trump says hurts him stuff like that hurt CNN. It does though seem like since the three had resign CNN has tightened things up some on the research and sourcing

I think CNN's problem is more of bias and focus, they go wall to wall over gossip stories and fail to give a well rounded coverage of the real news of the world. But that isn't Fake News. They may have had a few poorly sourced stories but that happens in reporting. I don't think they had any more "false reports" than the other networks. Fox is being sued right now for the exact same thing. One of their most popular reports Bret Baer falsely reported that the FBI was going to indite Hillary a week before the election. These things happen but I don't think it smart or fair to label an entire media organization as Fake News because of it. I think its actually quite dangerous, especially since it is coming from the leader of our Government. Obama overstepped with Fox but is no where close to what Trump is doing to the MSM.

How one views what Obama did with FOX is a matter of perspective when Obama would call a story just a FOX news story the implication was it wasn't real news or fake news. I consider what happened under Obama with the Justice Department targeting James Rosen of FOX and reporters and editors at the Associated Press far more troubling than anything Trump has done.

 

[Flopper]

I watched Rosensteins interview yesterday and it didn't confirm the theory in this op ed, it contradicted it

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

If Mueller drifts into areas that go beyond Russian Interference in the election, the only recourse the administration has is to fire him and that could create a huge shit storm because the administration can't reveal any information about the grand jury investigation.

In a grand jury investigation, the prosecutor will explain the law to the jury and work with them to gather evidence and hear testimony. Normal court room rules of evidence, exhibits and testimony do not apply. The grand jury has broad powers to see and hear almost anything they would like. They can subpoena witnesses and documents. There is no judge to tell the jury or prosecutor what they can or can't do. All workings of the grand jury are sealed. The administration can not legally reveal anything that goes on within the grand jury sessions.

How Does a Grand Jury Work? - FindLaw

The scope of the investigation is determined by Rosenstein, the grand jury can't go off on their own, it's the prosecutors job to keep them focused, but if they try you'll see very public contests to their subpoenas, bet on it.


.

You can contest a grand jury subpoena but you will appear or go to jail. Trump's only alternative is to let the investigation follow the evidence or fire Mueller.

There are no legal or ethical reasons for the special counsel to turn away if he discovers indications of misconduct that are unrelated to the original Russia inquiry. Rosenstein's order establishing the special council is very broad. It states that the special counsel is “authorized to conduct the investigation” that includes “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” as well as “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” The statue also gives him the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.

The president can tweet and hold campaign rallies till the cows come home about being treated unfairly, Mueller, and the grand jury but in the end the only thing that is going to be remembered is Mueller's public report at end of the investigation. Today, the only thing most people remember about the Clinton email investigations is summed up in a couple paragraphs in Comey's report.


https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
28 CFR 600.4 - Jurisdiction.

I'm not going to argue about it. There are established boundaries for the investigation. IF Mueller finds something outside those boundaries he is REQUIRED to go to Rosenstein, Rosenstein has the option of letting Mueller run with it or refer it to someone else to handle. Those are the FACTS, do I need to bold it for your to understand?


.

Not arguing the point is wise. Rosenstein gave Muller a very broad path to follow. Since Mueller is not required to reveal any part of the investigation until it is complete, there is no way to prove he has overstepped his bounds until the investigation is complete.

Trump really screwed himself when he went after Comey but that's to be expected when we elect a rank amateur to run the country.

 

[FA_Q2]

Maybe the Trumpsters are right about all the fake/biased news coming from CNN. I mean look at this crazy article!!!

Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far — CNN

WOW, they put a conservative OP-ED on their web site, how much air time did they give to the opinion?


.

Most if not all programs I see on CNN have a conservative or Trump supporter on their panels so theres most always an oppositional voice. They are usually outnumbered 4 to 1 which is a bit obnoxious but at least theres a rep from both sides during their discussions.

A move blatantly taken from FOX who has been dong this for a damn long time.

We all know that the token liberal does not make FOX a bastion of balanced news anymore than some conservative viewpoints and the token conservative on CNN's joke of a 'news' network.

 

[FA_Q2]

BS, he said Mueller knew the limits of the investigation and should he want to go beyond them he would have to clear it through Rosenstein. That's exactly what the OP-ED said.

Mueller Reined In


.

If Mueller drifts into areas that go beyond Russian Interference in the election, the only recourse the administration has is to fire him and that could create a huge shit storm because the administration can't reveal any information about the grand jury investigation.

In a grand jury investigation, the prosecutor will explain the law to the jury and work with them to gather evidence and hear testimony. Normal court room rules of evidence, exhibits and testimony do not apply. The grand jury has broad powers to see and hear almost anything they would like. They can subpoena witnesses and documents. There is no judge to tell the jury or prosecutor what they can or can't do. All workings of the grand jury are sealed. The administration can not legally reveal anything that goes on within the grand jury sessions.

How Does a Grand Jury Work? - FindLaw

The scope of the investigation is determined by Rosenstein, the grand jury can't go off on their own, it's the prosecutors job to keep them focused, but if they try you'll see very public contests to their subpoenas, bet on it.


.

You can contest a grand jury subpoena but you will appear or go to jail. Trump's only alternative is to let the investigation follow the evidence or fire Mueller.

There are no legal or ethical reasons for the special counsel to turn away if he discovers indications of misconduct that are unrelated to the original Russia inquiry. Rosenstein's order establishing the special council is very broad. It states that the special counsel is “authorized to conduct the investigation” that includes “any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump” as well as “any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.” The statue also gives him the authority to investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses; and to conduct appeals arising out of the matter being investigated and/or prosecuted.

The president can tweet and hold campaign rallies till the cows come home about being treated unfairly, Mueller, and the grand jury but in the end the only thing that is going to be remembered is Mueller's public report at end of the investigation. Today, the only thing most people remember about the Clinton email investigations is summed up in a couple paragraphs in Comey's report.


https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download
28 CFR 600.4 - Jurisdiction.

I'm not going to argue about it. There are established boundaries for the investigation. IF Mueller finds something outside those boundaries he is REQUIRED to go to Rosenstein, Rosenstein has the option of letting Mueller run with it or refer it to someone else to handle. Those are the FACTS, do I need to bold it for your to understand?


.

Not arguing the point is wise. Rosenstein gave Muller a very broad path to follow. Since Mueller is not required to reveal any part of the investigation until it is complete, there is no way to prove he has overstepped his bounds until the investigation is complete.

Trump really screwed himself when he went after Comey but that's to be expected when we elect a rank amateur to run the country.

In this particular case it is a GOOD thing that he is a rank armature in politics.

 

[Slade3200]

Maybe the Trumpsters are right about all the fake/biased news coming from CNN. I mean look at this crazy article!!!

Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far — CNN

WOW, they put a conservative OP-ED on their web site, how much air time did they give to the opinion?


.

Most if not all programs I see on CNN have a conservative or Trump supporter on their panels so theres most always an oppositional voice. They are usually outnumbered 4 to 1 which is a bit obnoxious but at least theres a rep from both sides during their discussions.

A move blatantly taken from FOX who has been dong this for a damn long time.

We all know that the token liberal does not make FOX a bastion of balanced news anymore than some conservative viewpoints and the token conservative on CNN's joke of a 'news' network.

Panelists aren't there to report the news, they are there for opinion and entertainment.

 

[jc456]

What has looking years back into Trump's financial dealings got to do with Russian collusion during the campaign?

This is ABSOLUTELY, a BLATANT witch hunt. CNN isn't following anyone, the democraps aren't following anyone, we all know Mueller is a leftist hatchet man, and he's hired ALL leftist HACKS to assist him in his fishing expedition.

President Trump should fire the lot tomorrow, including that weaselly little shit Rosenstein.

Grand juries subpoena witness and documents for examination. When that happens, not even the prosecutor can control it. The cat will be out of the bag and the administration will not be able to put it back. This is why grand jury probes always expand and occasionally become run away grand juries. Limits can be put on the prosecutor but not jurors. They can indict anybody, including the prosecutor.

Yawning