Mueller Knows the Game — Raise the Stakes

 

It seems that as soon as there were rumors Trump was thinking of dumping Mueller, Mueller came up with the strategy laid out by Comey: Once you get a special prosecutor launched, that perch can be used to control the whole process. But, the collusion with Russia business didn’t seem to be taking off, did it? Mueller needed to act fast if he wanted to keep his position.

So, now Mueller decides — out of the blue — that he should look into obstruction of justice just like Comey was hinting at. This all seems planned with Rod Rosenstein, doesn’t it? Perhpas it’s ad hoc, but either way the important thing was to get the special prosecutor established firmly and on the hunt. And by hunting the president’s scalp directly, it would be much more difficult for Trump to fire him. Pretty clever, isn’t it? This all seems too contrived — it doesn’t even pass the Hollywood thriller smell test. It’s too far-fetched.

Mr. President: you and your hapless AG need to fire a bunch of the top people over there at Justice, starting with Rosenstein. The people still there are the ones who didn’t quit under Obama, remember. They are the true believers in ruining your presidency. Do it now — it will only get worse.

Update:

I heard Louie Gohmert on Hugh Hewitt’s show this morning — he agrees with me that this was done to make it harder for Trump to fire Mueller. Also, he said that Mueller did more damage to the FBI than Comey and that Mueller is very vindictive in his dealings with his political enemies.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 123 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    You can’t make this stuff up; no one would believe it. Truth is stranger than fiction because fiction has to make sense. In the meantime…

    • #61
  2. Gumby Mark Coolidge
    Gumby Mark
    @GumbyMark

    Larry Koler (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    I wish it were different because I’m convinced all this Russia stuff is a complete sham.

    So, you agree it should be shut down — but you’re afraid of the consequences. This is rabbit talk — sorry but it is. Trump needs to stand up and show us how to stare down the wolf. This is what we hired him for — he was specifically chosen because of the difficulty of the task. Show us we were right to select you, Mr. Trump.

    Michael Henry has made a good suggestion on how to get around Trump firing Mueller as has Andrew McCarthy at NRO.  Staring down the wolf doesn’t amount to much if it means flailing around and allowing yourself to get baited.  Draining the swamp doesn’t work if you act stupidly and get yourself drowned at the start of the project. We just went through this with Trump’s firing of Comey which gave us Mueller.  Because he can’t think ahead he just keeps getting himself more entangled.

    • #62
  3. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Ian Mullican (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty, and two because he will undercut any defense you mount of him with his tweets. Just look how the Comey firing went?

    Since when is there a good chance he’s guilty?

    Anyways and in a different direction, didn’t Rosenstein come out this morning to the press saying not to believe stories using sources that are “anonymous officials” when the country of the official isn’t even listed? In other words, Trump isn’t actually being investigated for obstruction of justice? Or did I get that wrong?

    Who knows what is actually happening. Maybe he is being investigate maybe not. Just because he is investigated doesn’t mean anything will come of the investigation. But, as far as my comment about guilt, I think there is a possibility that Trump is guilty of something, even if it isn’t the thing that Democrats want. Do you think all of Trump’s business dealings are above reproach? Worse still he could become guilty of something concrete simply by lying in a deposition if it should come to that. That is how Clinton got to impeachment if I recall. Was Clinton not guilty of perjury? This is the trap for Republicans what if Trump lies but less skillfully than Clinton did under oath? Do you trust Trump not to botch a deposition up? Then what do you do?

    None of this has happened yet, but until you know how anything is going to break why make a move? Especially if you have no guarantee that you move will get any support from the White House.

    • #63
  4. Robert McReynolds Member
    Robert McReynolds
    @

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    Ian Mullican (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty, and two because he will undercut any defense you mount of him with his tweets. Just look how the Comey firing went?

    Since when is there a good chance he’s guilty?

    Anyways and in a different direction, didn’t Rosenstein come out this morning to the press saying not to believe stories using sources that are “anonymous officials” when the country of the official isn’t even listed? In other words, Trump isn’t actually being investigated for obstruction of justice? Or did I get that wrong?

    Who knows what is actually happening. Maybe he is being investigate maybe not. Just because he is investigated doesn’t mean anything will come of the investigation. But, as far as my comment about guilt, I think there is a possibility that Trump is guilty of something, even if it isn’t the thing that Democrats want. Do you think all of Trump’s business dealings are above reproach? Worse still he could become guilty of something concrete simply by lying in a deposition if it should come to that. That is how Clinton got to impeachment if I recall. Was Clinton not guilty of perjury? This is the trap for Republicans what if Trump lies but less skillfully than Clinton did under oath? Do you trust Trump not to botch a deposition up? Then what do you do?

    None of this has happened yet, but until you know how anything is going to break why make a move? Especially if you have no guarantee that you move will get any support from the White House.

    So guilty until proven innocent?

    • #64
  5. drlorentz Member
    drlorentz
    @drlorentz

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Do you trust Trump not to botch a deposition up?

    I’ll answer your question with a question, counselor:

    After decades in the real estate business, do you think Trump has no experience with depositions?

    • #65
  6. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):

    Larry Koler (View Comment):

    Gumby Mark (View Comment):
    I wish it were different because I’m convinced all this Russia stuff is a complete sham.

    So, you agree it should be shut down — but you’re afraid of the consequences. This is rabbit talk — sorry but it is. Trump needs to stand up and show us how to stare down the wolf. This is what we hired him for — he was specifically chosen because of the difficulty of the task. Show us we were right to select you, Mr. Trump.

    Michael Henry has made a good suggestion on how to get around Trump firing Mueller as has Andrew McCarthy at NRO. Staring down the wolf doesn’t amount to much if it means flailing around and allowing yourself to get baited. Draining the swamp doesn’t work if you act stupidly and get yourself drowned at the start of the project. We just went through this with Trump’s firing of Comey which gave us Mueller. Because he can’t think ahead he just keeps getting himself more entangled.

    Other than a real conspiracy that Trump couldn’t have known about there was no reason to think a special counsel would be appointed by a rat in his administration. Trump did the right thing then (even though kinda late) and now he must follow this through. Please don’t take the media’s wording on what happened and stop with the flailing stuff — that’s all the work of the leftists.

    • #66
  7. Kent Lyon Member
    Kent Lyon
    @NanoceltTheContrarian

    Remember, the information that Mueller is investigating Trump for obstruction of justice was leaked to the Washington Post by anonymous sources (likely Mueller himself, just as Comey leaked his memos). So the effort to make it more difficult for Trump to fire him results from an illegal act itself (the leaking). And, obviously, Mueller’s office is just as leak prone, if not more so, than was Comey’s FBI, with Comey the main leaker. All of this got started, of course, with a fake dossier drummed up under Democratic opposition activities, then used by Brennan to get a FISA court warrant, apparently under false pretenses, to investigate the Trump campaign, conveniently abetted by Obama’s orders to allow wide circulation of intelligence information, and exploited by Susan Rice and perhaps others to “unmask” private individuals, etc. ,etc. etc. So this looks like nothing less than an attempt at a coup by the intelligence agencies and Democrats. Nothing looks legitimate about the whole cirumstance. Yes, Sessions should take control of the Justice Department, Rosenstein should be immediately fired, and the Justice Department, which was thoroughly politicized by Obama should be gutted and re-staffed from the ground up.

    • #67
  8. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    I’m sure Sessions belatedly realizes he should never have recused himself. Trump needs to get rid of Mueller yesterday and have a press conference clearly and unapologetically saying why.

    I agree RA, but the resulting chaos and hue and cry from the media with constant references to Nixon’s firing of Archibald Cox can only exacerbate the problem. Loud and unreserved support for the administration from the Republicans in the Senate and House is sorely missing at this point.  We’re in a horrible situation.

    • #68
  9. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Hypatia (View Comment):
    And GOP Congress members aren’t even suggesting that Mueller has to go?

    Gee, I’m so glad the Dems magnanimously gave the GOP their baseball trophy. Cuz otherwise, they’d have no balls at all.

    How do I love thee. Let me count the ways.

    • #69
  10. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    I’m sure Sessions belatedly realizes he should never have recused himself. Trump needs to get rid of Mueller yesterday and have a press conference clearly and unapologetically saying why.

    I agree RA, but the resulting chaos and hue and cry from the media with constant references to Nixon’s firing of Archibald Cox can only exacerbate the problem. Loud and unreserved support for the administration from the Republicans in the Senate and House is sorely missing at this point. We’re in a horrible situation.

    Myself, I want Trump to only do the firing of individuals or slates of individuals on Saturday nights.

    • #70
  11. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Kent Lyon (View Comment):
    Remember, the information that Mueller is investigating Trump for obstruction of justice was leaked to the Washington Post by anonymous sources (likely Mueller himself, just as Comey leaked his memos). So the effort to make it more difficult for Trump to fire him results from an illegal act itself (the leaking). And, obviously, Mueller’s office is just as leak prone, if not more so, than was Comey’s FBI, with Comey the main leaker. All of this got started, of course, with a fake dossier drummed up under Democratic opposition activities, then used by Brennan to get a FISA court warrant, apparently under false pretenses, to investigate the Trump campaign, conveniently abetted by Obama’s orders to allow wide circulation of intelligence information, and exploited by Susan Rice and perhaps others to “unmask” private individuals, etc. ,etc. etc. So this looks like nothing less than an attempt at a coup by the intelligence agencies and Democrats. Nothing looks legitimate about the whole circumstance. Yes, Sessions should take control of the Justice Department, Rosenstein should be immediately fired, and the Justice Department, which was thoroughly politicized by Obama should be gutted and re-staffed from the ground up.

    We are in complete agreement. And thanks for laying out the case pretty clearly.

    • #71
  12. Z in MT Member
    Z in MT
    @ZinMT

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty

    Of what is Trump guilty?

    • #72
  13. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Kent Lyon (View Comment):
    Yes, Sessions should take control of the Justice Department, Rosenstein should be immediately fired, and the Justice Department, which was thoroughly politicized by Obama should be gutted and re-staffed from the ground up.

    Sessions should most definitely “unrecuse” himself. Why can’t a special counsel be appointed to investigate the leaks?

    • #73
  14. Goldwaterwoman Thatcher
    Goldwaterwoman
    @goldwaterwoman

    Z in MT (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty

    Of what is Trump guilty?

    Excellent question Z.

    • #74
  15. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    drlorentz (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Do you trust Trump not to botch a deposition up?

    I’ll answer your question with a question, counselor:

    After decades in the real estate business, do you think Trump has no experience with depositions?

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-election/trump-lies/?utm_term=.a516aff9fcda

    Seems so…

    • #75
  16. Jamie Lockett Member
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Z in MT (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty

    Of what is Trump guilty?

    Of what was Bill Clinton guilty?

    • #76
  17. Hypatia Member
    Hypatia
    @

    Ian Mullican (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty, and two because he will undercut any defense you mount of him with his tweets. Just look how the Comey firing went?

    Since when is there a good chance he’s guilty?

    Anyways and in a different direction, didn’t Rosenstein come out this morning to the press saying not to believe stories using sources that are “anonymous officials” when the country of the official isn’t even listed? In other words, Trump isn’t actually being investigated for obstruction of justice? Or did I get that wrong?

    I’ll ask again: guilty of what?  Of trying to publicize the fact tbat he’s not guilty; that’s all we’ve heard so far.

    • #77
  18. Justin Hertog Inactive
    Justin Hertog
    @RooseveltGuck

    If the leaks continue the investigation will seem out of control and Mueller will be perceived as being unfit to hold the position of Special Council. He will need to be replaced. IMHO.

    • #78
  19. Larry Koler Inactive
    Larry Koler
    @LarryKoler

    Ok, I’ve made my case. Let’s see what Trump decides to do.

    I will un-follow this now.

    • #79
  20. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Columbo (View Comment):
    It is just astounding to me how differently the AG’s of the two party’s act and are “covered” by the press. Why is it that there is never a Special Counsel appointed during a democrat administration, with obviously more corruption going on ………..

    And how stupid do the GOP have to be get this guy as Special Council when they control the congress and the White House?

    • #80
  21. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    Hasn’t Mueller only hired four people so far?  If there were five sources, that would be him and his entire staff.

    • #81
  22. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    Jamie Lockett (View Comment):

    Z in MT (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty

    Of what is Trump guilty?

    Of what was Bill Clinton guilty?

    1. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil case when he denied a sexual affair, a sexual relationship, or sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky.

    2. President Clinton lied under oath to the grand jury about his sexual relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

    3. In his civil deposition, to support his false statement about the sexual relationship, President Clinton also lied under oath about being alone with Ms. Lewinsky and about the many gifts exchanged between Ms. Lewinsky and him.

    4. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Ms. Lewinsky concerning her involvement in the Jones case.

    5. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth about their relationship by concealing gifts subpoenaed by Ms. Jones’s attorneys.

    6. During the Jones case, the President obstructed justice and had an understanding with Ms. Lewinsky to jointly conceal the truth of their relationship from the judicial process by a scheme that included the following means: (i) Both the President and Ms. Lewinsky understood that they would lie under oath in the Jones case about their sexual relationship; (ii) the President suggested to Ms. Lewinsky that she prepare an affidavit that, for the President’s purposes, would memorialize her testimony under oath and could be used to prevent questioning of both of them about their relationship; (iii) Ms. Lewinsky signed and filed the false affidavit; (iv) the President used Ms. Lewinsky’s false affidavit at his deposition in an attempt to head off questions about Ms. Lewinsky; and (v) when that failed, the President lied under oath at his civil deposition about the relationship with Ms. Lewinsky.

    7. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice by helping Ms. Lewinsky obtain a job in New York at a time when she would have been a witness harmful to him were she to tell the truth in the Jones case.

    8. President Clinton lied under oath in his civil deposition about his discussions with Vernon Jordan concerning Ms. Lewinsky’s involvement in the Jones case.

    9. The President improperly tampered with a potential witness by attempting to corruptly influence the testimony of his personal secretary, Betty Currie, in the days after his civil deposition.

    10. President Clinton endeavored to obstruct justice during the grand jury investigation by refusing to testify for seven months and lying to senior White House aides with knowledge that they would relay the President’s false statements to the grand jury — and did thereby deceive, obstruct, and impede the grand jury.

     

     

    • #82
  23. RightAngles Member
    RightAngles
    @RightAngles

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Yes, why not goad Trump into another ill thought through firing of a justice department official over what is now widely believed to be an investigation of his conduct. Nothing bad can come of that. Firing Comey lead to Muller and Trump actually being investigated. If he fires Muller I think his odds of being impeached sky rocket. If you are actually innocent shouldn’t you actually start acting like it?

    You guys don’t get it. Trump has nothing to lose. No matter what he does, you and the Democrats will always find a way to see it as the wrong thing. So he might as well do something that will stop this madness, and he should address the American people and tell them why.

    • #83
  24. Justin Hertog Inactive
    Justin Hertog
    @RooseveltGuck

    Sen. Feinstein thinks Trump’s “staunchest supporters will balk” if he fires Meuller. She’s wrong. Trump needs to drain the swamp, now more than ever.

    • #84
  25. Kozak Member
    Kozak
    @Kozak

    11. President Clinton abused his constitutional authority by (i) lying to the public and the Congress in January 1998 about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky; (ii) promising at that time to cooperate fully with the grand jury investigation; (iii) later refusing six invitations to testify voluntarily to the grand jury; (iv) invoking Executive Privilege; (v) lying to the grand jury in August 1998; and (vi) lying again to the public and Congress on August 17, 1998 — all as part of an effort to hinder, impede, and deflect possible inquiry by the Congress of the United States.

    • #85
  26. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Worse still he could become guilty of something concrete simply by lying in a deposition if it should come to that. That is how Clinton got to impeachment if I recall. Was Clinton not guilty of perjury?

    Everyone knows Clinton was impeached for getting a hummer, not for lying.  Ask any Democrat.  Frankly, I would *Love* to see the Democrats draw up articles of impeachment of Trump for Lying under oath.  It would be the funniest thing in the history of the world.

    • #86
  27. Miffed White Male Member
    Miffed White Male
    @MiffedWhiteMale

    Larry Koler (View Comment):

    Goldwaterwoman (View Comment):

    RightAngles (View Comment):
    I’m sure Sessions belatedly realizes he should never have recused himself. Trump needs to get rid of Mueller yesterday and have a press conference clearly and unapologetically saying why.

    I agree RA, but the resulting chaos and hue and cry from the media with constant references to Nixon’s firing of Archibald Cox can only exacerbate the problem. Loud and unreserved support for the administration from the Republicans in the Senate and House is sorely missing at this point. We’re in a horrible situation.

    Myself, I want Trump to only do the firing of individuals or slates of individuals on Saturday nights.

    In fact, he should find someone named “Archibald” and appoint them to the investigative team, just so he can fire them.

    • #87
  28. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Robert McReynolds (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):

    Ian Mullican (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    You can’t back Trump because, one there is probably a good chance he is guilty, and two because he will undercut any defense you mount of him with his tweets. Just look how the Comey firing went?

    Since when is there a good chance he’s guilty?

    Anyways and in a different direction, didn’t Rosenstein come out this morning to the press saying not to believe stories using sources that are “anonymous officials” when the country of the official isn’t even listed? In other words, Trump isn’t actually being investigated for obstruction of justice? Or did I get that wrong?

    Who knows what is actually happening. Maybe he is being investigate maybe not. Just because he is investigated doesn’t mean anything will come of the investigation. But, as far as my comment about guilt, I think there is a possibility that Trump is guilty of something, even if it isn’t the thing that Democrats want. Do you think all of Trump’s business dealings are above reproach? Worse still he could become guilty of something concrete simply by lying in a deposition if it should come to that. That is how Clinton got to impeachment if I recall. Was Clinton not guilty of perjury? This is the trap for Republicans what if Trump lies but less skillfully than Clinton did under oath? Do you trust Trump not to botch a deposition up? Then what do you do?

    None of this has happened yet, but until you know how anything is going to break why make a move? Especially if you have no guarantee that you move will get any support from the White House.

    So guilty until proven innocent?

    In the court of public opinion that is the way it works, and that is the court that really matters in terms of politics.

    • #88
  29. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    Miffed White Male (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Worse still he could become guilty of something concrete simply by lying in a deposition if it should come to that. That is how Clinton got to impeachment if I recall. Was Clinton not guilty of perjury?

    Everyone knows Clinton was impeached for getting a hummer, not for lying. Ask any Democrat. Frankly, I would *Love* to see the Democrats draw up articles of impeachment of Trump for Lying under oath. It would be the funniest thing in the history of the world.

    Well the irony will only be compounded when Republicans engage in the same shameless defense tactics of their president. Of course I would like to point out that Clinton got impeached after his reelection and during a time of economic growth and seeming global stability. None of which where his doing really but in which he basked nevertheless. Trump does not have such a margin of error.

    • #89
  30. Valiuth Member
    Valiuth
    @Valiuth

    RightAngles (View Comment):

    Valiuth (View Comment):
    Yes, why not goad Trump into another ill thought through firing of a justice department official over what is now widely believed to be an investigation of his conduct. Nothing bad can come of that. Firing Comey lead to Muller and Trump actually being investigated. If he fires Muller I think his odds of being impeached sky rocket. If you are actually innocent shouldn’t you actually start acting like it?

    You guys don’t get it. Trump has nothing to lose. No matter what he does, you and the Democrats will always find a way to see it as the wrong thing. So he might as well do something that will stop this madness, and he should address the American people and tell them why.

    But it won’t stop the madness. No more than throwing gasoline on a fire will quench it. The way to stop the madness would have been to to let it all burnout on its own. It isn’t clear the FBI had anything on him prior to the firing of Comey and opening up this obstruction of justice allegation. Now they have a reason and political cover to look at everyone around Trump. The coals were cooling down and Trump decided to throw another long on and give it more oxygen. Now his most loyal supporters are urging him to make the inferno bigger because they like to see the fire burn. This is the problem with the burn all of Washington Down desire that Trump’s hardcore base has. They are now in Washington, Trump is President, Republicans control Congress. You can only burn it all down if you are willing to go up in the flames with it. Trump needs less drama not more.

    Despite my high negative opinion of the man I stand I don’t always see everything he does as negative. It is just that in the case of his reaction to Russiagate and Comeygate I think Trump has acted stupidly.

    • #90
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.