Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election has expanded to include an examination of whether President Donald Trump attempted to obstruct justice, according to a new report from The Washington Post.
Daniel Coats, the current director of national intelligence, Adm. Mike Rogers, the head of the National Security Agency and Richard Ledgett, Rogers’ departed deputy, all agreed to participate in interviews with Mueller’s investigators as early as this week, five anonymous sources briefed on the requests told the Post.
It wasn’t immediately clear if others have been questioned by the FBI.
Investigators have also been looking for proof of possible financial crimes committed by Trump associates, officials told The Post.
COMEY FIRING TO BE INVESTIGATED BY SENATE PANEL, NEW REPORT SAYS
“The FBI leak of information regarding the President is outrageous, inexcusable and illegal,” Mark Corallo, a spokesman for Trump’s personal lawyer, Marc Kasowitz, told The Post.
The Special Counsel’s office declined to comment.
The president previously said he had received private assurances from fired FBI Director James Comey that he was not personally under investigation as part of the probe. Comey confirmed that he provided those assurances in testimony he gave to the Senate Intelligence Committee on June 8.
muellerExpand / Collapse
That changed following Comey’s firing, sources told The Post.
The investigation into obstruction of justice into Trump started days after Comey was let go on May 9, people familiar with the matter told The Post. Mueller’s office has resumed that work and early interviews scheduled to take place with intelligence officials indicate that his team is actively pursuing potential witnesses in and out of the government.
Former FBI Director James Comey testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill, Washington, DC, 6-8-17.Expand / Collapse
Former FBI Director James Comey testifies before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Capitol Hill, Washington, DC, 6-8-17. (2017, Martin H. Simon)
A March 22 exchange is allegedly of potential interest to Mueller, officials told The Post. Coats was attending a briefing at the White House then with officials from other government agencies. When that ended, Trump allegedly asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.
Coats said that Trump had asked him if he could intervene with Comey to get the FBI to back off its focus on former national security adviser Michael Flynn as part of the Russia probe, The Post previously reported.
In his testimony last week Comey claimed that Trump urged him to “see your way clear” of letting Flynn go. Trump has denied the comment.
Fox News’ Jake Gibson and John Roberts contributed to this report. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/06 … says.html#
When I was in college, someone stole my identification and a money order machine. They started papering the county with bogus money orders ... in MY name. The county sheriff picked me up at work and took me to a store where a money order had been passed.
The store owner identified me. He said I was the one! He said, "She wasn't as well dressed, and was shorter and heavier. She didn't look as well as she looks now." When we got back to the sheriff's car, they laughed. My dad had signed my license so there was no signature match. The owner's identification was far more than a stretch.
My parents started getting calls for me to come in and pick up my fake money orders. My dad got his attorney to help me.
When NLR Detective Sharfenberg called me in about a money order, I went. I figured that once he talked to me he'd know I didn't do it. By the time he fingerprinted me, took a mug shot and interrogated (terrorized) me, I thought I was guilty.
My dad's attorney was angry. He said if I talked to anyone else he would not represent me any longer.
Innocent people often have to get attorneys.
That's the point, have to stop talking to people, cops in order to protect yourself. You have a right to do that. Mr. Kasowitz has advised White House aides to discuss the inquiry into Russia's interference in last year's election as little as possible. Unlike many of the lawyers who have reportedly declined to represent Trump, including Ted Olson, Paul Clement, and Mark Filip, Kasowitz has no experience in executive branch lawyering.
"Attorneys from at least four elite law firms have balked at the opportunity to defend President Trump when approached.“The concerns were, ‘The guy won’t pay and he won’t listen,’" - http://www.chicagonow.com/chicagos-real … your-case/
- The market for white-collar attorneys in Washington is booming as Trump's aides in the White House lawyer up amid the growing scandal.
And why does Kasowitz tell others THEY don't need an attorney. Trump has one and "He's not guilty!" Remember, Trumps said, "If you find satellite people guilty, that's fine!"
We eat vegetables because it is beneficial. They need lawyers because it is beneficial.
The blatant hypocrisy of the left is soo obvious , Were investigations of fast and furious conducted by special prosecutors ? What about the tarmac meeting , what about the Iran cash at midnight deals , the Clinton fiasco's ? What an utter hypocrisy that you speak of here , Personally , I hope Trump fires all of these obstructionist seekers , because THAT is all that any of this is about .
"Whhaaaa ! He's not Myyy president ........."
I think what is incredibly telling is that NPR (a source I have recently lamented as being biased toward the left when they were once, imo, fairly impartial) has started not bashing the guy but reporting that there is nothing to see here, basically.
This is so obviously becoming a left wing attempt at a witch hunt. Throw enough mud to hope the public will stop waiting for the truth to come out.
ahorse, if there were an open investigation, I'd say the same thing. "Get your own attorney!" I don't know the details of what's going on now.
I saw Clinton go to the plane on the tarmac. If it turns into an investigation, I will make the same suggestion.
You're exactly right. Often innocent people have to get lawyers. I'll tell you another one. We recently were victims, took the evidence to an attorney. His first comment was 'what a scumbag'. The cost to fight what was happening was more than we could afford. What happened? We lost a lot with no viable recourse. The attorney apologized to me because he wouldn't take the case, asking if I took it personally. I told him, no. I was simply sad that wrong can become right, depending on how much you could afford for a lawyer.
Unfortunately, there is a price to pay for justice. Some can't afford it. Money can affect the outcome.
I would suggest that the group that has the most in common get an attorney jointly.
Perhaps at the end of the investigation, Trump will reimburse attorney fees!
Ours was singling us out. Either way, I've been in court enough for different things (processing bad checks for the company, there with relatives on child custody stuff) to know that the average citizen is at a disadvantage in the court room. It's a good old boy system where a lawyer trumps all evidence from the side without one.
Why do you think conservatives are so anxious to destroy or weaken agencies designed as consumer advocates? Their greedy adherents know that they can virtually get away with anything they want solely due to the fact that they have 'deep pockets'. The man in the street could not possibly bring such resources to bear. They all, including Trump, know this.
So, you don't know about how Obama weaponized consumer advocates? I believes it is time to return power to the consumers from the government.
That's just saying you want to powerful corporate interests to have absolute domination over the man in the street. The consumer finance protection board, as started by Liz Warren has been just such an agency of advocacy for those that have been set upon by greedy corporate interests but without the resources to go toe to toe with, say, the Koch Brothers. Since, the GOP is primarily for the rich, there is no right or wrong. No, I don,t trust the rich and powerful to do anything more than to exploit everyone else, that is their mantra.
Liz Warren lives in a $5.3 million dollar mansion, and her net worth is thought to be around $10 million. How does that happen on $174,000 per year? Who knows how much she has in offshore accounts.
Take the blinders off.
That's not the point, the Kennedy's and the Roosevelt's were rich, but advocated on behalf of the man in the street. So, it is with Liz Warren. That is far different than the mob in charge in Washington, now
The mob in charge of Washington is being purged. They are Obama appointees, the Deep State that still makes decisions according to their agenda and fails to do their jobs when its the President's agenda they should be following now as they are asked to do. Some are still carry-overs from Clinton and Bush. If, they cannot work with and for the President they need to tossed out on their ear.
well, we have a different perception of that, do we not?
Well, I am hoping that President Trump will disclose to the public who killed JFK. That was left up to the president in 2017 to decide on, so that would be Mr. Trump.
I would like to know that as well, but he is never going to tell. The actual perpetrators are probably all dead but I have to ask the question, why over the past 50 years has such crucial information been kept from the public?
I still doubt that anyone really knows, how do you keep a secret like that which would point to a diabolical and sinister government for so long?
Under the 1992 JFK Assassination Records Collection Act, the library of documents about Kennedy’s death must be made public in full by the deadline of this October 26, the law’s 25th anniversary, unless Trump decides otherwise. It is his decision alone.
Politico said an un-named leaker said that the Trump administration “is familiar with the requirements” of the 1992 law.
There are an estimated 3,600 sealed JFK files, along with 35,000 related documents that need to be reviewed before full disclosure can be made.
So naive to believe that it is only one side of the aisle who doesn't give a rat's behind about the common man.
It not naive, it is factual or do I have to google to prove. What do you think the philosophy of the GOP has been, take a closer look
Well, if you doubt, look at Obama care. It was a pork barrel orgy fest for the politicians and the insurance companies.....at the expenses of the American public.
I do wish the far ends would take off their blinders and stand with their fellow citizens and not their political parties.
Who are MY fellow citizens? Your fellow citizens and mine differ.
No, they don't differ. We, the people, is all of us. Just because you simply choose to recognize those who agree with you as citizens doesn't make the rest of them not count.
do all of us agree on a specific course of action, politically, ideological, in the matters of economics? We are all different and to think that we are going to see some big picture in just the way that you suggest is naïve. Honestly, L to L are you not merely choosing the recognize the needs of others that you say that I am opposed to, exclusively. What do I have in common with those that want to cut Medicaid by 1 trillion dollars merely to line the pockets of the rich and promote more military intervention throughout the world?
No. It is not naive. People can compromise. People can discuss and understand where some wants cannot be achieved in their entirety but the underlying problems which created those wants could be discussed and minimized.
Life is about compromise.To adults, anyway. And well mannered children.
Since the GOP are in charge, the onus is on them to offer to compromise with the Democrats to get legislation through. When I see that, then I will give more credibility to what you are saying.....
Argh. Argh. Argh.
You don't follow me. They don't care. None of them. They don't want solutions because that is not what the people who have them in their pockets want.
Are you saying that attempt at compromise with the Democrats is futile? If the GOP does not believe in the concept of compromise, what are you speaking of compromise about?
Am I missing something here?
I am saying that Washington is not interested in compromise. Neither side. Sooner or later we will all have to accept that. Definition of insanity? Repeating the process of voting for one of two parties and expecting the outcome to solve any problems.
I hear you but a third party is not coming anytime soon.
Since the GOP is control and we are talking about the need to compromise to get anything done, here is the test. If they don't seriously attempt to reach a compromise and really expect their crafted legislation to go through unchallenged, who now is throwing the monkey wrench into the wheels of government operations? How do we get to progress if the dominating party won't concede anything? As I said before, this is the test.
How do we get progress when the dominating party won't concede? We could have asked that a million times over the last 8 + years.
And you can't contemplate a third party because you've bought in lock, stock and barrel into the Democratic party. You've made that clear over the last few months.
Yes, I am a democrat, as their vision of society, the nation and the world is more in tuned with mine.
I prefer the policies of the Democrats over those of the other party, yes, I say that too. I am not hiding anything. While neither side is perfect, I have fewer issues with one side over the other.
I am despair about third parties as they have never garnered more than a fraction of the vote from the major two parties. Studying American history tells you that. It may be possible, but it will take a tsunami to wrench power from the main two. I doubt that solution will in come in time to deal with current gridlock issues facing us today.
A tsunami. Probably. Like dealing with the mafia and drug cartels. I see little difference between our political parties and those other entities.
But neither of you recognizes Trump for being the outsider , ....".......that third party. "[independent ] .....that we all seek or need ? Interesting , is he a democrat ? He sure isn't that right winger that the left thinks he is . Apparently the left wants far left and the right cant recognize the outside chance that we do need so desperately.
I fear for what will come .
Was it the same test when YOURS were in power and many didn't want the AHCA , or a Twenty Trillion dollar chinese national debt ?
Where is the compassion for all of the people who did nothing, some knew nothing, and have to considering lawyering up?
Can we stop the obsession with Trump/Obama/HRC?
What about those in the swamp that just were just working a job?
Now it looks like Rosenstein might need a lawyer?
Looks like Rosenstein may be unemployed soon !
Diane , don'r you feel at least that Trump is against an embedded Washington DC, with the media behind the establishment ?
Trump is only for lining his own pockets and promoting the insane GOP agenda. The drawback on Cuba is a case in point. Nothing revolutionary here, just another trashy Republican clown.
Do I feel there is a "deep state?" I don't know if there is a name for it. I believe there are people there who have problems with the way he does things. They are sharing that information with media, and who knows, maybe FBI.
Some call them leakers. Some call them whistleblowers.
I just went through 5 years of bad evaluations because the principal thought I was too old and making too much money. He didn't like the fact that I was unintimidated, documented everything, responded to bad evaluations in a way that made them look like fools and I let my students read my evaluations. They have very good input. The principal was shocked when students and their parents talked to him about what he was doing.
Ahorse, I don't know people's motivation. I do know that when FBI questions people, there is a possibility of them unknowingly committing perjury. They need protection.
This is really a great civics lesson if students are following what's going on: separation of branches of government, president's authority, employee ethics, morality, emoluments clause, nepotism, ad infinitum. It will all work out.
The concept of "deep state" was just made up by a bunch of inane rightwingers as an explanation to anyone and anything that opposes Trump. It is all quite transparent, really. I did not hear any of this nonsense during Obama's term.
Do some homework on the "Deep state in the United States". Or, keep your head in the sand of denial. There is a long history.
Obama's term was nonsense.
Nonsense? so are what you are promoting with this latest fad of yours. We will defeat you, your advocates and your King. It will be just a matter of time.......
You will not defeat the King of kings and Lord of lords.
Do you think that is a good or bad thing?
All of this leftist obstructionism that the people above take as religion , Is nothing but a newly created fourth branch oof the federal government , holdover Leakers !The Obama's Lynch's , Rices , Comey's , Podesta , Clinton's , deep state former employees who are ideologically opposed to any progress . Their pajama clad sleep ins with the news media produce a new obstruction every single day . What happened to Russian collusion ? What happened to Comey Obstruction ? What happened to the Russian election hacking ? The Ivanka in the white house mystery , Jared Kushner , What happened to Sessions meeting with Russian spies, or the web of financial entanglement ?
The left and especially it's representation HERE reminds me of the kid at the home plate who can't hit the great big whiffle ball with the great big fat plastic bat and the special council pitcher keeps slowing the pitch down to a lob . One of these days they will hit on something instead of foul balls and tics .................but we're all waiting .
by John Coviello 5 years ago
Does Anyone Know Why President Trump Fired FBI Director James Comey?
by Scott Belford 2 weeks ago
All of the available evidence seems to say so.Here is a workable definition of a coups d'état as an "organized effort to effect sudden and irregular (e.g., illegal or extra-legal) removal of the incumbent executive authority of a national government, or to displace the authority of the highest...
by Scott Belford 5 years ago
Here are the FACTS as we know them:Jan 27, 2017: Trump has dinner with Comey and, according to Comey, Trump asked Comey for a loyalty oath' but Comey only promised Trump honesty. Trump says he didn't but thought it would have been a good idea.Jan 30, 2017: Trump fires Deputy Attorney General...
by Ralph Schwartz 5 years ago
What do you think will be the "bombshell" in the Comey hearings tomorrow?Do you think former FBI Director Comey will have a "bombshell" to reveal tomorrow or will it be a big nothing-burger? If you think yes, then what will it be? Could he use this as a revenge...
by Sharlee 3 years ago
Although the special counsel' Robert Mueller's report on Russian interference does not come to any concrete conclusion as to whether President Trump sought to obstructed justice, Robert Mueller's team did find and examine 10 "discrete acts" in which Mueller infers President Trump may have...
by Allen Donald 5 years ago
Say what you will about James Comey's performance as head of the FBI. You can think whatever you want about him. What is absolutely true is that he does NOT have the reputation of being a liar and there is historical evidence to back up his practice of taking accurate notes on his meetings. Both...
Copyright © 2022 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|