Posted on Feb 20, 2018
Mueller probe: London-based son-in-law of Russian businessman to plead guilty to false statements...
1.76K
8
6
2
2
0
Interesting that this version of the story does not include the individuals citizenship. He is not British, nor is he Russian.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5413431/Lawyer-oligarchs-son-Mueller-guilty-plea.html
MSN Link to WaPo story - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mueller-probe-london-based-son-of-russian-businessman-to-plead-guilty-to-false-statements/ar-BBJn5PA?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartanntp
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5413431/Lawyer-oligarchs-son-Mueller-guilty-plea.html
MSN Link to WaPo story - https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mueller-probe-london-based-son-of-russian-businessman-to-plead-guilty-to-false-statements/ar-BBJn5PA?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartanntp
Mueller probe: London-based son-in-law of Russian businessman to plead guilty to false statements...
Posted from washingtonpost.com
Crime
Election 2016
International Affairs
Posted 7 y ago
Responses: 3
1
1
0
I’m really trying to make this leap to see how this ties to anything the Special Council was supposed to investigate. Is this just incidental findings while trying to find Russian election interference?
Also:
1. Isn’t attorney client privledge supposed to make it where the attorney doesn’t talk about work for a client? Why would he make a false statement if he could tell investigators to shove it on the topic?
2. Where is our jurisdiction to intercede in Ukrainian competitive bid laws?
3. Why are the only charges “false statements”? That seems fishy on the Special Council’s part IMO.
4. Tangent in relation to this, why is it ok for some people to delete emails but not this guy?
Also:
1. Isn’t attorney client privledge supposed to make it where the attorney doesn’t talk about work for a client? Why would he make a false statement if he could tell investigators to shove it on the topic?
2. Where is our jurisdiction to intercede in Ukrainian competitive bid laws?
3. Why are the only charges “false statements”? That seems fishy on the Special Council’s part IMO.
4. Tangent in relation to this, why is it ok for some people to delete emails but not this guy?
(1)
(0)
SSG Trevor S.
Capt Gregory Prickett than you for giving some good answers to my questions. The overall question is, what does this have to do with the original investigation? Is there a connection or is this just a set of incidental findings?
1. That's why its a head scratcher to me. Why would he even answer questions dealing with his clients?
2. The reason I bring up jurisdiction is that many people don't realize that some people in law enforcement may overstep their limitations. I don't believe Mueller or any American has any business in Ukrainian elections, or government dealings beyond what Ukrainians ask them to get into.
3. Another good point, but that leads me back to 1 and 2. Why would he blab anything in the first place. If it was covered by the Ukrainians being his client, and it was possibly out of the jurisdiction of the investigators why not just tell him to go look elsewhere? The guy is a lawyer. You would think he would know enough to have representation during an interview and to think before he speaks.
4. Totally agree.
1. That's why its a head scratcher to me. Why would he even answer questions dealing with his clients?
2. The reason I bring up jurisdiction is that many people don't realize that some people in law enforcement may overstep their limitations. I don't believe Mueller or any American has any business in Ukrainian elections, or government dealings beyond what Ukrainians ask them to get into.
3. Another good point, but that leads me back to 1 and 2. Why would he blab anything in the first place. If it was covered by the Ukrainians being his client, and it was possibly out of the jurisdiction of the investigators why not just tell him to go look elsewhere? The guy is a lawyer. You would think he would know enough to have representation during an interview and to think before he speaks.
4. Totally agree.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
0
0
0
This is an interesting statement tied to this story by Mr. Obama - "Obama has defended his response to Russian meddling, saying he had told the Russian president to "cut it out.""
Did President Obama really believe telling President Putin to "cut it out" was an effective method of correcting the problem?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-latest-attorney-pleads-guilty-to-lying/ar-BBJnaN6?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartandhp
Did President Obama really believe telling President Putin to "cut it out" was an effective method of correcting the problem?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/the-latest-attorney-pleads-guilty-to-lying/ar-BBJnaN6?li=AA5a8k&ocid=spartandhp
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google