Claude Taylor: Trump was hand-delivered a sealed target letter.

[pnwmom]

If you click on this tweet, it leads to a few follow-up tweets.

Link to tweet

Claude Taylor is a Democrat who worked in the 90's as Director of Volunteers for Bill Clinton ,and has worked in 3 campaigns. He was the first to report the existence of Grand Juries, including one in the Eastern District of Virginia, investigating Trump/Russia.

[hrmjustin]

1. Didn't he claim he was already indicted?

[WinkyDink]

6. Who are your "he" and "he"? If either or both are Trump: No. No. And No.

[hrmjustin]

9. Didn't Louise Mensch and Taylor both claim he was already indicted?

I remember that distinctly.

[pnwmom]

12. You remember wrong. That was Flynn. n/t

[FBaggins]

50. Nope...

It was "a sealed indictment has been granted against Donald Trump.

[L. Coyote]

36. Correct, sealed indictments were handed down. This is another step, informing the target.

They have quite the list of correct breaking stories, so this is likely going to be verified too.

[FBaggins]

51. So the indictments came weeks BEFORE the target letter, eh?

"They have quite the list of correct breaking stories *

Oh... it's "quite the list" alright. Just not in the way you think.

[virtualobserver]

38. Yes, on the tarmac, indicted by the father of the marshalsea

[tandem5]

69. Not debtors prison too! Trump's screwed!

"A Mr. Pancks is waiting for you, sir -- Says it's in regarding of certain pecuniary difficulties."

[virtualobserver]

74. thank you for connecting with the absurdity of my joke

Trump has amassed a fantastic level of debt....any prison sentences that emerge from this will have their root in that debt.

The situational irony here is striking. I firmly believe that he ran for President as a way to make money. It could very well bring his entire financial empire crashing down.

[pnwmom]

11. No he didn't. He has said Flynn was under a sealed indictment. nt

[hughee99]

77. He said both...

Here's snopes writeup on Taylor's claim.

http://www.snopes.com/sealed-indictment-president-trump/

[gldstwmn]

2. Is this the one that was

delivered by the SCOTUS Marshall on the runway or is this different? I can't keep up anymore.

[L. Coyote]

37. Different. The runway letter was a court notice that he had to comply on the Giulliani Memo.

Trump was defying a court order to release the Giulliani memo which goes to the intent of the Muslim Ban. Don't know id that has been done or if Trump is still defying the US Supreme Court's lawful order and the orders of three other courts.

[FBaggins]

52. Did you miss that a video exists?

You can watch uncut video from the time that Marine Corps 1 lands. Watch Trump on the entire walk from MC1 to AF1... through the aircraft departing.

At no point did the Marshal of the Supreme Court appear.

Not that a video should be needed. A high school civics education should suffice.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. Is that the one that was issued by the FISA court?

[bettyellen]

5. I think that part was cleared up. I'm not going to trash these guys, they're not reporters.

[L. Coyote]

39. They are just independent journalists doing reporting. They aren't reporters for corporations, they

are independent, far better if you don't mind the lack of support from an editor and the scrutiny of a paycheck writer.

[Kentonio]

53. Or far worse if you want accuracy and sensible fact checking and due diligence.

[Demit]

57. And accountability. And a seasoned editor to explain, "This is thin."

And "Make sure you understand how these processes usually work. Also, get your terminology right or we look like fools."

[bettyellen]

63. I totally get that, which is why it's important not to denigrate journalists by putting Mensch on

The same level- I think it's a huge mistake to say they're comparable.

[Kentonio]

64. Totally agree

[bettyellen]

65. She's gotten enough right that I do think she knows insiders BUT I think her past odd

Associations are concerning and indicative of inconsistent thought or loyalty and so I wouldn't be shocked if they are or will play her. But she's a blogger of rumours, so I don't know why people freak out.

[Kentonio]

66. She only bugs me when I see good people here investing so much hope in what she says.

I don't want people to have a huge disappointment if she ends up being full of it.

[bettyellen]

67. Well it's human nature, for some. Some are so compulsive about trashing her

I don't get why anyone gets so invested. I know I can't.

[Oneironaut]

70. Exactly. And they should at least admit that their sources are dubious,

rather than pretending to have "super secret connections." They both act like they're the foremost authority on leaks from the White House, when in reality, most of their announcements are either speculation or are based on shaky sources.

[The Wielding Truth]

4. YAY! If true, time is up for the "Don". The case is closing around him.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. It isn't. That isn't how the process works.

Clyde and his pal Louise Mensch can't even get their legal terminology straight, but they keep issuing these unsourced and unverified bits of gossip that never go anywhere. If this were true and someone on the inside knew about it, do you seriously think they'd leak the info to a couple of obscure and unreliable bloggers? If they wanted their information to get out they'd go to the New York Times or the Washington Post or some other reputable media outlet.

[The Wielding Truth]

10. I hear you,The Velveteen Ocelot. It has to break someday. Hope it is before

Last edited Sat May 27, 2017, 05:21 PM - Edit history (1)

more harm is done.

[pnwmom]

13. What is implausible about the possibility that Trump has been given

a target letter that is sealed to public view?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

15. He's a sitting president. He won't be indicted while he's in office.

The legal definition of a target is "a person as to whom the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence linking him or her to the commission of a crime and who, in the judgment of the prosecutor, is a putative defendant." https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-9-11000-grand-jury#9-11.153 Because of the principles of separation of powers/executive privilege, sitting presidents are not indicted or prosecuted for crimes while in office; therefore Trump couldn't be considered a "putative defendant." A grand jury could list him as an unindicted co-conspirator, as happened to Nixon in March of 1974, but if that is done it would not be publicly disclosed. "In the absence of some significant justification, federal prosecutors generally should not identify unindicted co-conspirators in conspiracy indictments." 9-11.130. (Nixon did testify before a grand jury in 1975, after he resigned and had been pardoned, in connection with ongoing Watergate investigations.)

Then there's this:

9-11.153 - Notification of Targets

"When a target is not called to testify pursuant to USAM 9-11.150, and does not request to testify on his or her own motion (see USAM 9-11.152), the prosecutor, in appropriate cases, is encouraged to notify such person a reasonable time before seeking an indictment in order to afford him or her an opportunity to testify before the grand jury, subject to the conditions set forth in USAM 9-11.152. Notification would not be appropriate in routine clear cases or when such action might jeopardize the investigation or prosecution because of the likelihood of flight, destruction or fabrication of evidence, endangerment of other witnesses, undue delay or otherwise would be inconsistent with the ends of justice." https://www.justice.gov/usam/usam-9-11000-grand-jury#9-11.153

So, even if Trump could be a "putative defendant," he would not necessarily have to be notified he was a target if this "might jeopardize the investigation or prosecution because of the likelihood of flight, destruction or fabrication of evidence, endangerment of other witnesses, undue delay or otherwise would be inconsistent with the ends of justice." If you were a federal prosecutor, knowing how Trump operates, would you send him a target letter that would warn him and give him a chance to destroy or fabricate evidence?

[pnwmom]

17. That wouldn't stop him from being the target (subject) of an investigation.

Richard Nixon was the subject of an investigation, and he was named as an "unindicted conspirator."

But it isn't clear that a sitting President can't be indicted. Laurence Tribe, a Harvard Constitutional Law Professor, says that a President can be indicted but not put through a criminal trial till after leaving office.

Link to tweet

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2F10029099941

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

19. But none of that happened in Watergate until the investigations into the various criminal charges

were complete, or nearly so. It makes absolutely no sense to be convening grand juries when the investigations have barely even started. Grand juries are presented with the prosecution's evidence that crimes have been committed, and even though there's already a lot of smoke, the fires still have to be identified. Mueller doesn't even have his staff in place yet - and he's the one who's going to be handling the grand juries. He is known as a methodical prosecutor, and even if he thought he could eventually indict Trump but wait to prosecute him after he leaves office, he would not convene a grand jury until the investigation is complete enough to do so. It isn't yet. It will take months. There is no earthly reason to be convening grand juries or sending out target letters now.

[pnwmom]

20. How do you know that a Grand Jury or Juries weren't convened

under James Comey?

He told the Senate Intelligence Committee that he had been working with two prosecutors, and specifically named the Eastern district of Virginia -- a court that Claude Taylor had already named as the location of a Trump/Russia Grand Jury.

From May 6, before Comey was fired, about what Keith Olbermann was reporting:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/olbermann-trump-grand-jury_us_590d27f0e4b0104c734f3ae9

There is “strong reason to believe there is a grand jury sitting in the [federal] Eastern District of Virginia right now hearing evidence about the connections between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Russians.” he said on “The Resistance,” his GQ web series.

Comey indicated as much, Olbermann argued, when he testifed Wedesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Comey, in response to a question from Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) on Wednesday, said he was currently “coordinating” with “two sets of prosecutors,” including the “main Justice [Department] National Security Division” and “the Eastern District of Virginia U.S. Attorney’s Office.”

Olbermann said that he talked to John Dean, former White House counsel for Richard Nixon, about Comey’s comments and that Dean, a key witness in the Watergate hearings, said it would be “difficult to believe that there is not a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

28. I don't believe anything Claude Taylor says, for one thing.

For another thing, and more importantly, Comey wouldn't have been convening any grand juries. He was the Director of the FBI - the police, basically - and not the prosecutor. Grand juries are convened not by the FBI but by the U.S. Attorney for the district where the grand jury is to meet. For Comey to say that he was "working with" prosecutors in E.D. Va. does not mean the U.S. Attorney for the district (who would have been fired on January 20 with all the rest of them) had convened a grand jury. Again, although the FBI had begun investigating the Russia hack last summer, it is highly doubtful that they were, or are yet, ready to seek indictments.

[pnwmom]

29. Comey told the Senate he was working with 2 Federal prosecutors. Prosecutors

are the ones who convene Grand Juries.

John Dean, among others, thought that meant there was a Grand Jury.

From a May 6th report on a Keith Olbermann show:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/olbermann-trump-grand-jury_us_590d27f0e4b0104c734f3ae9

There is “strong reason to believe there is a grand jury sitting in the [federal] Eastern District of Virginia right now hearing evidence about the connections between Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and the Russians.” he said on “The Resistance,” his GQ web series.

Comey indicated as much, Olbermann argued, when he testifed Wedesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Comey, in response to a question from Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) on Wednesday, said he was currently “coordinating” with “two sets of prosecutors,” including the “main Justice [Department] National Security Division” and “the Eastern District of Virginia U.S. Attorney’s Office.”

Olbermann said that he talked to John Dean, former White House counsel for Richard Nixon, about Comey’s comments and that Dean, a key witness in the Watergate hearings, said it would be “difficult to believe that there is not a grand jury in the Eastern District of Virginia.”

[L. Coyote]

41. They would have been convened by the FISA Court and thus the USA for East District Virginia

and that is Dana Boente. Comey and FBI investigations may have led to convening the Grand Jury or several of them, but FBI doesn't convene grand juries, prosecutors do that.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

76. The FISA court also would have had nothing to do with anything like this.

The only function of the FISA court is to issue warrants for surveillance of foreign persons. The FISA court does *not* convene grand juries.

[L. Coyote]

40. He can be charged, just not brought to trial outside of Congress until after out of office.

[onenote]

46. That is the view of some legal scholars. Others have a different point of view.

The issue has never been addressed in court.

[Barack_America]

7. Explains the "Twitter lockdown" stories.

[BainsBane]

14. Are any of these predictions going to pan out?

It was several weeks ago we were told indictments would be issued the next day. Yet they didn't. I can't even count the number of tweets like this I've seen posted her predicting one momentous event after another. I understand people badly want to believe that Trump is about to be taken down, but wishes aren't fact. When these people who claim inside knowledge make one claim after another that don't transpire, it begs the question of why people continue to hang on their every tweet.

[cwydro]

18. Exactly.

Crying wolf again and again.

I understand that people want to believe, but this continuing nonsense makes fools out of those who do.

[pnwmom]

24. How do you know there are no sealed indictments?

How do you know that Michael Flynn, for example, isn't named in a sealed indictment? He could be negotiating a plea deal right now -- and we wouldn't hear till the government was ready for us to hear.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

30. He's far more likely to talk before he's indicted, especially in light of

the last few days' developments. With Kushner in the crosshairs Mueller might be more inclined to cut a deal with Flynn to get to Kushner.

[BainsBane]

45. The original tweet said nothing about their being sealed

It said they would be issued the next day. There have been countless of such sensational statements, none of which have trasnspired. If people claim to be reporting the truth, it's not the responsibility of readers to prove they are wrong. The reporter needs to be able to establish their claims.

Trump was about to resign and op. What happened to that?

We have good reporting from the NYTimes and WaPo. The source their reports, and they have consistently been true. The same can't be said about tweets like this.

[Warren DeMontague]

31. 24 business hours.

[L. Coyote]

42. No one said the indictments were going to be unsealed, ttbomk.

You need to read what "these people" actually wrote, instead of fabricating a facsimile.

[BainsBane]

44. The statement didn't say sealed

It said people would be indicted the next day. The sealed part came later.

[onenote]

47. Mensch in mid-April: first "arrests" as soon as "next week"

Link to tweet

?lang=en

Mensch on May 10: first arrests possible "tomorrow"
https://patribotics.blog/2017/05/11/exclusive-comey-day-first-trump-russia-arrests-possible-thursday/

Why should i believe that the things she says have happened are true when her predictions about what is going to happen obviously weren't.

[SticksnStones]

54. I believe he wrote warrants were being issued

Most assumed arrest warrants...he only reported 'warrants' as what he was told. They turned out to be search warrants. And search warrants for evidence were issued.

So that was cryptic but correct.

[BainsBane]

58. The word was "arrests"

not warrants, and it was Louise Mensch. People posted it here at the time.

Link to tweet

?lang=en

It was then picked up by the Palmer Report, which has responded to the election loss by becoming the Democratic version of the pizza pedophile ring scandal purveyors. http://www.palmerreport.com/opinion/intel-sources-first-big-arrests-in-donald-trumps-russia-scandal-could-come-next-week/2301/

Since the arrests didn't come "next week," as Mensch predicted, she decided to repeat the claims in May, insisting they were imminent. https://patribotics.blog/2017/05/16/exclusive-u-s-marshals-readying-plan-approved-by-justice-dept-official/

The search warrants were reported in the legitimate press.

Now, I know people have decided to debate these claims by denouncing those who don't "like" Mensch and Taylor. It has nothing to do with liking. It's a question of whether the information is reliable, and I see nothing to suggest it is.

[SticksnStones]

59. The thread was about Taylor. I was commenting on Taylor.

But throwing Mensch into the mix muddies it.

And wow, comparing Palmer report to Pizzagate which ramped up to violence is little harsh.

IMO, You are holding intelligence gathering to the same standard as reported journalism.

It's not journalism. It's people talking about leaks they've come across.

Much has been written about intelligence vs verified information. Intelligence gathering is picking at threads and seeing where it leads.

Journalism is an entirely different realm.

Peace.

[BainsBane]

61. Intelligence gathering?

Since when do intelligence officials report their findings on Twittter? It isn't that or journalism. It's at best gossip. I'm throwing Mensch in because it's all the same sort of thing. People have decided to promote every rumor circulated on Twitter by Mensch and Taylor because they want to believe them. I would love nothing more than to see Trump and co arrested, but that doesn't mean I'm going to take rumor as fact.

Palmer has insisted multiple times that the "first step" toward Trump's impeachment was launched. This began as soon as Trump was inaugurated. Yet Trump hasn't been impeached and the House has taken no steps to bring it about. No responsible journalist or human being peddles that sort of thing. It benefits nothing but his own finances.

The Palmer/Mensch/ Taylor and the countless trash websites like Politics USA all rely on the very same tendency among among readers that the Kremlin propaganda and Pizzagate purveyors did: Too many consume "news" based on what they want to believe rather than concern for what is supported by evidence and sources. We now live in a culture that treats the truth with wanton disregard, in which emotion and desire are the only standard by which people judge information. It is that which made it possible for Trump to be elected, and the sad fact is we see it as prevalent among the left as right.

[SticksnStones]

62. I think you're missing the awakening occurring on Twitter

As a legitimate means for disseminating information to the masses that MSM won't. There is great value in this form of information medium. It's evolved into something way beyond gossip. And we are witnessing week after week, the MSM catching up to the story already being told across Twitter...surely the latest story on Jared's involvement illustrates that...Twitter has been pulling at the Jared threads for months.

Consider this thread by a blue checked journalist:

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Oneironaut]

73. Mensch and Taylor both do the same things psychics do.

They spam predictions, knowing that at least a couple should pan out. People only remember the correct predictions. This gives them ad revenue, fame, etc.

They're both frauds.

[FBaggins]

75. Not quite

Psychics generally try to learn something about the subject of their predictions so that they at least sound 3.

"The NFL's FISA court has already informed all 47 teams that the ground-rule double has been secretly suspended" is only going to work if the rubes know nothing at all about sports.

[redstateblues]

16. It's Fitzmas again!!

[Foamfollower]

21. I CALL BULLSHIT!!!

Because that is precisely what this is.

[brettdale]

22. Claude Taylor

Was also so high up in the Clinton campaign, he was paid $35K a year working for Clinton.

He now tweets a lot and has a blog!!!

[brettdale]

23. I have to ask and this is a honest and serious question

Is Claude Taylor and Lousie Mense's PA a lady named Nancy Seltzer?

[pnwmom]

25. He is a liberal Democrat and she is a British conservative, former MP.

They say that they travel in different worlds and have different sources.

[brettdale]

26. Oh they have the same sort of style with their annoucements and tweets

As one of Nancy's biggest clients, kinda thought it may be her guiding them in terms of what they
announce.

[pnwmom]

32. Who is one of Nancy's biggest clients? n/t

[WheelWalker]

27. I'll give it a kick and a recommend. So there.

[manicraven]

33. This was posted on their site 10 days ago...Supposedly serving of warrants was "imminent."

EXCLUSIVE: U.S. Marshals Readying; Plan Approved By Justice Dept Official

The U.S. Marshals Service presented a plan to a senior Justice Department official yesterday for the service of warrants in the Trump-Russia inquiry, separate sources with links to the intelligence and law enforcement communities report.

The extensive plan was approved yesterday by a senior Justice Department official who is closely involved in prosecuting the case.

Sources say that the extensive plan, multiple pages in length, covered not only the serving of warrants, but logistical arrangements such as the closure of streets, if necessary.

They further report that while timing is uncertain, such plans are normally only presented and approved when arrests are imminent.

[SticksnStones]

55. They turned out to be search warrants.

While many longed for them to be arrest warrants.

Taylor collections information and tries to interpret it. View his info in that manner not as a reporter going back and telling a story.

It's a different approach than journalism. He's not a journalist nor does he claim to be. He claims he had access to threads of details. That's it. Nothing more. Do with the threads as you like.

[Kablooie]

34. Maybe but maybe not. This is not multi-sourced.

Claude Taylor tweets on their own are intriguing but not news.

Yes, he has been right sometimes in the past but that is not a guarantee he will be right this time.

Keep this thought in mind but don't spread it as news unless you hear more, mainstream confirmations.

[pnwmom]

35. Correct. That's why I always clearly identify anything he posts.

No one has to read any further than his name to decide if they want to read further.

[L. Coyote]

43. Source says "we must assume that GJ investigation may also serve as basis for impeachment".

THREAD:

1. Trump has been formally notified via a sealed target letter that he is a suspect (target) in a Grand Jury investigation.
2. The notice was hand-delivered last week. Source says "we must assume that GJ investigation may also serve as basis for impeachment".
3. This target letter is sealed because of the extraordinary circumstances. Target letter can also be an invite to speak with investigators.
4. *A target letter is a "courtesy letter given by the federal government informing you that you're a suspect in a criminal investigation".

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[onenote]

49. The term 'target' letter is commonly used to refer to two different types of letters

One is a letter that informs the recipient that they are being investigated for possible involvement in a crime. The other merely informs the recipient that they may be called to testify.

Even assuming Taylor is correct about a target letter being delivered to Trump (and I have serious doubts he is correct), I strongly doubt it was the first kind. At best it would have been a notice that he may be called to testify.

[oberliner]

48. This is so obviously BS

I legitimately do not understand why people believe this nonsense.

[MineralMan]

60. It's always a matter of curiosity about why people

believe improbable and mysterious things. People seem to be programmed to want to believe something. In many cases, just about anything will do, apparently.

[L. Coyote]

68. until it isn't. Then it is history.

People wouldn't believe Richard Nixon could do anything wrong long after he resigned. People can be like that, they refuse to believe facts right in front of them. My uncle when to his grave with a Dick and Pat photo on the living room wall. You reminded me of him, and otherwise wonderful person, just resistant to political facts.

[oberliner]

72. You believe that Trump was "hand delivered a sealed target letter" ?

And that no news outlet is aware of that happening?

[Achilleaze]

56. I feel a song coming on...

[Oneironaut]

71. Should be noted - take Taylor and Mensch with the smallest grain of salt possible.

They throw crap onto the web hoping that one of their pieces of speculation turns out correct. Their success rate is abysmal. They probably realize, though, that you only need to be right once. That's what people remember.