To this day, the DNC servers have not been forensically inspected by the FBI so we have no proof the servers were even hacked, and if hacked, by whom?...

It’s all fake...

Given this and other obvious evidence of a bogus/non-existent investigation of HitleryGate -- as well as the obvious and related Deep State dossier/coup -- I can only surmise that Trump and his people have allowed things to play out *slowly* as to have the Deep State playahs bleed themselves out in public view. Otherwise the MSM would frame a Trumpian rapid take-down as "raw partsian power-play".

It's taking great patience and faith by Trump in the White Hats, but their Game Plan IS working.

One last note; It was absolutely crucial that Trump discredit the Fake MSM early on and often. AND thoroughly. Or else at least one of their Hysterics-du-Jour would have stuck to the wall.

Robert Mueller indicted 12 Russian military officers alleging they gained access to the DNC emails and other computer systems, however, he has not presented any physical evidence to back up his claims.

Oddly, the MSM isn't curious about that evidence.

If you're Trump do you goad Mueller into producing such "proof" for the world to see?

If you're Trump do you goad Mueller into producing such "proof" for the world to see?

If you are Concord Management you demand that Mueller produces evidence. He does not appear to have evidence or a case to present. They nay drop that case in favor of the new indictments. Evidence is not needed when a case is in eternal process.

If you are Concord Management you demand that Mueller produces evidence. He does not appear to have evidence or a case to present.

So it appears Mueller is trying to bluff with a pair of deuces?

We HOPE Concord MGMT calls his bluff. Can they demand a deadline? Or can this case and its un-provable charges be dragged out until 2020?

Isn't this amazing? Everyone already knows Mueller lack any evidence to present. He's cornering himself...like Dems do. All they want are the allegations, rumors, and innuendos to lingering and waft...at least until the Mid-Terms. And then they are lost, the Piper must be paid.

We HOPE Concord MGMT calls his bluff. Can they demand a deadline? Or can this case and its un-provable charges be dragged out until 2020?

Concord Management is the one that showed up in Court through their attorney, certified service over the objection of Team Mueller, demanded a speedy trial, and demanded a crapload of discovery. It's a circus.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6307879/united-states-v-internet-research-agency-llc/

The case is docketed under United States v. INTERNET RESEARCH AGENCY LLC (1:18-cr-00032) in the District Court, District of Columbia

Some of the filed documents are available off this docket. The last one, Doc 44, shows the government still unable to effect service on other defendants and "The government therefore respectfully requests that the Court order the government to submit a status report, in lieu of a hearing, regarding service by September 7, 2018." I can see why they want to get out of a hearing and just submit their status report on paper.

They did their publicity stunt court appearance before they had been able to serve anyone, had nothing prepared for trial, and got the surprise of a lifetime when high powered attorneys for Concord Management appeared in court.

Concord Management is the one that showed up in Court through their attorney, certified service over the objection of Team Mueller, demanded a speedy trial, and demanded a crapload of discovery. It's a circus.

Thanks for clarifying.

Concord showed up as the legal team that challenged Mueller's bogus indictment based on smoke & mirrors.

Unless one was looking for specifics on the aftermath of the indictment, we/I didn't know that a speedy trial AND discovery were demanded. I guess the MSM doesn't want THAT out there.

The last one [docket], Doc 44, shows the government still unable to effect service on other defendants and "The government therefore respectfully requests that the Court order the government to submit a status report, in lieu of a hearing, regarding service by September 7, 2018."

I can see why they want to get out of a hearing and just submit their status report on paper.

Yes...before Sean Hannity and FOX start parsing the affects of the entire charade.

They did their publicity stunt court appearance before they had been able to serve anyone, had nothing prepared for trial, and got the surprise of a lifetime when high powered attorneys for Concord Management appeared in court.

I had read that Mueller's reps were caught flat-footed.

Hannity and Fox *should* examine this on their shows. It demonstrates further evidence that Mueller & Co are just stalling and playing games. Not that collaborators Sessions, Ryan and McConnell mind.

Btw -- in your opinion, why is Sessions retained as AG?

Btw -- in your opinion, why is Sessions retained as AG?

Because Acting AG Rosenstein would not be preferable, and getting a preferable person appointed to replace Acting AG Rosenstein might take a while.

Acting AG Rosenstein would not be preferable, and getting a preferable person appointed to replace Acting AG Rosenstein might take a while.

Was it Sessions who recommended Rosenstein?

Why can't Trump just appoint an new AG as well as Acting AG? Sessions is obviously part of The Fix and collusion. This is ridiculous.

Was it Sessions who recommended Rosenstein?

Why can't Trump just appoint an new AG as well as Acting AG? Sessions is obviously part of The Fix and collusion. This is ridiculous.

I was just thinking back to the Saturday Night Massacre where President Nixon demanded AG Eliot Richardson fire Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox and Richardson resigned. Next in line Deputy AG William Ruckleshaus automatically became Acting AG, Nixon ordered him to fire Cox, and Rucklehaus resigned. Next in line Solicitor General Robert Bork automatically became Acting AG, Nixon ordered him to fire Cox, and Bork fired Cox.

An article by Steve Vladeck suggests three ways to do it. A recess appointment requires a recess. A statutory replacement requires he insert someone who currently serves in a different Senate confirmed position. The DOJ succession statute places Rosenstein in the position.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/07/if_donald_trump_fires_jeff_sessions_here_s_how_he_ll_appoint_a_successor.html

How to Replace Jeff Sessions

If he fires the attorney general, Donald Trump can take three very different approaches to appointing his successor.

By Steve Vladeck

Scenario 1: The DOJ Succession Statute and Executive Order

The most obvious and least controversial succession scenario would be for President Trump to follow the terms of the DOJ succession statute and his own executive order on DOJ succession, under both of which the deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, would automatically become the acting attorney general pending the confirmation of Sessions’ successor.

[...]

Scenario 2: The Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998

A more complicated scenario would be to rely on the provision codified at 5 U.S. Code Section 3345(a)(2), which states: “notwithstanding [the default rule that the deputy becomes the acting], the President (and only the President) may direct a person who serves in an office for which appointment is required to be made by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity subject to the time limitations of section 3346.”

In other words, the president may direct anyone who holds a “PAS” office—one requiring presidential appointment and Senate confirmation—to serve as acting attorney general for 210 days (and potentially longer, depending upon when the president nominates someone to the position).

[...]

Scenario 3: The Recess Appointment Elephant in the Room

If the individual President Trump desires to serve as Sessions’ successor is Senate-confirmable, then nothing would stop President Trump from simply nominating the successor and naming someone else as the short-term acting attorney general under the Vacancies Reform Act. But on the assumption that the confirmation of a new attorney general would be conditioned by the Senate upon some promise of noninterference in the Russia investigation, it stands to reason that this option, while legally straightforward, may be off the table politically.

But now we come to the elephant in the room: President Trump’s power to “recess-appoint” Sessions’ successor. Article II, Section 2, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution empowers the president “to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.” And as the Supreme Court concluded three years ago in the Noel Canning case, “the Recess of the Senate” can include just about any formal recess that lasts 10 or more days—no matter whether it’s an intersession or intrasession recess—and the vacancy at issue need not arise during the recess. (Both these holdings were over the nominal dissents of four of the more conservative justices.)

So if the Senate recesses for 10 days or more in August (which currently appears to be at least a decent likelihood), President Trump could simply recess-appoint whoever he wants to serve as attorney general until the end of the next Senate session, i.e., Jan. 3, 2019.

[...]