You know Mueller’s taking too damn long when we resort to quoting Monty Python.

President Trump’s eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., has agreed to sit down for a transcribed interview with the Senate judiciary committee, as investigators continue to dig into his attendance at a 2016 meeting where he was promised Russian dirt on the Clinton campaign.
[…]
While the committee spokesman would not divulge the precise date of Trump Jr.'s attendance in private, both Grassley and ranking Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein have previously told CNN they expected him to appear before their panel as soon as September.

Alan Futerfas, who is an attorney for the younger Trump, declined to comment.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller has issued subpoenas to a former lawyer for Paul Manafort and to Manafort’s current spokesman, an aggressive tactic that suggests an effort to add pressure on the former Trump campaign chairman.

The subpoenas seeking documents and testimony were sent to Melissa Laurenza, an attorney with the Akin Gump law firm who until recently represented Manafort, and to Jason Maloni, who is Manafort’s spokesman, according to people familiar with the matter.

Manafort is under investigation for possible tax and financial crimes, according to US officials briefed on the investigation. The allegations under investigation largely center on Manafort’s work for the former ruling party in Ukraine, which was ousted amid street protests over its pro-Russian policies.

It’s unclear what specific information the Mueller investigators believe Laurenza and Maloni may have. But issuing subpoenas to a lawyer of someone under investigation is unusual, in part because it raises potential attorney-client privilege issues that prosecutors tend to try to avoid. Maloni, as a public relations representative, doesn’t have the same attorney-client privilege protections.

Y’all referenced completely the wrong comedy from these isles! Try Father Ted; you’ll like it if you like Python.

I thought None totally nailed it with that Lancelot gif.

Ah, but don’t forget how that scene ends …

(1) THREAD: What do the Manafort subpoenas and Trump Jr. agreement to testify tell us about the state of Mueller’s investigation?
(2) Multiple media outlets report that Manafort’s spokesman and former attorney have been subpoenaed to testify.
(3) In other news, Trump Jr. agreed to a transcribed interview with a Senate committee.
(4) As a starting point, the issuance of grand jury subpoenas to Manafort’s former attorney and his spokesman confirm what was already
(5) evident–that Manafort has significant potential criminal liability and is in Mueller’s sights. The execution of a search warrant at
(6) Manafort’s home indicated that Mueller had evidence showing there was a good reason to believe a crime had been committed and evidence of
(7) that crime could be found at Manafort’s home. Recent subpoenas to PR firms working with Manafort suggest that Manafort still had not
(8) “flipped” and was a focus of Mueller’s investigation. In that context, I disagree with @CNN that issuance of a subpoena to the spokesman
(9) was “aggressive.” To me, the spokesman is a logical person to interview. There is no spokesman-client privilege so everything Manafort
(10) told the spokesman is fair game. Mueller could be interested in proving that Manafort had knowledge that contradicted disclosures or
(11) or other statements he made publicly. The subpoena to the attorney is more unusual, and typically subpoenas to attorneys are vetted very
(12) carefully and has guidance that requires prosecutors to seek approval before issuing a subpoena to an attorney. The subpoena to
(13) Manafort’s former attorney suggests to me that they believe she is a witness to a crime or a subject of the investigation herself.
(14) It also suggests that they already tried to obtain information from her without issuing a subpoena. It would be interesting to know
(15) on what matters she represented Manafort, because that would give the public insight into what Mueller is interested in.
(16) As for Trump Jr., I would advise him to take the Fifth, because lying to the Senate Committee is a crime and his words can be used by
(17) Mueller as evidence against him. There’s no question that Mueller’s team will scrutinize the transcript of his interview. The only way
(18) I would permit Trump Jr. to sit for the interview, if I were his lawyer, is if I had reviewed every relevant document and communication
(19) and was completely convinced he had no liability. I doubt his lawyer has access to all of those records at this time. It’s possible that
(20) the PR downside of taking the Fifth outweighs any legal concerns, or that he’s convinced that he would be pardoned in any event.
(21) As I discussed here in @thehill a pardon would mean he couldn’t take the Fifth and wouldn’t cover state crimes.

I know the feeling - hence my reply with the next line of the skit. :)

EDIT: Yes, Gordon is correct.

All this talk of “If X is pardoned, they can no longer take the Fifth” — all it really amounts to is that they can be held in contempt of Congress if they don’t respond to subpoenas, right? So what’s to say the pardon wouldn’t cover that too? I mean, what actually happens if they’re questioned under oath and just clam up?

Doubtful, since Congress isn’t generally subject to the whims of the Executive.

Thing is, Congress IS subject to it’s own whims and Contempt of Congress almost never gets used anyway. The odds of it happening with these boot-lickers approaches zero.

In practical terms, how are you supposed to force a pardon recipient to testify?
Let’s say Trump pardons Sessions for ignoring some court order and imposing some discriminatory policy. Congress calls him to testify, and he refuses. Congress holds him in contempt. Trump pardons him for that. What then? I mean, once you’ve got to the stage of pardoning for violating a court order, I don’t see where being theoretically subject to a contempt holding gets you. The rubicon has already been crossed.

You can’t which is why Congress is supposed to impeach anyone who tries that sort of bullshit.

But if they’re testifying to Congress its unlikely the President could pardon them out of that. Of course Congress would be obligated to actually do something, so that isn’t going to happen anyway.

Trump won’t be president forever. After he leaves office, everyone he pardoned could be forced to testify against him.

No, Trump won’t be president forever, but the white-minority-rule state that gets entrenched by his cronies could be around for quite some time.

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team is working with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman on its investigation into Paul Manafort and his financial transactions, according to several people familiar with the matter.

The cooperation is the latest indication that the federal probe into President Donald Trump’s former campaign chairman is intensifying. It also could potentially provide Mueller with additional leverage to get Manafort to cooperate in the larger investigation into Trump’s campaign, as Trump does not have pardon power over state crimes.

The two teams have shared evidence and talked frequently in recent weeks about a potential case, these people said. One of the people familiar with progress on the case said both Mueller’s and Schneiderman’s teams have collected evidence on financial crimes, including potential money laundering.

No decision has been made on where or whether to file charges. “Nothing is imminent,” said one of the people familiar with the case.

Couple more. Financial Times: Russian lobbyist testifies to Mueller grand jury

And

So the Republicans need to gain control of 6 more state legislatures and continue to prevent beta cuck libs from winning congressional seats through gerrymandering and voter suppression so that Republicans will have the power to amend the constitution and give Trump wherever the hell he wants like pardons for state crimes or president for life. Is that about right?

Trump can’t pardon state crimes. Edit: Oh wait, parsing failure, nothing to see here.