Post Sugar Shock Russiagate

Something to read while your blood sugar heads back towards the normal range. First, someone at Politico thinks that Mueller has subpoenaed the President:

The evidence lies in obscure docket entries at the clerk’s office for the D.C. Circuit. Thanks to Politico’s Josh Gerstein and Darren Samuelsohn, we know that on August 16 (the day after Giuliani said he was almost finished with his memorandum, remember), a sealed grand jury case was initiated in the D.C. federal district court before Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell. We know that on September 19, Howell issued a ruling and five days later one of the parties appealed to the D.C. Circuit. And, thanks to Politico’s reporting, we know that the special counsel’s office is involved (because the reporter overheard a conversation in the clerk’s office). We can further deduce that the special counsel prevailed in the district court and that the presumptive grand jury witness has frantically appealed that order and sought special treatment from the judges of the D.C. Circuit—often referred to as the “second-most important court in the land.”

Nothing about the docket sheets, however, discloses the identity of the witness. Politico asked many of the known attorneys for Mueller witnesses—including Jay Sekulow, another Trump lawyer—and each one denied knowledge of the identity of the witness. (What, of course, would we expect a lawyer to say when asked about a proceeding the court has ordered sealed?)

But for those of us who have been appellate lawyers, the brief docket entries tell a story. Here’s what we can glean:

• The parties and the judges have moved with unusual alacrity. Parties normally have 30 days to appeal a lower court action. The witness here appealed just five days after losing in the district court—and three days later filed a motion before the appellate court to stay the district court’s order. That’s fast.
• The appeals court itself responded with remarkable speed, too. One day after getting the witness’ motion, the court gave the special counsel just three days to respond—blindingly short as appellate proceedings go. The special counsel’s papers were filed October 1.
• At this point an unspecified procedural flaw seems to have emerged, and on October 3, the appeals court dismissed the appeal. Just two days later, the lower court judge cured the flaw, the witness re-appealed, and by October 10 the witness was once again before appellate court. Thanks to very quick action of all the judges, less than one week was lost due to a flaw that, in other cases, could have taken weeks or months to resolve.
• Back before the D.C. Circuit, this case’s very special handling continued. On October 10, the day the case returned to the court, the parties filed a motion for expedited handling, and within two days, the judges had granted their motion and set an accelerated briefing schedule. The witness was given just 11 days to file briefs; the special counsel (presumably) just two weeks to respond; and reply papers one week later, on November 14 (for those paying attention, that’s eight days after the midterm elections). Oral arguments are set for December 14.

At every level, this matter has commanded the immediate and close attention of the judges involved—suggesting that no ordinary witness and no ordinary issue is involved. But is it the president? The docket sheets give one final—but compelling—clue. When the witness lost the first time in the circuit court (before the quick round trip to the district court), he petitioned, unusually, for rehearing en banc—meaning the witness thought the case was so important that it merited the very unusual action of convening all 10 of the D.C. Circuit judges to review the order. That is itself telling (this witness believes the case demands very special handling), but the order disposing of the petition is even more telling: Trump’s sole appointee to that court, Gregory Katsas, recused himself.

Why did he recuse himself? We don’t know; by custom, judges typically don’t disclose their reasons for sitting out a matter. But Katsas previously served in the Trump White House, as one of four deputy White House counsels. He testified in his confirmation hearings that in that position he handled executive branch legal issues, but made clear that apart from some discrete legal issues, he had not been involved in the special counsel’s investigation. If the witness here were unrelated to the White House, unless the matter raised one of the discrete legal issues on which Katsas had previously given advice, there would be no reason for the judge to recuse himself.

It could be a lot of things, but yes, it could be that Mueller is subpoenaing the President. It's not like we haven't  expected it. HotAir:

But is it Trump? Cunningham makes a good case here, in part by noting that none of these circumstances fits anyone else that Mueller might be targeting. Even if it is, though, that doesn’t mean Trump will be talking with a grand jury either. The subpoena might be an attempt to get Trump to negotiate in good faith for a deposition with investigators. If Mueller has that in mind, then a stealth subpoena is the right tactic to use.

But, from across the pond, Trump DENIES Mueller has secretly subpoenaed him after former prosecutor said he has clues to prove president is desperately fighting grand jury appearance

President Donald Trump has denied receiving a subpoena from Special Counsel Robert Mueller after a former federal prosecutor made the case the president may already be fighting a quiet battle to resist a demand for grand jury testimony.  'No,' Trump responded Wednesday when DailyMail.com asked him if he had been subpoenaed at all by Mueller, as the president addressed reporters at the White House before leaving for a Florida campaign rally.

Trump lawyer Jay Sekulow also denied a subpoena existed, after Politico published an essay from former federal prosecutor Nelson Cunningham arguing that telltale signs may indicate the beginnings of a court fight over the issue. 'The report in Politico is completely false,' Sekulow told DailyMail.com. 'There has been no subpoena issued and there is no litigation.'

ABC: Conspiracy theorist becomes key figure as Mueller builds case

Self-proclaimed conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi returned to Washington, D.C., again this week for more closed-door meetings with special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigators, and on Friday is scheduled to make a second appearance before the federal grand jury probing Russia interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, ABC News has learned.

Reached by ABC News on Wednesday, Corsi's lawyer, David Gray, declined to comment on the matter.

Corsi, who until recently served as the Washington, D.C., bureau chief for the controversial far-right media outlet Infowars, is one of at least 11 individuals associated with political operative Roger Stone -- a longtime and close ally of President Donald Trump -- who have been contacted by the special counsel.

Much remains unknown about Mueller’s interest in Stone. But in recent weeks, Corsi has emerged as a central figure of interest to Mueller as he builds his case, sources confirm to ABC News. Corsi, who Stone told ABC News he has known for years, has frequently appeared with Stone on-air for Infowars, where Stone currently serves as a contributor.

Mueller’s interest in Corsi is believed to stem from his alleged early discussions about efforts to unearth then-candidate Hillary Clinton’s emails. The special counsel has evidence that suggests Corsi may have had advance knowledge that the email account of Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta, had been hacked and that WikiLeaks had obtained a trove of damning emails from it, two sources with direct knowledge of the matter told ABC News.

The rest of the article mostly smears Corsi as a right-wing conspiracy nut. They're particularly incensed at his role in "Swift-Boating" John Kerry and the birther controversy with Barack Obama.

If a mainstream media source had obtained compromising information on Donald Trump via the Kremlin, they would publish it without fear.

And Mueller is still grumbling about being Kavanaughed: Mueller asks FBI to probe scheme seeking sexual assault dirt on him. Did they bribe women to come forward with false stories, like they did with Trump, Kavannagh and Moore? I've never heard of such a thing! Actually, this thing is starting to look like a false flag operation designed to make Mueller look good.