Bugfatty300
Buddha Squirrel
I'm surprised that the PDF isn't 8pt all caps comic sans as well.
Mueller's Report
- Thread starter Cheetah
- Start date
I'm surprised that the PDF isn't 8pt all caps comic sans as well.
SupremacyKing2
Deity
My take on the Mueller Report:
1) Russia definitely interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump win. They did this by spreading misinformation on social media that favored Trump and also by releasing the hacked emails from the DNC to hurt Hillary's campaign.
2) There was no provable criminal collusion because the Trump campaign did not have an explicit agreement with Russia. However, there was what I would call "informal collusion". Members of the Trump campaign would meet with the Russians on their own to share polling data (Manafort) or try to get dirt in Hillary. And the Russians would do their thing to interfere with the election. And the Trump campaign welcomed their help without explicitly asking for it.
3) Trump freaked out when Mueller was appointed because he was afraid that all this activity would definitely look like collusion so he tried to obstruct justice multiple times, including firing Comey, trying to fire Mueller, attacking the investigation publicly and encouraging witnesses to lie or not cooperate, but his administration refused to carry out his more egregious orders.
I think at this point it is entirely a political question. The legal aspect of it as been settled since Mueller has prosecuted everyone he intends to prosecute and the DOJ won't indict anyone further. But Congress now needs to decide if there is anything in the Mueller Report that they consider to be an impeachable offense which is a separate issue from provable crimes and whether it is worth pursuing.
1) Russia definitely interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump win. They did this by spreading misinformation on social media that favored Trump and also by releasing the hacked emails from the DNC to hurt Hillary's campaign.
2) There was no provable criminal collusion because the Trump campaign did not have an explicit agreement with Russia. However, there was what I would call "informal collusion". Members of the Trump campaign would meet with the Russians on their own to share polling data (Manafort) or try to get dirt in Hillary. And the Russians would do their thing to interfere with the election. And the Trump campaign welcomed their help without explicitly asking for it.
3) Trump freaked out when Mueller was appointed because he was afraid that all this activity would definitely look like collusion so he tried to obstruct justice multiple times, including firing Comey, trying to fire Mueller, attacking the investigation publicly and encouraging witnesses to lie or not cooperate, but his administration refused to carry out his more egregious orders.
I think at this point it is entirely a political question. The legal aspect of it as been settled since Mueller has prosecuted everyone he intends to prosecute and the DOJ won't indict anyone further. But Congress now needs to decide if there is anything in the Mueller Report that they consider to be an impeachable offense which is a separate issue from provable crimes and whether it is worth pursuing.
Which bits are you referring to? The biggest bit I see blacked out for Harm to Ongoing Investigation is pages 184 - 188, which is all campaign finance and the Trump Tower meeting. There is also one persons name blacked out of the list of individuals related to obstruction of justice, as well a a big section of him and Jeff Sessions.
[EDIT] I have got some of the pages wrong, the 1st big bit is wikileaks, the second just the one unknown individual.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
Some wikileaks connections are getting blacked out also, maybe related to the tower meeting but probably more there also.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Prior to Mueller, there was an investigation under Comey's direction. Nowhere do I see a summary of findings prior to Mueller's involvement. Since those findings should have been the basis of his mandate, it's an odd omission.
As a said, at first glance. Perhaps I missed it.
J
So it was not obstruction of justice because of the rebellion in the white house? Who would have thought that would save Trump personally:
The Mueller report found that potential obstruction of justice by the president only failed because members of his administration refused to "carry out orders", including former FBI Director James Comey, former White House counsel Don McGahn and former campaign manager Corey Lewandowksi.
In one passage, the document says:
"The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests. Comey did not end the investigation of Flynn, which ultimately resulted in Flynn's prosecution and conviction for lying to the FBI. McGahn did not tell the Acting Attorney General that the Special Counsel must be removed, but was instead prepared to resign over the President's order. Lewandowski and Dearborn did not deliver the President's message to Sessions that he should confine the Russia investigation to future election meddling only. And McGahn refused to recede from his recollections about events surrounding the President's direction to have the Special Counsel removed, despite the President's multiple demands that he do so. Consistent with that pattern, the evidence we obtained would not support potential obstruction charges against the President's aides and associates beyond those already filed."
BeebIn one passage, the document says:
"The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests. Comey did not end the investigation of Flynn, which ultimately resulted in Flynn's prosecution and conviction for lying to the FBI. McGahn did not tell the Acting Attorney General that the Special Counsel must be removed, but was instead prepared to resign over the President's order. Lewandowski and Dearborn did not deliver the President's message to Sessions that he should confine the Russia investigation to future election meddling only. And McGahn refused to recede from his recollections about events surrounding the President's direction to have the Special Counsel removed, despite the President's multiple demands that he do so. Consistent with that pattern, the evidence we obtained would not support potential obstruction charges against the President's aides and associates beyond those already filed."
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
Hot Takes:
1) The redactions don't seem too bad. I guess Barr decided he could either redact everything or brown nose Trump, and decided brown nosing was the easier way out.
2) I'm honestly surprised Mueller didn't investigate Trumps shady connections with Deutsche Bank/ Russian organized crime/ money laundering.
3) The tl;dr: version of the obstruction volume is that Trump failed to obstruct justice because he was too stupid to know how to do it properly.
4) How come it seems that various judicial and investigative branches always break in favor of the 'conservative'? Comey thought telling us about Clinton's emails was important enough to break decades of DoJ precedent to testify in front of Congress, but telling the public there was an active counterintelligence investigation against the Trump Campaign was off limits? Same with the "We are re-opening the investigation into her emails.... wait no nevermind" letter? Again with Mueller basically writing "The president is guilty as sin on obstruction, but I'm not going to make any decisions due to a completely silly OLC memo and pawn the decision off on a political hack who was appointed to the job after saying the president can't be nailed on obstruction".
Also, I have no idea what the world is coming to but I agree with Paul Rosenzweig (off and on contributor the Lawfare and the Atlantic) on a topic relating to presidential authority!
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...-has-protected-trump-and-hurt-country/587494/
1) The redactions don't seem too bad. I guess Barr decided he could either redact everything or brown nose Trump, and decided brown nosing was the easier way out.
2) I'm honestly surprised Mueller didn't investigate Trumps shady connections with Deutsche Bank/ Russian organized crime/ money laundering.
3) The tl;dr: version of the obstruction volume is that Trump failed to obstruct justice because he was too stupid to know how to do it properly.
4) How come it seems that various judicial and investigative branches always break in favor of the 'conservative'? Comey thought telling us about Clinton's emails was important enough to break decades of DoJ precedent to testify in front of Congress, but telling the public there was an active counterintelligence investigation against the Trump Campaign was off limits? Same with the "We are re-opening the investigation into her emails.... wait no nevermind" letter? Again with Mueller basically writing "The president is guilty as sin on obstruction, but I'm not going to make any decisions due to a completely silly OLC memo and pawn the decision off on a political hack who was appointed to the job after saying the president can't be nailed on obstruction".
Also, I have no idea what the world is coming to but I agree with Paul Rosenzweig (off and on contributor the Lawfare and the Atlantic) on a topic relating to presidential authority!
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/a...-has-protected-trump-and-hurt-country/587494/
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
I think the more accurate tl;dr version of obstruction is the Trump did attempt it but his underlings didn't go along with it. That's not the same thing as him being too stupid to do it and therefore it didn't happen. He did try an obstruct but at the end of the day the people who had to carry it out wouldn't.
Agree on the rest
Agree on the rest
Ajidica
High Quality Person
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2006
- Messages
- 22,482
@hobbsyoyo I had a different takeaway from the report's obstruction section that mentioned everyone telling him that -with the exception of McGahn- wasn't going to get rid of the investigation. Christie told Trump that firing Comey wasn't just going to make the investigation go away, but still Trump did it. We saw similar things with his idea to fire Mueller and get Sessions to un-recuse himself.
Also, how did Sessions and Bannon come out of this looking not-terrible?
Also, how did Sessions and Bannon come out of this looking not-terrible?
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
It's a gigantic nothing burger.
Tons of stuff on what foreign nationals did and nothing to tie it to anyone but other foreign nationals. The question as to why it was ever begun remains unanswered. In another thread, the statute was quoted concerning obstruction of justice. One key phrase is, "due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry." Was this entire investigation due and proper within this stature's meaning?
J
Tons of stuff on what foreign nationals did and nothing to tie it to anyone but other foreign nationals. The question as to why it was ever begun remains unanswered. In another thread, the statute was quoted concerning obstruction of justice. One key phrase is, "due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry." Was this entire investigation due and proper within this stature's meaning?
J
The last 4 words of the report: "does not exonerate him"
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Of course not. That would invite criminal misconduct charges. They may be coming anyway.
Still, it is the practical result that Trump is exonerated.
J
From a practical standpoint - yes. In the obstruction of justice section, Mueller lays out a fairly compelling case of 10 instances where Trump obstructed, but also noted the separation of powers defenses Trump would have and DOJ policy not to indict a sitting President. He did, however, point to the Constitutional remedies - which falls to Congress. Mueller correctly fulfilled his role (per the statutes and DOJ policy to be soft on Presidential crime) and the report does details many of the short-comings of President Trump and his likely criminal behavior. Trump, thanks be to Putin, is the one man in the United States that can't really be criminally prosecuted for the specific criminal acts he committed. A fair reading of part 2 of the report makes out a strong case that Trump obstructed in several ways.
The report even explicitly footnotes how to do impeachment multiple times in excruciating detail.
Zkribbler
Deity
Fixed.
Collusion is not a crime. The word you're looking for is conspiracy. That last part is incorrect.
Mueller has referred 16 incidents to various offices of the US Attorneys General involving possible criminal conduct, not falling under Mueller's mandate.Rather, the Senate needs to count noses to ascertain whether enough GOP Senators will vote to convict to reach the required 2/3 majority.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,383
Saint Mueller repeating that "Russia hacked the DNC" without providing any evidence does not make it true.
The sole "evidence" of russians hacking the DNC for those emails is a claim by a company hired the DNC, Crowdstrike. A company notorious for making false claims. They deliberately withheld evidence from any police authorities. For reasons yet unexplained but easy already to guess at, the people in the FBI at the time simply accepted the claim by this firm as it it were a proven fact. And Mueller conveniently repeated it as if it were a fact, because without that claim he didn't have any motive for his witch hunt.
I hope this now finally gets investigated. The Intelligence-police complex in the US needs to be taken down a few notches, it seems to be the greatest threat to peace internationally and to democracy internally.
They underestimated Trump, immensely, he's crass but not stupid. But did manage to push him into an alliance with the neocons. Which, I guess, is mission half-accomplished. And made things far worse than they might have been without these court games.
His strong seems to be dealing with people he picks as underlings, it's amazing how many he hired and fires without suffering any actually bad consequences from it. And how he's managed to game Washington politics this way. I guess a lot of power and influence goes with the job, but also requires an ability to control people and stay one step ahead of the inevitable betrayals and changes.
Last edited:
Luckily enough, the Mueller report provides evidence. Might want to read it.
innonimatu
the resident Cassandra
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2006
- Messages
- 15,383
I already searched it. And no it doesn't. If you think it does, feel free to quote, I may have missed it. As far as I can see on that subject it only makes claims.
Mueller's rather pitiful triumph was finding some propaganda bought by a russian oligarch's company and indicting a few people involved while hoping to never have to actually prove anything about even that in court.
As for collusion, if what Trump said was indeed:
this just proves that the guy is not senile, and correctly identified (or had people working for him who did) the problem he was facing. This is not the statement of a guilty criminal looking for an escape, it's the statement of a politician who knows he's being outmaneuvered by his opposition in the political game. And it actually evaluated correctly how the whole thing would play.
And that a person in that situation would ask around from his advisers how to counteract in this political game is only to be expected. It is part of the game. To expect an innocent man to not look into all means of defense is just medieval: you're a witch if you float and then must burn at the stake, and only innocent if you don't fight and drown?
Last edited:
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
Mueller wrote the report to fuel the conspiracy crazies that inhabit the newsrooms of the Capital. However, that is all this is--conspiracy theories run amok. It is now shown to have always been much ado about nothing. The serious questions are now pointing the other direction. The Obama administration will have a major scandal after all.
J
Yet he was one of the most effective President in recent history during the investigation. Perhaps it was a blessing in disguise or perhaps he will be more effective without the cloud looming. We will see.
J
Similar threads
