Most important takeaway so farâŚ
Mueller chose not to even consider whether Trump obstructed justice (âwe determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgmentâŚwe determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimesâ**)
in other words, Mueller did not find ambiguity on the question of whether Trump obstructed justice, because he never considered whether Trump committed an a crime.
**pages 213-214 of PDF i.e. page 1 and 2 of Volume II
Volume II, Page 8 of the Mueller report:
Mueller would have prosecuted Trump if he had been allowed too.
âBecause we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgement, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the Presidentâs conduct. The evidence we obtained about the Presidentâs actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.â
In other words Mueller chickened out. He should have looked at Kenneth Starr for inspiration of how things are done.
If-- having been warned during the campaign â Trump knew about âhelpâ and accepted it and didnât report it-- thatâs obstruction, surely.
Cover-up and whitewash of the millennium.
So far, the real summary seems to be âThey got away with it.â
Stunning.
Mueller also wasnât allowed to question Fat Ass under oath.
If it had occurred, the list of perjury charges would have been longer than Tolstoyâs âWar and Peaceâ.
Itâs not much of a cover-up when just about every news outlet (except the RW bubble) is saying, âGee, this REALLY looks like a cover-up!â
yeahâŚand this is made more obvious by the fact that, on page 1 of volume II, Mueller states explicity that he was supposed to investigate ââŚwhether the President had obstructed justiceâŚâ How do you investigate a potential crime when you wonât even consider âJustice Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisionsâ? (page 2)
It would not be prudent for me to comment on this matter until I read the measured and erudite analysis of Rudy Giuliasshole.
âAt the same time, the redacted report suggests that another element of Russiaâs meddling â social media influence operations conducted by the Internet Research Agency â occurred without the participation of the Trump campaign.â
Has there ever been any hard evidence that the IRA campaign had any effect whatsoever on peopleâs voting choices? And if so, how does that compare to US attempts to influence elections worldwide? Where are these voters that switched from Clinton to Trump because they read an article about PizzaGate? Iâve never met or heard of such a person.
The joke here is that the only reason heâs not prosecuting is because they didnât find a secret contract that specifically lays out what both sides were agreeing to. Instead, it was mostly done in public and we already know about the rest.
Trump loudly announced what he wanted them to do and they obliged because they already had mutual interests. And now Trump continues to give them everything they want while praising their leader and any dictator heâs told to praise. Thereâs no specific agreement because Trumpâs already in Putinâs pocket and he knows it better than anyone.
Thank you.
Ridiculous. Do you know a single person who will claim they changed from A to B because of a political ad?
And yet, why do campaigns spend hundreds of millions on such ads?
In order to believe that Russia had âno effect on the electionsâ â you must believe:
Governments donât spend millions on âpropagandaâ because it has no effect.
Advertising does not work, and has no value.
Super bowl ads donât cost millions of dollars.
Bad YELP reviews canât harm a business because theyâre âfreeâ.
âFake Newsâ is nothing to worry about.
Polls donât cost money, and therefore have no value.
There is no such thing as âbiasedâ news of any flavor.
There is no such thing as a âviralâ video, and they have no affect on the people in them.
Your reading, viewing and surfing habits â have no value to Amazon, Facebook or Google.
YOUR private business has no reason or need to be âprivateâ.
Everyone is who they say they are on the internet.
âReputationâ â has no value. It can not be created or destroyed by âword of mouthâ.
If you believe ONE of these things â you were affected by Russian âmeddlingâ.
What a dodge by Mueller. Sounds like he was looking for a way to exonerate more than he was looking for a way to crack thru.
As more and more direct quotes come out, it does seem as though Mueller did âchicken out.â There are specific words saying Trump discussed pushing Mueller out with McGahn, there are verified statements that members of the Trump administration used encrypted messaging to hide communications about Russia, there are quoted conversations from meetings confirming Trumpâs desire to get favorable support from Russia, etc. One can argue that Mueller trusted congress to do its job, but I find myself disheartened about Muellerâs final decisions.
Which leads to the obvious question of why Mueller adopted that position. If Mueller accepted the DoJ position that you cannot indict a sitting president then it would be a waste of time and resources to investigate his obstruction even though âThe evidence we obtained about the Presidentâs actions and intent presents difficult issues.â The key takeaway is Muellerâs clear statement that his report âdoes not exonerate [Trump].â Congress can conduct its own investigation or use the Mueller report in the impeachment process without concern about DoJ policy on indicting a sitting president.
Remember, the BEST that can be said for Trump and his campaign is that they knew that the Russians were meddling in the campaign and trying to help them. So, they knew for months that a hostile foreign power was trying to affect the outcome of our election, but breathed not one word of that knowledge to law enforcement or national security authorities.
Should that be enough to bar (no pun intended) Trump from office?