Do you believe Mueller's findings about the Trump admin/Russia?

[Josie]

Some could think it was a Troll Poll?

Report it, then.

 

[haymarket]

That critical fact was deliberately omitted from the Poll
Some could think it was a Troll Poll?
Regardless, it was not well thought out
I put that down to the sudden conversion in becoming a Mueller supporter

We need to read the entire Mueller Report to at least see if the Barr summary is totally accurate.

 

[haymarket]

I'm seeing lots of skepticism, but poll results say there's no skepticism. Interesting.

The poll has no option for first reading the entire Mueller Report.

 

[Josie]

The poll has no option for first reading the entire Mueller Report.

Why would that be an option when it literally isn't an option?

 

[Mach]

What's your opinion on the news today?

It's been a long two years with zero word from Mueller except indictments. There was no well-evidenced conspiracy with team-Trump and Russia in terms of election meddling, I can believe that.

I'm not sure on obstruction, but so far it puts me in doubt of obstruction rising to the level of criminality. With no underlying crime, and Trump's action itself not being a crime (firing Comey), it seems like a hill too steep to climb.

Had he LIED to obstruct, then it would have been easy. Since Trump was never subpoane'd, they won't be able to show anything like that.
Was it a mistake not to subpoena Trump? I think tit-for tat given Bill and Hillary, they should have. I think given proper DOJ behavior, in according with staying out of politics (unlike Comey), they likely should not have.

Big day for team Trump. The strategy of "no collusion" will pay dividends politically. My guess is Trump will squander it, but Democrats are good at fumbling the ball too. 2020 just got more interesting.

 

[Logicman]

Lying left-wing liberal snakes. They are of their father, the devil, and they speak his native language - lies. They all need to apologize to President Trump for putting him and the country through two years of false accusations and personal attacks.

 

[haymarket]

Why would that be an option when it literally isn't an option?

Because it must be an option.

 

[JANFU]

We need to read the entire Mueller Report to at least see if the Barr summary is totally accurate.

No argument here. Expect court cases on Congressional subpoena's for documents

Now recall how the DOJ released all those docs to the House Committee Nunes puppet.

 

[JANFU]

Report it, then.

Report what?

 

[uptower]

In the absence of anything else this would appear to be so far sufficient:

"But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."

Which shows at worst the Trump campaign were unwitting tools. Till anything better comes along we have to accept that it doesn't now look like Trump's campaign deliberately broke the law vis-a-vis Russian help. Bear in mind the evidence still warranted an investigation to prove this, so it was not a 'witch hunt'. In fact it did its job in exonerating Trump on that charge.

The rest, especially Barr's conclusion on obstruction, is a bit of spin designed to skew public opinion ahead of wider release:

"In cataloguing the President's actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department's principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of- justice offense."

Well, Trump appointee Barr would say that. Congress might have their own opinion about it after reviewing the actual report, rather than Barr's summary. It seems still likely the president was committing obstruction to hide other crimes, which he knew would become known with the sharks circling that close. Note the multiple spin off investigations into his campaign conduct, finances, inauguration and so on.

So far then, the mixed bag we expected. No smoking gun on Russia, which the red hats can use to claim Trump is an angel; but plenty of red meat to keep his opponents occupied till 2020.

 

[Mach]

That's not Barr's conclusion -- it's Mueller's. It's a direct quote from the Mueller Report:

That's not what I refer to.
#1 Barr's report is not Mueller's report, so until it is seen, some will always be skeptical, especially given Barr's history.
#2 Mueller remained silent on obstruction, and instead provided all evidence they found.
Barr/Rosenstein (+ advisors), i.e. the DOJ, HAS weighed in on obstruction and concluded he did not obstruct, and they reported that to congress as well.

So people are likely skeptical about both #1 and #2. I don't think most are *really* skeptical about conspiracy, except for the most die-hard folks.

 

[Mach]

It doesn't matter. There was no collusion. Stop playing investigator.

IG cleared Hillary, why do Republicans even to literally today, still yap about Hillary with regards to her misdeeds that need to see justice?

 

[Josie]

Report what?

Alrighty. Let me hold your hand through the conversation.

You said.......

That critical fact was deliberately omitted from the Poll
Some could think it was a Troll Poll?
Regardless, it was not well thought out
I put that down to the sudden conversion in becoming a Mueller supporter

Troll threads are sent elsewhere. If you think it's a troll thread, report it.

 

[haymarket]

No argument here. Expect court cases on Congressional subpoena's for documents

Now recall how the DOJ released all those docs to the House Committee Nunes puppet.

Nunes was and is a national disgrace.

 

[Cardinal]

I've decided I'm with Bernie on this one: I don’t want [Barr's] summary of the Mueller report. I want the whole damn report.

 

[Harshaw]

That's not what I refer to.
#1 Barr's report is not Mueller's report, so until it is seen, some will always be skeptical, especially given Barr's history.

What's Barr's history, specifically?

 

[Excon]

Barr made iran contra go away: All reasonable people want the full report and transparency.

You mean like all those non-existent reasonable people who weren't demanding to see what the falsely claimed 17 agencies saw to come to the conclusion they did?
Those reasonable people?

Sounds like hypocrisy.

 

[JANFU]

Alrighty. Let me hold your hand through the conversation.

You said.......



Troll threads are sent elsewhere. If you think it's a troll thread, report it.

Josie, calm down.

 

[roughdraft274]

Mueller Finds No Trump-Russia Conspiracy but Stops Short of Exonerating President on Obstruction of Justice - The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The investigation led by Robert S. Mueller III found that neither President Trump nor any of his aides conspired or coordinated with the Russian government’s 2016 election interference, according to a summary of the special counsel’s findings made public on Sunday by Attorney General William P. Barr.

Are you surprised that no evidence was found that the Trump administration conspired with the Russians to interfere with the 2016 election? Do you believe it?

If the actual report says it then ill believe it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk

 

[JANFU]

Nunes was and is a national disgrace.

No argument here.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Until we can read the complete Mueller Report one cannot answer this question.

It's over.

 

[Captain America]

Well, I haven't seen Mueller's findings yet but when I do, I will believe them.

If Barr's intrepretation of them is accurate, I think Trump, et al, owes Mueller an apology.

If Barr's intrepretation is correct, and Trump is as pure and innocent as the driven snow, I think all those who tried and convicted trump of Russian collusion, owe Trump an apology.

I think America deserves to read the report in it's entirety. They need to know their president isn't a piece of ****.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Maybe, maybe not. I'm not privy to the legal aspects of that.

I do have to wonder, though, if there would still be calls for seeing the full report from the left if Barr had announced today that there WAS evidence of the Trump admin working with Russia. I'm sure the usual Trump-humpers would be demanding it, but I bet the other side would find Barr's report sufficient. Funny how politics work, huh?

The concept of a closed door briefing on classified portions was broached with the House, but they turned it down, because if it had anything useful to them, they could not discuss it publicly. They only want what they think they can use politically.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Barr is indeed a partisan and his own personal record demonstrates this without a doubt.

Do you have proof of that?

 

[Excon]

I am not referring to the collusion aspect, but the obstruction of justice component. As I have stated here on several occasions, I've never been one to believe Trump worked in conjunction with Russia to influence the election.

Obstruction of what? The report makes it clear that you would need an underlying crime to form the intent to obstruct an investigation into it.