[W:914,1223] Robert Mueller's report is out

[trixare4kids]

People who think it is "desperate" to read a several hundred page report about all sorts of corrupt activities by the president and his best men, then discuss it, are not going to be the deciding factor in 2020 or any other election.

:lol: "Corrupt activities"?

If there were corrupt activities, you'd have a point....

 

[tres borrachos]

Why is she even part of this thread?

Because apdst brought her up. My post that he responded to was in response to his post mentioning her.

Or are you asking him why he brought her into this thread?

 

[MTAtech]

So Russia interfered with the election to promote Trump's bid, but the investigation couldn't state that the Trump Campaign itself conspired in that interference.

It's clear Barr took things out of context to shine the best light he could on Trump, I don't think anyone was surprised by that. And of course the Trumpeteers will spin that same narrative. Why understand the whole truth, when only part of the truth is what you need?

This is what it states (page 2) on Trump's obstruction of justice:

Fourth, 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 , however , we are unable to reach that judgment. The evidence we
obtained about the President ' s actions and intent presents difficult issues that prevent us from
conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred . Accordingly, while this report does
not conclude that the President committed a crime , it also does not exonerate him.
...
Several features of the conduct we investigated distinguish it from typical obstruction-of justice
cases. First, the investigation concerned the President, and some of his actions, such as
firing the FBI director, involved facially lawful acts within his Article IT authority, which raises
constitutional issues discussed below. At the same time, the President's position as the head of
the Executive Branch provided him with unique and powerful means of influencing official
proceedings, subordinate officers, and potential witnesses-all of which is relevant to a potential
obstruction-of-justice analysis. Second, unlike cases in which a subject engages in obstruction of
justice to cover up a crime, the evidence we obtained did not establish that the President was
involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference. Although the obstruction
statutes do not require proof of such a crime, the absence of that evidence affects the analysis of
the President's intent and requires consideration of other possible motives for his conduct. Third,
many of the President 's acts directed at witnesses , including discouragement of cooperation with
the government and suggestions of possible future pardons , took place in public view. That
circumstance is unusual, but no principle of law excludes public acts from the reach of the
obstruction laws. The likely effect of public acts is to influence witnesses or alter their testimony ,
the harm to the justice system's integrity is the same.
...
Soon after the firing of Corney and the appointment of the Special Counsel,
however, the President became aware that his own conduct was being investigated in an
obstruction-of-justice inquiry. At that point, the President engaged in a second phase of conduct,
involving public attacks on the investigation , non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both
public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation. Judgments about
the nature of the President 's motives during each phase would be informed by the totality of the
evidence.

 

[Saladin4]

Take it up with Mueller.


You know, they guy your side hailed as a hero when appointed to head the investigation.

The guy who will be testifying to Congress...Watch and see

 

[TamleeB]

They don't scare me they are a small tribe against a large nation, and they do not have the surprise attack of a hostile foreign nation to push them over the top again...

I guess that will be decided in 2020. As we learned from the last Presidential election cycle, anything can happen.

 

[Obscurity]

And if we do end up with four more years of Trump, they'll be right there to lather, rinse and repeat. :roll:

TBH though, Bernie or Biden was never going to beat him anyway, especially after the report clears the president.

IMO, the only way the Dems. might win and beat him in 2020, is to get honest, admit they were wrong about Trump, his family members, his campaign members or any other American and conclude by saying, today is a great day for our country. They need to argue issues, and stop with their resisting the POTUS. I actually don't mind, because nobody the left is running, IMO, offers more than what Trump has done for our country economically. And with me, it's about a strong economy and keeping people employed. The latter won't happen if the left takes power... The first thing they will do is burden business by upping their taxes and burdening them with over-regulation. jmho

Sanders will demolish Trump. The report damns Trump as wanting to obstruct but having a menagerie of well informed swamp creatures there to refuse to carry out his absurd and illegal orders.

Unlike this upstart rabble, Sanders will actually do things for the middle and working class, instead of paying lip service to them. You'd best take heed. Fear the Bern. He will win in a cataclysmic land slide if he passes the DNC and their corrupt, already in motion smear machine.

 

[Objective Voice]

I just downloaded the Mueller Report moments ago and have only gotten to page 7. What I've learned from just these 7 pages alone tells me that the Trump campaign worked hard to obtain "dirt" on Hillary mainly through 3rd-party intermediaries. Moreover, Mueller worked very hard to make a clear distinction between "contacts with the Russian government" and "contact with individuals with ties to the Russian government". It is because of these 3rd-party contacts - intermediaries - that no conspiracy charges ("collusion") were drawn. Yet, it is clear to me that the coincidental contacts that took place throughout the 2016 Trump campaign by way of these intermediaries worked to both Russia and Trump's advantage, i.e., "'a backdoor' way for Russia to control part of eastern Ukraine" and "[Manafort's] strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states" by virtue of an arranged meeting between Manafort and Konstantin Kilimnik, a Russian businessman (associate) who has ties to Russian intelligence, i.e., a 3rd-party intermediary.

There was a conspiracy here, folks, a quid pro quo. And you don't have to dig too deep into the Mueller Report to see it.

 

[Saladin4]

Honestly, I don't care about arguing minutia or keeping this alive.

It's a done deal. Trump is off the hook. Time for some to learn to live with life on life's terms.

Oh shut up...He is not off the "hook"...By any means.....Your partisan babbling not with standing

 

[danarhea]

the mueller report cost about 35 million (high end estimate)

the distance to the moon is 238,855 miles.

The us border is 1,933 miles and estimates for even a portion of wall there is in the billions, not millions.

You didn't really think that through, did you? :lol:

blam!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lmao.

 

[Chomsky]

I said that same thing earlier in the thread.

No matter what the outcome of the FBI investigation into Clinton, she was absolutely guilty to many Independents, or at the very least, they had reservations about her. And that was absolutely fair under the circumstances. Trump Fan Nation seems to not be astute enough to recognize that, or don't remember it. I've been reading this report (and unlike Barr, I won't pretend I can read it, digest it, analyze it, and make sense of it in a few hours. What I see so far is actually quite damning. Like Hillary, he wasn't charged with any crime. Like Hillary, he will distress the Independents. This is actually not a good day at all for Trump. Not getting indicted by Mueller at this point is the least of his worries. Impeachment and possible criminal investigations by other law enforcement, coupled with the bad image this report is conveying, isn't going to go well for him.

There could be impeachment, but there will never be removal by the Senate; but the report could assist in removal by electorate.

 

[trixare4kids]

Reading it, digesting it, etc is a very good thing. Analyzing it is a very good thing. Using it WELL is a great thing.

That's not really what's being done by most posting here and OP ED pieces and such so far. Most are looking for tidbits to quote and trying to retry it or scream impeachment. So far, about 90% of what has actually been quoted does nothing to credibly dispute the summary of findings.

It's very important how this is played. It could be turned into a win done right or it can stink of desperation. It's barely been released and the latter is already starting to mount up.

 

[Obscurity]

Looking through this thread I see a whole lot of people quoting big sections of various pages - bear in mind "Fair Use" limits what can be posted - and describing the various bits of corrupt behavior they describe.

But then I see a whole lot of other people running dishonest victory laps, making sure to avoid the quoted sections at all cost, generally just trolling anyone who is trying to discuss it, and if they do a little of that it's to proclaim Trump's complete innocence on all fronts (not the report says or supports). I don't think those are the kind of people worth worrying about. The only way one could reach the desperation conclusion is if one is starting from the position that Trump is completely innocent and therefore there is nothing in the report to discuss, full stop. So, I suspect someone who the Dems need in 2020 and whose support is worth aiming for is not going to look at this ****storm and conclude the people who discussed the report are being desperate. Those that do are almost certainly in the second category.

As for impeachment, I think you'll find most people are nothing that Trump was never going to be convicted on articles of impeachment, but if this was the 90s he would at least have to answer such charges. Thus far, it sounds like Trump did a whole lot more than Clinton did to cover up the BJ and interfere in the civil suits. There were a few here insisting on impeachment even before the report. I recall one person announcing that Mueller was a "traitor". But those are a small minority.




Bear in mind, each candidate in the main 2020 election was the most unfavored of their party for several decades before, and even then Hillary got the popular vote. Her loss was ultimately down mainly to strategic incompetence (failure to campaign in a few key states or even coordinate with a ground operation), despite the huge contribution of her unlikability. They do have to play their cards right. But.....but not in minimizing the report.

It's easy for them to run victory laps. Their dear leader, the slobbering offspring of a new york real estate mogul, has worked hand over fist to delegitimize the report before it dropped.

Had this moronic, bat eared, weak chinned fool embraced the reality Russia interfered, these louts would be taking the report more seriously.

Will he be impeached? I hope not. I hope the dems use this as the largest political bludgeon of all time, to eviscerate Trump's actions for the mob boss brusque they represent. I hope they use it to completely and utterly demolish any hopes he has of winning a second term.

I also hope the political establishment realizes its own peril. These findings make strange bedfellows out of republicans and establishment dems who want to keep HRC away from investigators.

 

[foolardi]

Take it up with Mueller.


You know, they guy your side hailed as a hero when appointed to head the investigation.

Only because this " supposed hero " was not vetted properly.Like Obama in 2008.
Mueller had a terrible reputation for unethical practices and use of bulldog attorneys like
Andrew *Weissmann.Enron and Whitey Bulger and the botching of the Anthrax scare.


* had a case overturned due to unethical practices.Left the Justice Dept.
Left the DOJ and Mueller Investigation in order to teach at New York University.
More like left in order to escape being investigated by the Inspector General.

 

[dobieg]

The guy who will be testifying to Congress...Watch and see

You mean the guy who said no collusion and didn't recommend charges on obstruction? That guy?


Damn, your side really pins your hopes on the wrong people.

 

[trixare4kids]

Reading it, digesting it, etc is a very good thing. Analyzing it is a very good thing. Using it WELL is a great thing.

That's not really what's being done by most posting here and OP ED pieces and such so far. Most are looking for tidbits to quote and trying to retry it or scream impeachment. So far, about 90% of what has actually been quoted does nothing to credibly dispute the summary of findings.

It's very important how this is played. It could be turned into a win done right or it can stink of desperation. It's barely been released and the latter is already starting to mount up.

And because some of us react on this thread to how this is currently being played, as you have said above, just wrongly.... we are personally disparaged for supporting a president who has been cleared of wrong-doing. This is a good day for our country, but we're the ones who are being told we are wrong for showing happiness.

Well color me wrong, but I am proud to be an American today.

 

[tres borrachos]

There could be impeachment, but there will never be removal by the Senate; but the report could assist in removal by electorate.

Yup, that's my point. Even with what appears to be a hell of a lot of damning things in this report (and we're just scratching the surface at this point), the Senate would never allow him to be removed anyway. The spectre of this will still affect him in November 2020.

 

[Hypothetical]

can anyone as yet cite where in the report the items about obstruction are? I have not seen them yet.

 

[Mr Person]

we are personally disparaged

Disparaged. Disparaged...hmmm....

Like when you called someone a baby for addressing one of your trolling meme posts?

I'm sure you have connections to the very highest levels of government, and they openly gossip with you about confidential material.

You must be one of Trump's most beloved supporters. :lamo

You don't know how funny you are to me... Need a pacifier?

 

[foolardi]

There could be impeachment, but there will never be removal by the Senate; but the report could assist in removal by electorate.

And what pray tell would be the Impeachable offense.There has to be a legal basis
like High Crimes and Misdemeanors.Treason or Bribery.
Not Tweeting away the days.Especially when true.

 

[Saladin4]

You mean the guy who said no collusion and didn't recommend charges on obstruction? That guy?


Damn, your side really pins your hopes on the wrong people.

The guy who said this asshole trump was NOT exonerated ...That guy

 

[trixare4kids]

From John Marshall:

Seems worth noting. Red underline is part Barr quoted, blue underline the part he omitted.

Keywords... Trump campaign did not conspire or coordinate with the Russian government in its election interference activities. :usflag2:

You're celebrating, right? Doing the happy dance? :2dancing::ind: Good day for our country, right?

 

[Objective Voice]

Barr is a hack.

Barr's release: "The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in it's election interference activities"

The actual quote:
The investigation also identified numerous links between the the Russian government and the Trump campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in it's election interference activities"

He cut a sentence in half! Basically, it's 100% proven that the Trump campaign cooperated and coordinated with the Russian government. But because the Russian government committed the crimes, and it couldn't be established that the Trump campaign explicitly asked for those crimes to be committed.. it was technically not criminal.

This is true. However, you have to look at the actions the Trump campaign took after said information was released, who was obtaining said information prior to its release and how said information could work to the campaign's advantage.

While there is no crime in taking advantage of any information once it becomes public knowledge, the fact that the Trump campaign worked so hard to get information on Hillary - sometimes even before it became public and who they tried to get it from other than WikiLeaks - is astounding!

 

[trixare4kids]

This is exactly what Wallace said:

Here's the video of Chris Wallace on Fox: "The Attorney General seemed almost to be acting as the counselor for the defense, for the counselor for the president, rather than the Attorney General ... I suspect that Democrats' heads on Capitol Hill were exploding."

Yes, Wallace said this, (he is a never-Trumper after all), but how does this change my point above? Think about it before replying.

 

[Fruityfact]

And because some of us react on this thread to how this is currently being played, as you have said above, just wrongly.... we are personally disparaged for supporting a president who has been cleared of wrong-doing. This is a good day for our country, but we're the ones who are being told we are wrong for showing happiness.

Well color me wrong, but I am proud to be an American today.

The thing is you haven't engaged with the report at all. Just proclaimed "victory"
Hence, you're disparaged for your dishonesty.

 

[foolardi]

Sanders will demolish Trump. The report damns Trump as wanting to obstruct but having a menagerie of well informed swamp creatures there to refuse to carry out his absurd and illegal orders.

Unlike this upstart rabble, Sanders will actually do things for the middle and working class, instead of paying lip service to them. You'd best take heed. Fear the Bern. He will win in a cataclysmic land slide if he passes the DNC and their corrupt, already in motion smear machine.

You can't be serious.You mean the Millionaire Bernie Sanders with 3 residences.
Who gave just a hair over 3 % of his income last year to Charity.Compared to President
Trump who gave around 20 %.
Same thing with this Beto O'Dourke creep.Gave way under 1 % to charity.