Mueller Time Ends and Not Everyone Will Be Satisfied

Mueller Time Ends and Not Everyone Will Be Satisfied March 24, 2019

I’ve dutifully followed the probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election from its beginnings, and now it looks as if I can start wrapping this up.

Special counsel Robert Mueller turned in his final report on Friday, putting its fate in the hands of newly-appointed Attorney General William Barr.

The discussion through the weekend was how soon Barr would complete his review of the report and when he would turn that review over to Congress.

On Sunday afternoon that happened, so here’s the breakdown:

Having reviewed the report along with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, they have concluded that there was insufficient evidence to charge President Trump or anyone on his campaign team with directly or indirectly conspiring with the Russian government to influence the outcome of the 2016 election.

From ABC News:

The special counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US presidential election. As the report states: “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”:

“In cataloging the President’s actions many of which took place in public view, the report identities no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct.”

An important point to note is the wording, “in our judgment.”

According to reports, Mueller did not make any conclusion in regards to attempted obstruction of the investigation. That was included in the letter to Congress by Barr and Rosenstein, based on their interpretation of the Mueller report.

Also included in what was said to be a 4 page letter to Congress, summarizing the report, was the curious notation from the Justice Department that the report “neither implicates nor exonerates Trump or his campaign.”

In other words, he’s not guilty, but he’s not innocent, either.

There are so many ways that could be interpreted, but apparently we’re going to have to see Mueller’s actual report to decipher that riddle.

That brings us to the next phase of the drama. Democrats are asking that the Justice Department give them access to the full report, as well as all the evidence and documentation that went into reaching the conclusions being drawn.

How much of a fight the Justice Department puts up remains to be seen, but Democrats are willing to resort to subpoenas, if that becomes necessary.

“It means make the request, if the request is denied subpoena, if the subpoenas are denied we will hold people before the Congress and yes, we will prosecute in court as necessary to get this information,” House Intelligence Committee chairman Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said Sunday on “This Week”.

Until that fight begins, Trump and his circle can breathe a little easier. This is a win for him.

Of course, he can’t get too comfortable. Mueller farmed out quite a few cases to the Southern District of New York, and prosecutors there have leapt on these cases with voracious fervor.

Everything from Trump’s charity to his campaign committee is being scrutinized, and it is unlikely that he’ll be as fortunate in all those cases as he’s been with Mueller.

So rest well tonight in Trumpville, for tomorrow, the fight begins anew.

By the way, what do you think the chances are that Robert Mueller gets an apology from Trump for 2 years of verbal abuse?

*EDIT* I wanted to toss in a couple of tweets from Representative Jerry Nadler that went out ahead of the news of AG Barr’s findings, to help set the stage for the next leg of this fight.

It ain’t over, folks.

"Once more, the GOP goes nuts on the slightest idea a Democrat did something shady ..."

Donald Trump: Predator President or Just ..."
"The big look has both wrong, two wings of the same hypocrite party faction bird."

Donald Trump: Predator President or Just ..."
"This won't change any Trump supporters' minds. Republicans like hypocrisy because hypocrisy triggers the libs."

Donald Trump: Predator President or Just ..."
"Three cheers for George Conway. I'm glad someone has the courage to point out the ..."

Donald Trump: Predator President or Just ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Alpha 1

    In unrelated news it looks like Netanyahu’s right wing coalition will win reelection in Israel, despite the fact that Netanyahu has been indicted for corruption. It seems that relying on corruption charges to bring down hard-right nationalist politicians is not a winning strategy.

  • earhartam

    If true the campaign was approached multiple times by Russians, why didn’t Trump go to the FBI to report these multiple overtures? And, if the Trump camp was so adamant about not conspiring why did the Russians continue to approach them?

  • John225

    Netanyahu is getting a fair bit of assistance from his fellow Dugin desciples. Trump is holding talks with him at the moment as has Pompeo which will generate quite a bit of positive free publicity for him very close to the election plus Trump seems to be endorsing Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights. Brazils Jair Bolsonaro (the newest member of the club) is getting very chummy with Netanyahu calling him his brother and talking about moving Brazils embassy to Jerusalem. More free air time. Brazil has historically been quite friendly with Iran and now looks like it is pivoting away from that towards Israel.

  • JASmius

    I disagree that this is a “win” for Trump. Release of the full Mueller report indicating what Barr claims it does without any self-serving cherry-picking would qualify, but not a four page “summary” of a 685-page report. That’s not going to persuade anybody of Trump’s innocence who wasn’t already convinced of it. That’s why Democrats pushed Barr so hard to promise full disclosure of Mueller’s eventual report in his Senate confirmation hearings two months back. It’s why they’ll subpoena the full Mueller report and Mueller’s own testimony. And the White House will fight it all the way to the SCOTUS, and it’ll take months.

    It’s just as I said yesterday: Bill Barr has done the job he was hired to do – whitewash the Mueller report and try to completely flip the Russiagate narrative. Only full release of the entire report can settle that matter, and that Trump’s DOJ will not do. Gee, I wonder why.

  • Michael Weyer

    Again, I always doubted full collusion (just because Putin is not going to trust an idiot like Trump with any actual important knowledge) but the way Trump is acting, he looks like he’s hiding something shady as hell. But of course, to American Pravada (aka FOX News) and his army of sychophants who honestly believe he’s this amazing figure, it’s somehow “proof positive he’s innocent, now start going after Hillary, Obama and George Soros!”

  • IllinoisPatriot

    “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”:

    Yet the investigation DID establish that Paul Manafort, while working as Trump’s campaign manager DID forward polling information and demographic information to the Kremlin-linked Data Analytics organization.

    Yet Trump DID admit to Lester Holt that James Comey was fired over the whole “Russian thing” and Trump has met multiple times with Putin one-on-one with no US interpreters or national-security personnel allowed in the room, emerging to sing the praises of Putin while throwing the US intelligence community under the bus.

    How does that not rise to the spirit of obstruction of justice if not actual betrayal of US national security secrets to the Russians ?

    The investigation DID uncover several links and clandestine meetings (that Trump had previously denied) between Trump family members, campaign officials (Carter Page, Paul Manafort, Michael Cohen, Trump Jr’s Trump Tower meeting that Trump Sr dictated the media response for, etc).

    Why do I have a strong feeling that this report is as much a victim of whitewash and premature termination (Mueller has the Grand Jury authority for several more months and has never even interviewed Trump or family members under oath) as the Clinton investigation did under Holder/Lynch ?

    Why does it smell like Barr’s idea of “doing the right thing” is to protect Trump’s legal rear-end at any cost ? Why does this smell like a major cover-up for Trump’s corruption and possible treason given Trumps post-inaugural idolization of Putin, Kim, Ji Xing, etc ?

    Why does it seem that Mueller was told (by Barr) to stand down and that Rod Rosenstein’s exit from DOJ has more to do with Barr’s over-riding him and shutting down the Mueller investigation before Trump is incriminated than it does with any other reason ? Why is the timing so co-incidental that Barr gets nominated takes over the investigation and Rosenstein immediately leaves just as Mueller wraps up his report without interviewing the Trump family members or Trump himself, accepting instead “written answers” to questions that Trump’s lawyers deemed acceptable to answer instead of the questions that needed to be asked ? Why is Stone not in jail for the witness tampering and other corrupt actions he took (and bragged about at the time) during the election (actions like threats of bodily harm, death threats, wikileaks correspondence, etc).

    This whole “wrap-up” without “finding any evidence” is just so wrong because there is (and has been shown in court documents file by Mueller) lots of circumstantial evidence that the Trump campaign (and possibly even the Jervanka team) were in contact with the Russians and coordinating with them to run bot-nets and social-media campaigns timed and targeted to help Trump win. If this were not true, then why are facebook and twitter STILL finding & deleting Russian accounts due to political interference with US elections ?

    Was it not our AG Barr that stated (pre-confirmation) that he did not feel there was any collusion, that Mueller’s probe was a wasted of time/money — a ‘witch hunt’ — and that Mueller’s probe needed to be shut down immediately as it was ‘harming’ Trump’s ability to ‘get things done’ ?

    OTOH, the DOJ DOES have this inane policy of never indicting a sitting President, so perhaps Mueller was told to stop investigating because if he went any further, he’d be indicting Trump in all but the courtroom as any other ties to Russia would directly tie to Trump and that would tantamount to “indicting a sitting President” which the DOJ will not do. (How could Mueller indict Kushner/Trump JR without also Indicting or including Trump personally in the alleged actions – either as a ‘silent partner’ in the actions or as the requestor of the actions (as mob bosses never actually commit murder, but ‘request’ that hit-men do so) ? It sounds like to go further, Mueller would need to invoke RICO laws and just the SOUND of ‘RICO’ and ‘sitting President’ in the same sentence would trigger our current Pro-Trump AG.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    If this is a “win” for Trump, it is only in his own imagination that thinks he can participate in yet another cover-up that will not come back to bite him at election time.

    The more the cult#45 spikes the ball over this by mis-representing the report as proof of Trump’s innocence, the bigger the loss I see for the entire GOP in 2020.

    I think it’s clear from the timing of Rosenstein’s ‘retirement’, Mueller’s termination, and Barr’s confirmation that the three are related – and not to the benefit of either the Law or of Justice.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    We don’t really know that full collusion did NOT take place – only that Mueller was unable to obtain positive proof that such collusion took place strong enough to refute the interlocking and mutual-supporting stories (lies) told by Trump and his well-practiced team of deceivers. Among other things we don’t know, is whether or not Mueller was explicitly told to shut down his investigation once Barr was confirmed in order to avoid incriminating Trump.

    We DO know that most (all?) of Mueller’s convictions and guilty pleas were for violations of state (not federal) laws or for lying to federal agencies (perjury) including lying to the FBI & Congress. (NOTE: Lying to the FBI could well have included lying to Mueller’s prosecution team before being found out and charged with the offense. I get the feeling that Mueller was attempting to push the Sisyphus Boulder uphill in his efforts to get the truth out of any Trump associate while always working under the threat that a Trump pardon would turn the ground beneath his feet to quicksand at any time while under constant attack from Trump, Trump boot-lickers with public megaphones and the threats from cult#45 radicals that were (and are) willing to commit physical assault if not actual murder in the name of their godling..

    We DO know that Manafort was willing to (and was caught when he did) lie under oath.

    We DO know that Roger Stone took the 5th instead of testifying before Congress rather than testify and either commit perjury or incriminate himself.

    We DO know that Michael Cohen had a MAJOR change of attitude when he was raided and his Trump activities threatened to send him to long jail terms while Trump disowned him. From his statements both before and after his ‘change of heart’, we see that Trump has a clear pattern of lies and denials and enough yes-men that will lie for him that getting admissions or evidence is extremely difficult before said evidence is destroyed outright to protect Trump. The surprise raid on Cohen’s office/apartment apparently netted enough evidence to convict Cohen and turn him to tell the truth that was also supported by the evidence seized.

    We DO know that Michael Cohen has recordings he made of conversations with Trump that have never been made public and that will now be covered up never to be seen again under DOJ seal. We DO NOT know what was on those recordings or what else Trump was conspiring to do that was captured by those recordings.

    We DO know that Trump himself is (apparently) incapable of telling the truth – under oath or otherwise and that Mueller apparently was unwilling to push the issue to get his personal testimony – was Mueller prohibited from doing so because of Trump’s intimidation of Rosenstein or Barr’s personal fealty to Trump and subsequent order to Rosenstein/Mueller ? We DO know that Sessions & Rosenstein felt compelled to write memos villifying Comey that Trump then used as a hyped-up excuse to fire Comey (though Trump DID later expose the entire ‘fake memo’ charade to Lester Holt).

    Is all this proof of conspiring with Russia ? Not necessarily, but it IS evidence that a conspiracy WAS taking place during the primaries and Trump and the Trump Family were behind it. A conspiracy to distort the election and to make a mockery of our election system. A conspiracy that had Trump whining about the Electoral College (he now seems to be counting on for re-election) and whining about 1 man, 1 vote and a US “Democracy” where he feels that ONLY the popular vote should count. A conspiracy with the RNC to disregard their own bylaws and rig the convention to ignore or threaten or silence any delegate that was not a rabid Trump cultist. How much a part the Russian representative that Trump invited actually played in the abuse of the convention delegates is something no one is likely to prove at this late date given the denials and lies that are sure to come from those most responsible for the abuses.

  • mersey

    So this is what a “witch hunt” looks like? Interesting. As I said on the red site two years ago, if the “full” Mueller report exonerates Trump and family, I’ll accept the results and move on. But this report has nothing at all to do with what I think about Donald Trump. I was NeverTrump well before the Mueller investigation started, as was Susan and many others around here. The man is still an offensive cretin who should never be the president of the greatest country in the world. I hope enough people wake the hell up to make sure this man does not serve a second term as president. If re-elected, the shackles would be completely gone and he’d rule like the tyrant he truly wants to be.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Given AG Barr’S stated position on the Mueller report and Trump’s already demonstrated desire to cover up the results so they never become public, I doubt we’ll ever see the full report though. I fully expect that Barr is enough of a Trump boot-licker that he will bury the report to prevent it from becoming public — and he’ll get cover from both Trump and the Trump boot-lickers in the Senate that confirmed him.

    From what I’ve heard so far the report does not exonerate Trump. It only says Mueller did not (or was not allowed to) investigate far enough to determine whether there was clear evidence of guilt or not. It sounds like Mueller was told to shut down by Trump’s new AG “protector”.

    Lack of evidence is not proof of innocence. Especially when said lack of evidence is due to refusal to allow an investigation or actual refusal to investigate.

  • mersey

    I have no doubt that what you wrote will become a historic fact. If so, the man will never be exonerated to a large percentage of the American population. But in the real world, we’re just the peasants who have to live by American law and order, while the rich and influential like Trump and his family live with a different set of law and order.

    I don’t need the Mueller report to tell me that Trump and family are corrupt. I’m not stupid and can see that for myself.

    Watching Trump operate over the past 2 years plus, he and his goon squad of media clowns will be referring to Robert Mueller as a great American by the end of the week, if not sooner.

  • chemical

    Why do I have a strong feeling that this report is as much a victim of whitewash and premature termination (Mueller has the Grand Jury authority for several more months and has never even interviewed Trump or family members under oath)

    If Mueller requested an interview with either Trump or any of his family, their legal team would have taken the 5th. I mean, let’s face it. Trump can’t ever stop running his mouth, and any interview with Mueller likely would have wound up with Trump incriminating himself. Trump still has some attorneys that don’t want to stab him in the back, and it’s likely that they laid down 2 rules for talking to Bob Mueller:
    1. Do not talk to Bob Mueller.
    2. Do not talk to Bob Mueller.

  • chemical

    But in the real world, we’re just the peasants who have to live by American law and order, while the rich and influential like Trump and his family live with a different set of law and order.

    This is something that us liberals tend to go on about all the time, and if I didn’t know whose blog I was on right now and who I was talking to, I’d say you are a liberal based on this comment (please don’t take it as an insult). It’s just that it’s gotten to a point where no thinking person could possibly ignore it any longer. Frankly it’s reassuring that there are people out there that I disagree with politically, but still recognize the same facts I’m seeing.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    So when Mueller can find no evidence of collusion, is it because such evidence does not exist or because Trump’s lawyers won’t let Trump testify as he has offered to do ?

    … or is it because Trump had finally managed (via Barr) to terminate the “Russia thing”, thus freeing up Kushner & Trump to open their back-channels ? — I CERTAINLY hope the CIA is now monitoring the Russian contacts of Trump & Kushner to pick up any ‘backchannel’ collusion that Trump will now fee free to engage in.

  • chemical

    In my personal opinion, the Trump-Russia relationship is implicit, rather than explicit. As in, it’s not that Trump has drawn up a contract with the Russian government that says “You help me win and I’ll ease sanctions on you”, but rather Trump says something nice about Russia or Putin, and then Putin helps him out a bit.

    Thing is, Trump specifically asked for this. During the 2016 campaign he asked Russia to hack Clinton’s emails, and they did. Whether Trump was blowing smoke out his rear end or not is irrelevant, because Russia saw it as an invitation to form an implicit relationship with Trump. In a just world, Trump would have been hauled off the stage in handcuffs after that campaign rally.

    Mueller is a pro, but I think the law failed here. Mueller was likely searching for evidence for an explicit relationship and couldn’t find any, but at the same time knew he knew that he couldn’t prosecute anyone for the implicit relationship, which he laid out in detail in his report. And I’d wager that’s what Barr is trying to bury.

  • mersey

    No, I don’t consider myself liberal at all, even though I’ve been called that since the Republican Party has become the Party of Trump. There are some undeniable truths, and the fact that Donald Trump is an immoral imp of a man transcends the right and the left. Unfortunately there are a large percentage of those of the so-called right that protect immoral imps.

  • Ellen Elmore

    mersey, I completely agree with you that Trump should never be the president of the U.S.A. And you are right that if Trump is elected in 2020, he will then be able to rule the way he wants to rule now – as a tyrant, a king and a dictator. But the American public is still caught up in “at least he is not Hillary.” Hopefully by 2020 they will see that it is not enough to just be “not Hillary” and be qualified to run the country.

  • Michael Weyer

    At least you, Susan and others are sticking to your guns. Unlike Erik Erickson who seems to have figured “ah, I miss being accepted among Republicans” and now doing Hannity-level articles hailing Trump and slamming the evil left. A key reason I’m avoiding the Resurgent now (aside from Susan’s works).

  • mersey

    Ellen, I think we’re way past the “at least he is not Hillary” mantra from the Trumpers. These people actually like the way he acts and talks. As long as he’s “sticking it to the left” they have no problem with ignorance, petulance and corruption. Too many souls have been sold to this man. Many of us will be facing another election where we’ll be placing votes with people who have no chance of winning an election. So be it. My conscience will be clear.

  • mersey

    I don’t read The Resurgent anymore either. I know why people like Erik and Glenn Beck have changed religion. Like everything to do with Trump, it’s about money. Same thing happened at the red site. They’ve made their choice, now they can live with it. Mark my word, when the Democrats control the entire government again, and they will, Barack Obama will seem like a moderate. The progressive left will do the same thing to the Trump right that they are doing to the left now. I’m an old fashioned conservative. I want the right to win the hearts and minds of Americans with ideas and morals, not by shoving an agenda down the throats of a progressive.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    There also appear to be a lot on the left that are gleeful that at least SOME conservatives are choosing to stand on principle and are using those standing on principle to cover their own partisanship and hatred of all GOP / Trumpists.

    We need to be wary of them and call them out when we see them because they are definitely NOT part of “us”. They are STILL dyed-in-the-wool leftists that will turn on us the first time we disagree with them and that will attempt to insinuate self-serving comments to try to nudge the conversations toward exonerating Obama and Hillary while they applaud our dismay and disgust with Trump.

    They will act as if incriminating Trump exonerates Obama and/or Clinton and will attempt to claim that we cannot have one without the other. The clear truth is that BOTH were / are acting against the Constitution and against common decency and common sense as well as against the good of the people of the US and against their Oaths of Office.

    I believe this is why you are being called a liberal. To a Trumpist, anyone that does not shake their pom-poms and cheer wildly at his schoolyard rantings is a “liberal” while to the left, the very fact you claim conservative credentials (classic conservative – not the fake Trumpist kind), means that you are “in the tank” for Trump. Neither side can apply reason or moderation to their viewpoints which is the reason that I (and likely you and others here) have rejected both extremist ends of the spectrum for the true middle (and that is NOT the “middle” that the radical-left, socialist, Obama claimed to occupy).

    You speak of undeniable truth. I am fed up with the lies and propaganda and have decided to start standing on those truths, exposing both the left and the Trumpist right for the fools they are. In regards to “peasants”, I am more of a man than Trump is because I KNOW that man is not measured by what’s in his pants (anymore than a woman is measured by breast size or the size of her behind) and because I have the self-discipline to not make a public spectacle and general horses-patute of myself daily in public. I have principles that I stand for (unlike Trump OR Obama) but I only have one set of standards.

    Trump’s wealth is his only because of the lack of backbone in decades of NY prosecutors refusing to investigate and prosecute him for his numerous legal infractions that have resulted in his over 3000 court cases – some of them actually criminal….

    Standing on principle is why I enjoy Susan’s blog so much.

  • mersey

    Well said IllinoisPatriot. Most of us who are NeverTrump conservatives have been from the very beginning of Trump’s rampage through the Republican party. We were NeverTrump when the liberals were cheering on Donald Trump in early part of the primaries, thinking that he had no shot in hell of ever becoming president. We did our best to warn other conservatives about the road Trump was leading them down, but to no avail.

    Most of us around here have no political party and no power. But we do have the truth. As for the liberals, the only thing that we share is a dislike of Donald Trump. After that, we go our separate ways.

  • chemical

    For what it’s worth: As for myself, I dismissed Trump as a joke candidate, and mostly laughed at him during the 2016 GOP primary, because that’s what you do with clowns. Then he started winning primaries, and the joke no longer was funny anymore.

    I think we do share a little bit more than not liking Donald Trump. Although it’s likely that I’ll disagree with you on most government policies, I do sense some common virtues, such as justice and a respect for our democratic institutions, among you guys. And you stood for those principles, even when your political party abandoned them to worship the golden calf and kiss Trump’s ring. That’s still worth something to me. I don’t know if you intended to do this, but you traded your Trump cultist friends for at least one liberal atheist friend.

    We don’t get to go our separate ways after Trump leaves office. We’ll still share this country, and if we’re going to be neighbors, we should strive to be good ones.

    And one last thing: You’re the radicals now. If you refuse to treat religious and ethnic minorities with utter contempt, or refuse to support someone who will break the law to further your own political goals, that makes you the fringe conservative movement.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I disagree that the conservatives are the “fringe”. I think our numbers are WAY more than are indicated by the primarily far-left media would indicate or are willing to allow for.

    Just look at how many people have deserted (and continue to desert) the GOP. Then look at Pelosi and many Democrats in the HOR refusing to accept or even accomodate the AOC radicals in the (D) party. I believe (as is borne out in my own acquaintances) that most people in this country are neither radical enough to actually endorse AOC and her agenda, nor will they continue to vote for the (D) party should the (D) continue their slide to the left. I think Pelosi is aware that the (D) party is also shrinking as they move further left and the more conservative members of the (D) party abandon THEM as well.

    I short, I think both parties have moved too far to the extremes to maintain a dominate voting block or to be trusted to do what the country needs instead of what their personal ideologies dictate everyone must do.

    Perhaps this is the start a HUGE national backlash against the radicalism and extremism in BOTH parties, iit’s still to early to tell, but we ARE changing as a country. The Leftist/liberal/progressive priorities and ideologies are not only being discredited but the patches the (D)s keep throwing out to try to cover the cracks and crevices in their platform are becoming unsustainable – just as the GOP has been split by Trump after many years of being cracked by GOP alt-right and progressives.

    I think the bulk of voters can agree on most things and on most issues. Policies and issues the two extreme ends of the spectrum represented by the tow major parties will never admit to as the true problems to be solved because of special interests and special-interest funding by too many mega-donors and not enough reliance on leadership and character.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Thinking about the Mueller premature shutdown, the following has occurred to me:

    First, we must keep in mind that the DOJ apparently has a long-standing policy against indicting a sitting president.

    Second, we must realize that AG Barr is hostile to the Mueller probe and is looking for a way to reject it or its conclusions.

    Now, for the sake of argument, assume that Mueller HAS found evidence (either direct or circumstantial) that ties Trump into obstruction of justice or ties Trump to the Russian organizations that we now know were trying to influence the 2016 election in favor of Trump.

    Ask yourself this:

    If Mueller were to indict Trump, would that not be sufficient reason for Barr to reject his report for no other reason than violation of DOJ policy against indicting a sitting President ? If Barr were given a chance to reject Mueller’s report (given his historical views on the investigation in general), what would prevent him from taking advantage of the opportunity to please Tyrant Trump and reject the investigation results ?

    If Mueller were NOT to indict Trump, but to conclude that there IS evidence of collusion or obstruction, would not Barr argue that Mueller has not done his job by declaring guilt, but not having (or presenting) the evidence for indictment, which would then violate DOJ policy and be grounds to reject Mueller’s report ? Might Barr make the argument that it is not Mueller’s place to determine guilt of a sitting President because doing so amounts to an indictment in the court-of-public-opinion ?

    We know that the report did not assign guilt, and that there was apparently no “need” to depose Turmp. Does that mean that Trump’s testimony would have been superfluous to evidence that was already open-and-shut ?

    Was Mueller’s final recommendation not to indict or determine guilt (thereby paving the way for Trump/Barr to convene a media circus against him with no way for him to effectively fight back against their press-conference megaphones and self-serving alternate reality) a way to avoid having his last two years worth of work and multiple convictions getting overturned or thrown out on the technicality of a DOJ policy against indicting a sitting President ? Was it just a desire to avoid the cult-implementation of death threats and lawsuits for malicious prosecution by putting the onus on Congress and the AG to actually do their jobs and uphold the law ? Will Barr attempt to bury the report and make HIMSELF vulnerable to Obstruction of Justice charges from Congress or one or more State AGs ? Does Barr hold the same immunity from prosecution that Trump does ?

    Do you really think that (given the aftermath we’ve now seen) Trump and Barr would NOT have attempted to derail the report for technical reasons having nothing to do with the merits or the evidence ? (I do).

    Is there more to this story than is being told ? I think so.

    I think the timing of this premature shutdown (when Mueller still had not disposed of Corsi or Stone as witnesses and still had a subpoena out for an unidentified foreign owned company) coinciding with the confirmation of Barr and the resignation of Rosenstein is just too “convenient” for Trump who’s been trying to accomplish this for years and who many suspect nominated Barr for the sole purpose of shutting down the Mueller’ probe.

    I think it’s reasonable to assume from the evidence that Mueller was NOT yet done with his investigation, had more witnesses to interview and more documents to examine, but was prevented from doing so. Exactly what the reason or who the originator of the shutdown order was we may not know for some time, but Trump is the ONLY person with both the authority and the reason (incentive / motive) to shut down the probe.

    Is it possible that Mueller handed off his evidence to one ore more state AGs for followup ? Is it possible that Barr was a threat to the investigation in ways other than a direct order to shut down (monetary, new DOJ “policy” hinderances, political attacks, funneling (leaking) of status reports directly to Trump, etc) ?

    I think we see now why most of Mueller’s results were based on state laws. I think he is savvy enough to have recognized that Trump would not be able to resist the allure of brandishing his ‘pardon pen’ for any and all federal violations other than those of the most minor nature (make too serious a charge and the witness gets a pardon, thereby removing his incentive to cooperate with prosecutors).

    We already have Corsi threatening to sue Mueller, Stone likely to sue and Alan Dershowitz taking a victory lap. Trump has apparently been told to be on good behavior or risk virtually admitting to the world that he appointed Barr for the sole purpose of shutting down Mueller.

    From the above, you may rightly determine that I’m less concerned that Mueller failed to make an indictment or recommendation on indictment about Trump’s guilt than I am that Barr appears to be hiding the bulk of the report and providing a “summary” only that is NOT consistent with observed history, the known court filings or Trump’s patterns of behavior while NOT releasing the full report or the evidence referred to therein.

  • chemical

    Two things:
    1. I hope you’re right. I don’t think you are, but I hope you are.
    2. AOC is a lot less radical than you think she is. A few days ago I pointed out how the media doesn’t actually go into detail about proposed policies for politicians, regardless of political affiliation (media or politician). They mostly talk about political strategy, who has leverage over who and on what issues, etc. Do me a favor and actually read AOC’s proposed Green New Deal: Not the “news” regarding the policy. The actual policy. I don’t really care if you disagree with it or not, but you owe it to yourself to read what AOC is actually proposing, even if it’s just to argue more effectively against it.

    Obviously politicians propose a lot of bills all the time, and it’s impossible to keep up on everything that everyone is proposing. I try to make a habit out of reading all the major policies proposed — and the only way to get that without any spin on it is to read the policy straight.