Special Counsel Mueller has submitted his report to Attorney General Barr

[Blackjack200]

I don’t get what’s ironic about this at all? That’s like saying we shouldn’t get upset if someone bombs us because we bomb other people all the time. Of course we should!

From a US standpoint it’s entirely irrelevant if we run influence operations in other countries because for the US the standard of judgment is ‘is this good for us’, not ‘is this hypocritical’. Same goes for every country.

We should be upset if someone bombs us, but we should also take that moment to consider our own violent behavior. I am amused by the folks who are Very Upset at Russia's behavior in 2016 but have no problem with what we're doing in Venezuela.

 

[brandonbull]

We should be upset if someone bombs us, but we should also take that moment to consider our own violent behavior. I am amused by the folks who are Very Upset at Russia's behavior in 2016 but have no problem with what we're doing in Venezuela.

What are we doing in Venezuela?

 

[PJFrylar]

If we do care, we should demand that members of the Obama administration and the Democratic party be investigated for their parts in the "Russian interference".

Mitch fucking McConnell. You fucking idiot...

 

[Blackjack200]

What are we doing in Venezuela?

Fuck off shithead.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I was referring to "not enough political teeth to take down Trump" [for a historic number of now-proven impeachable offenses, regardless of the Mueller report final summary]

That, in itself, is staggering--in the sense that it is absolutely pathetic for us to admit, much less accept.

Got it, but isn’t that the nature of white collar crime, and also why the 1% prefer to hide behind the curtain.

 

[Jhhnn]

If we do care, we should demand that members of the Obama administration and the Democratic party be investigated for their parts in the "Russian interference".

On the basis of what, exactly? Did the Russians do anything to benefit them?

 

[blankslate]

We should be upset if someone bombs us, but we should also take that moment to consider our own violent behavior. I am amused by the folks who are Very Upset at Russia's behavior in 2016 but have no problem with what we're doing in Venezuela.

Or what we did in the 90's to help Yeltsin who at the beginning of his campaign was sooooo far behind that he was definitely going to lose before we stepped in to help him...
People will bleat and mewl about "whataboutism" they need to eff off and realize context for what it is.

https://off-guardian.org/2018/02/19...d-yeltsin-win-the-1996-presidential-election/

https://ccisf.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/201612201405.pdf
^^^^^a .pdf upload of the scanned pages from the actual article.^^^^

Now Trump is definitely (in my opinion of course) guilty of fraud, theft, and emoluments violations sadly so much attention to collusion was given that barely any time was spent explaining to the viewers of these news shows how Trump is very likely guilty of the previously 3 mentioned crimes.

Some people put all of their eggs in one basket when the smarter strategy would have been to subtly remind people Trump is being investigated by Mueller while also spending time on how Trump is involved in emoluments violations and committed fraud (involving his payoff to Stormy Daniels) while he was President.

but if you take the nuance out of the story (and you have to considering the public's tendency to not pay much attention to news details) It looks like the major news programs just gave Trump a spiked baseball bat named Lucille with which to beat them over the head with.

Now it could be that Barr totally misrepresented Mueller's report, but if that was the case I'd think that Mueller would have come out to make a public statement correcting AG Barr by now.


*edited for glaring spelling/grammar errors*



__________________

 

[VRAMdemon]

It's worth noting that neither Leon Jaworski (Watergate Special Prosecutor) nor Ken Starr (White water) specifically recommended pursuing obstruction of justice charges, yet we know how that worked out for the respective presidents involved.

it is my understanding that both Leon Jaworski and Ken Starr had a preponderance of evidence for obstruction, but because the subject was the President of the United States, and further, that the Justice Department has a policy against indicting a sitting President, they decided that it was not their job to bring these indictments.

Both of them, Jaworski and Starr, decided that any action against the President was Congress' job, and so forwarded on all of the materials to the House and Senate Judiciary committees. Neither made a declaration about obstruction one way or another, but they listed the facts for and against in their reports. (It was after reviewing the Jaworski report that the House decided to file for impeachment of Nixon, listing "Obstruction of Justice" as one of the first charges.) It sounds like this is the playbook Mueller followed; he listed the facts for and against as well.

Barr, however, has upended this procedure and made the call regarding obstruction himself, but Barr has an established opinion that a sitting President cannot be charged with obstruction. And now the Justice Department is trying to dig in and not let Congress see the Mueller material. A further note: neither Jaworski nor Starr allowed the White House time to review the report before Congress.

This "Barr Report" appears to be little more than a fig leaf, written for an audience of one.

 

[VRAMdemon]

Trump is a proven cheat, liar and a coward.

So far, all the report has proven is that he's merely a useful idiot of the Russian empire, rather than an active agent.

Trump's behavior is almost even more inexplicable, given he brought all this on him with his mouth, rash decisions, and overall shady behavior.

I still want to know what exactly the Russians were up to, and still up to. The fact that we've lost focus on that is dangerous.

There doesn't have to be a crime to obstruct justice. If you prevent police from looking into a crime that does not exist, you are obstructing justice.

Making easily refuted lies up out of whole cloth is kind of this administrations thing. Anyone who trusts anyone within the Trump administration to tell the truth, particularly if the truth is directly opposed to what would benefit the party or Trump personally, has not been paying attention. I'm sure that Barr would just flat-out lie about the contents of the report if it suited the administration's purpose. That's the reason Trump hired him in the first place. It's not more absurd than DHS secretary Nielsen lying about separating families at the border or former press secretary Sean Spicer lying about Trumps inauguration crowds or any of the other by now close to 10,000 lies that have come directly from Trump himself.

Given that senate republicans have come out against releasing the report, and given how house republicans have whitewashed their investigations into Trumps inner circle. I'm left thinking that anything Barr says is just as suspect as anything anyone else in this administration says, and anyone taking it seriously has a serious problem assigning credibility to known serial liars.

 

[trenchfoot]

One wonders how much pressure it would take (or even if there is such a threshold) to get Barr to release the Mueller report in toto, besides the legit redactable content of course.

If Barr puts up what's considered to be undue resistance of the blatant kind, then it would show his true colors as being the Trump ally he was (due to his stance on presidential powers) suspected of being.

That would fit right in with how Trump has been obviously dodging and weaving what any person would consider to be legitimate questions about his relations with the Russians, the Saudi's, his underhanded business practices and really, his actual competency commensurate with the office he now holds.

 

[blankslate]

And now the Justice Department is trying to dig in and not let Congress see the Mueller material.

this is wrong except for legitimately secret and sensitive material that should be redacted (I don't see there being much except for involving ongoing investigations or personal information) it should be released as complete as possible.

I believe there is a FOIA request on the Mueller Report and I hope that the release is expedited because of the FOIA request.


_____________

 

[IronWing]

The press should not refer to the Barr Letter as the Mueller Report. It is bad reporting to do so.

 

[Blackjack200]

Now Trump is definitely (in my opinion of course) guilty of fraud, theft, and emoluments violations sadly so much attention to collusion was given that barely any time was spent explaining to the viewers of these news shows how Trump is very likely guilty of the previously 3 mentioned crimes.

Some people put all of their eggs in one basket when the smarter strategy would have been to subtly remind people Trump is being investigated by Mueller while also spending time on how Trump is involved in emoluments violations and committed fraud (involving his payoff to Stormy Daniels) while he was President.

I heard a theory that the Russia conspiracy was what the Democrats pushed so hard on because investigating other crimes or corruption would likely implicate them as well. Just speculation, but I think it makes a lot of sense.

 

[blankslate]

I heard a theory that the Russia conspiracy was what the Democrats pushed so hard on because investigating other crimes or corruption would likely implicate them as well. Just speculation, but I think it makes a lot of sense.

My thoughts were since Jonathan Allen and Arnie Parnes book "Shattered" details how a couple of Clinton advisors suggested that them damn Russkies helped Trump win could be a talking point...

The investigation was used to prevent anyone asking "What if any mistakes did the Clinton Campaign make? and how do we avoid the same mistakes in 2020?"
If the DNC and now the DCCC seriously asked those questions with genuine self-reflection I think today's Democratic Party would have more members truly and enthusiastically endorsing "medicare for all" (and not backtracking or faltering when pressed on what that means), less people being upset over candidates like AOC and others willing to primary "Establo-Bruh" dinosaurs in their party... among other things.



________________

 

[Bitek]

There doesn't have to be a crime to obstruct justice. If you prevent police from looking into a crime that does not exist, you are obstructing justice.

Making easily refuted lies up out of whole cloth is kind of this administrations thing. Anyone who trusts anyone within the Trump administration to tell the truth, particularly if the truth is directly opposed to what would benefit the party or Trump personally, has not been paying attention. I'm sure that Barr would just flat-out lie about the contents of the report if it suited the administration's purpose. That's the reason Trump hired him in the first place. It's not more absurd than DHS secretary Nielsen lying about separating families at the border or former press secretary Sean Spicer lying about Trumps inauguration crowds or any of the other by now close to 10,000 lies that have come directly from Trump himself.

Given that senate republicans have come out against releasing the report, and given how house republicans have whitewashed their investigations into Trumps inner circle. I'm left thinking that anything Barr says is just as suspect as anything anyone else in this administration says, and anyone taking it seriously has a serious problem assigning credibility to known serial liars.

If they don't release the whole report, it just fuels the idea of a cover up.

A memo from Trump's hand picked guy just saying:

"On the subject of Russian interference: xxxxx no xxxxxx, xxxxx xxx... [c]ollusion xxxx xxxx. Trump xxxx no xxx xxx... Obstruction xxxx maybe xxxx.

Yadadada, he's totally cleared and vindicated."

Is not acceptable.

 

[Blackjack200]

If the DNC and now the DCCC seriously asked those questions with genuine self-reflection I think today's Democratic Party would have more members truly and enthusiastically endorsing "medicare for all" (and not backtracking or faltering when pressed on what that means), less people being upset over candidates like AOC and others willing to primary "Establo-Bruh" dinosaurs in their party... among other things.

I think the issue with M4A is not self reflection, it's the industries and millions of lobbying dollars arrayed against it. It's IMO the most visible and obvious case of the corruption of democracy by industry. M4A has 70% support, Republicans should be falling over themselves to support it if it was a question of politics.

 

[dank69]

Thinking about this a little further, why was it the 1% the Russians might have swayed that made the difference? How many changed their minds by Comey's little "she's not a criminal just stupid" speech? How many changed their minds when they found out the DNC was working against Bernie? How many votes did Hillary give up by ignoring a few key states? What about the deplorable's comment? Or that little oops when she got the debate questions in advance? I think that cost her a few swing votes as well.

Why is it that none of those things enter the equation? If Hillary and the DNC had done a better job those few votes the Russians may have influenced wouldn't have mattered at all. That election was Hillary's to lose, and by golly, she pulled it off.

Interesting post. You see, The DNC did not work "against Bernie." The famous deplorables comment was specifically directed at misogynists, racists and xenophobes, and I would think you would agree that misogynists, racists and xenophobes are deplorable. And how many people realize that little "oops" was unsolicited by anyone in Hillary's campaign? Do you realize it?

Millions of Americans still think the DNC conspired against Bernie, think Hillary called all Trump voters deplorables, and have no idea that the "oops" was the work of one person not tied to Hillary's campaign at all and gave her no advantage. Do you know why millions of Americans think these things? Because Russians flooded social media with this misinformation. I mean, you are a smart guy, right? If you can fall for this misinformation campaign, what chance does the average American have?

 

[dank69]

I heard a theory that the Russia conspiracy was what the Democrats pushed so hard on because investigating other crimes or corruption would likely implicate them as well. Just speculation, but I think it makes a lot of sense.

Democrats did not start the investigation, nor did they set the rules for the Special Counsel when it was given the authority to take over the investigation.

 

[Jhhnn]

I heard a theory that the Russia conspiracy was what the Democrats pushed so hard on because investigating other crimes or corruption would likely implicate them as well. Just speculation, but I think it makes a lot of sense.

Which sounds like something Trump & his Russian friends want you to believe.

 

[Jhhnn]

Barr's argument is perfectly circular. We can't prove conspiracy because of likely obstruction and we can't prove obstruction w/o having a conspiracy.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Which sounds like something Trump & his Russian friends want you to believe.

This raises to mind the matter of the Steele dossier.

As I understand the history of it -- and I can be corrected -- the Republicans first employed Steele to investigate Trump before their primary. Then the DNC or related entities subsidized him. Steele had been a British intelligence operative for MI6 until 2009, and ran the Russia desk for MI6.

Now the argument of the GOP -- put forward by people like Graham-Cracker, Jordan and others -- is that somehow the dossier is tainted because the Democrats contracted for it. Here, their underlying assumption is that the Democrats simply asked Steele to concoct a fiction. But if I were to run a campaign and gathered opposition research, would I not want to know the Truth of any "dirt" that could be found on a candidate? What better propaganda to spin about the opposition than a propaganda of absolutely True dirt?

They jump to this other hole in the sieve of possibilities because they themselves engage in that sort of nonsense -- Black or Grey propaganda. Numerous instances can be cited over the last decade or more. "Let's create a fiction, sell it as the truth, and see if it sticks."

Enough of the Steele dossier has been confirmed by corroborating sources that the former hole in the sieve of possibilities proves out. The Democrats simply wanted to know the Truth about Trump, and hired an intelligence veteran to continue what he'd already started on behalf of pre-primary GOP.

As a footnote to that, it would seem that the GOP establishment before the primary would have been interested in the Truth about Trump. After the primary, they'd have an incentive to spin falsehood. But not before the primary. That sort of research is an internal matter -- to find out how Trump might make the party vulnerable.

 

[pmv]

I don't disagree with you at all, and would never claim we don't do it all the time. I'm just comfortable with that hypocrisy. I'm OK saying that it's ok when we get influence others in our interest, and not ok when others influence us against our interests. There are certainly limits to what I would be comfortable with (assassination of foreign leaders, for example), and I don't pretend it's an ethically ambiguous position to hold.

The world is a dirty place and I don't mind playing in the mud to a degree, when it serves us.

But I don't agree there is just one single 'national interest'.

The US's actions with regard to post-USSR Russia, particularly with regard to Yeltsin, led pretty directly to the advent of Putin and Putinism. It was under Yelltsin that the Russian system that gives Putin so much power took shape. I'm not convinced that has really worked out for the benefit of all Americans.

Plus I just feel the Russian connection has been a bit overblown, and distracts from more important things behind Trumpery. In terms of standard-of-living Russia ranks below almost every EU country. It's closer to Brazil in rankings of world power than to the old USSR. I can't take it seriously as some sinister global puppet-master.

But the connection is worth uncovering just for the sake of the truth and filling in the historical record, sure. I just think the conservative gloating about this not bringing down Trump is in it's own way misplaced because it was never going to do that. And even if it did it wouldn't change much.

Seems a more important aim might be to fix the broken electoral system, for one thing.

 

[1prophet]

Trump is a proven cheat, liar and a coward.

So far, all the report has proven is that he's merely a useful idiot of the Russian empire, rather than an active agent.

Trump's behavior is almost even more inexplicable, given he brought all this on him with his mouth, rash decisions, and overall shady behavior.

I still want to know what exactly the Russians were up to, and still up to. The fact that we've lost focus on that is dangerous.

The same thing they have always been up to since the cold war

Social media along with a greed is good, shallow selfish impatient soundbite generation that prefers an echo chamber safe space, not looking for solutions but fingers to point at that has declining morals right up there with the Roman Empire,

just makes it that much easier for the Russians, just like the race to the bottom, cheaper is better made it easier for the Chinese to use American corporate greed along with consumerism to their advantage.

 

[Fern]

I’m not aware of a single member of Congress calling for the public release of the report including grand jury deliberations or classified information. When people say the ‘full report’ it should be understood as ‘the full report minus things that would be illegal to include’.

While there are undoubtedly some aspects of the counterintelligence investigation that are classified the investigation of obstruction of justice should be basically entirely unclassified. Anyone want to bet Trump fights releasing that tooth and nail?

Well, be aware now. While we were trading posts on this yesterday Democratic House members were doing for exactly that: Calling for a "full", complete and unredacted copy of the Mueller report:

Here's the text: https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/democrats.judiciary.house.gov/files/documents/2019-03-25 Letter to AG Barr Re Special Counsel.pdf

I am unable to copy and paste from it so it'll have to read by those interested

That’s okay, second it hits more than one or two house members it will be leaked

That's right.

Fern

 

[Blackjack200]

Democrats did not start the investigation, nor did they set the rules for the Special Counsel when it was given the authority to take over the investigation.

Democrats didn't make Russian collusion their central argument for impeachment/prosecution?

They didn't do this despite many skeptics that pointed to a lack of evidence of collusion and the long odds that there was any kind of quid pro quo between the Russian government and the Trump campaign?

They didn't ignore much more compelling evidence of Israeli election interference?