Mueller Investigation

Elwood's comment about Africa on the upswing is an idea I've shared for a long time. China recognizes their resources & opportunities and is "investing" there which of course means trying to exploit the shit out of them. I don't think most African nations are falling for it. But yes the "dark continent" is the "dark horse" in a changing world. Obviously though there are so many nations & cultures there that are constantly opposing themselves and this does not work in the continent's favor.

Are they not all in jail now or facing jail?

Trumps innocent and that's great for America, but quite a few of his boys seem to be facing hard time as a result of these investigations are they not?

Mueller has been extremely careful in his choice of words over the course of all this nonsense.

Barr's memo quotes him directly: "“while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

That's an extremely... interesting... choice of words.

The easiest one to point to is campaign finance violations. He is named as an unindicted co-conspirator.

No it isn't.

All it means is that Mueller got his feelings hurt that Trump was slamming him every day but that slamming didn't raise to the level of an obstruction of justice charge being warranted.

Robert Mueller has more honour and integrity in his farts than the insane clown currently occupying the White House.

If you're unable to even concede the point about Mueller's character, I see no further reason to have a discussion.

What did Mueller's team leak?

Right. Keep kissing the ground he walks on.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entr...obert-mueller-and_us_5936a148e4b033940169cdc8

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/robert-mueller-botching-investigations-since-anthrax-attacks/

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/05/the-wrong-man/308019/

If what Mueller has done at the FBI and DOJ over his career makes him honorable and with integrity than Trump is a fucking angel worthy of having two halos above his head.

I think he does but you're the one quoting Pompeo as a reliable source without offering any corroborating evidence. I doubt you'd do that if the subject matter were otherwise.

To clarify, there isn't going to be an apology because Wikileaks did not release those details by mistake and in fact have defended their decision in that regard. Personally, I think that they were wrong. However, seizing on this as something that invalidates the entire body work of that organisation as you are is ridiculous - particularly as when challenged to show any actual harm done, you change the subject to something else.

We don't know since Wikileaks has a policy of protecting its sources. Even if there was Russian involvement at some level, there is quite a lot of difference between that state of affairs and one where Wikileaks knowingly works as a Russian agent. That must be shown to be the case, not just assumed because it suits one part of the political establishment that is interested in denigrating them.

A conversation or debate normally works by one person responding to the points brought up by the other. It isn't a coherent response to my highlighting the propganda campaign against Wikileaks pursued by the US to switch the point to whether it was the Russians who hacked the DNC.
Do you know how much money they've spent just on blackening the reputation of Wikileaks?

Utter nonsense. Those subject to abusive legal processes and wide-ranging slander will always need protection and defense.

You bought into the conspiracist nonsense. Here is you speculating the Trump is implementing Russian policy in Venezuela (despite doing the opposite of what Russia says it wants). Here is you calling him a puppet. Here you are specifically surmising a conspiracy between Trump, the Russians and Assange.
You might have been more introspective at the impending discreditation of much of that, but it seems not.

Yes, but you don't go far enough. Trump as POTUS is the result of literally decades of political pandering as a route to the office, of an ill-informed electorate who mostly vote based on which letter is after a candidate's name, and "lesser of two evils but NEVER vote for a third party" thinking.

So given what some of that says do you suspect Mueller of covering up for Donald trump like the Huffington post peice says he did for Bush/Chaney, or is he incompetent and missed the crimes and evidence like in the federalist?

What are you implying because it is not clear with the articles you have posted.

This entire thread is such a dumpster fire.

I'm implying that Mueller doesn't have as much honor and integrity as WAB and a lot of others think he has. That seemed pretty clear given what WAB posted.

Here is what I don't get. We know manafort gave all the polling and get out the vote data to tye Russians for swing states, that the Russians then targeted those swing states using the information Trump's campaign gave them, those states then had a sudden shift at the last second pushing Trump barely over the line. Yet we are supposed to believe THAT wasn't collusion?

It is worth noting that the only one claiming obstruction charges weren't warrented is Barr. A man Trump specifically put in the position in order to kill the investigation.

Barr and ROD ROSENSTEIN.

"After reviewing the Special Counsel's final report on these issues; consulting with Department officials, including the Office of Legal Counsel; and applying the principles of federal prosecution that guide our charging decisions, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and I have concluded that the evidence developed during the Special Counsel's investigation is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-Justice offense. Our determination was made without regard to, and is not based on, the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president."

You know the guy who hired Robert Mueller.

Are you now claiming Mueller is stupid? Because that's what you're implying here.

"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."

Yeah, but it makes a certain amount of sense. I can't imagine it would be easy to prove obstruction of justice in a criminal investigation in a court of law, when the investigation in question concludes that no crime was committed. It's happened (Martha Stewart), but it still gives Barr a lot of wiggle room.

Thanks, let's assume they could prove the campaign finance violation.

Slap on wrist? Big fine? Sentenced to an hour listening to Chuck Shumer?

Whatever cruel and inhuman punishment you might devise, don't you feel a bit silly calling President a "criminal" based on that?

And why would a larger beach be better?

So, unindicted, not convicted. Guilty until proven otherwise?

Pssst...he doesn't like him. Plus, the Prez is (gasp) white.

Also Trump did not interfere with Mueller. Mueller had all the resources he needed. No person was fired from Mueller's team by Trump. Trump's administration according to Mueller cooperated fully and gave Mueller everything it needed. Hell Trumps lawyer sat for 30 hours with Mueller. That's not the actions of a POTUS whose intent is to obstruct.

The only thing Trump did was shoot of his mouth everyday on Twitter about a witch hunt. It's not obstruction to complain that they are out to get you.

Martha Stewart on the other hand was convicted of obstruction of justice because she lied about her actions in the ImClone stock trading case.

To add to what I already said, those pushing the Russia-gate bullshit rather than focusing on Trumps harmful policies have handed Trump a fucking massive boon going into the 2020 election and bear much of the political responsibility for those policies being implemented.

No. Not Mueller. Comey maybe, but not Mueller.

Stay classy, CNN.

Dow Trembles after Mueller Report Shockingly Vindicates Trump

"Shockingly"

Not even Comey.

Firing Comey did not stop any investigation that was already taking place.

Trump's mistake with Comey was that he waited too long to fire him.

He should have fired him the moment he took the oath of office.

His first lines of his speech should have been, "Comey. Comey, if you can hear me you're fired!"

So for it to be obstruction of justice it has to successfully stop an investigation?

The most important takeaway from this is that Mueller didn't say the piss tape doesn't exist. There's still hope.