Muller Report on Trump and Russia finished and submitted

[EnglishALT]

Special counsel Robert Mueller on Friday wrapped up his nearly two-year investigation into Donald Trump and Russia and sent his report to Attorney General William Barr.

No details of Mueller's findings have been released, but Barr said he may be able to brief congressional leaders on the report as soon as this weekend.

"I am reviewing this report and anticipate that I may be in a position to advise you of the Special Counsel's principal conclusions as soon as this weekend," Barr wrote in a letter on Friday to a group of lawmakers on the House and Senate judiciary committees.

Barr also concluded in his letter that Mueller's investigation — relentlessly attacked as improper and a "witch hunt" by Trump — was conducted properly. Barr noted that he was required to inform congressional leaders if Mueller had done anything "inappropriate or unwarranted."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...ds-report-trump-investigation-ag-barr-n974006

Now it will be up to the Attorney General to decide how much to release, and when to brief Congress, who in turn will decide how much to brief the American public. Important things to note is that there are no more indictments or sealed indictments, meaning Trump Jr, Trump, and Kushner, will not be indicted by Muller.

The timing is also some what significant, it was submitted on a Friday at 5 PM, on the weekend of one of the biggest sporting events of the year, March Madness. The "Friday Night News Dump" is infamous in Washington, where a story is released on Friday where it can be lost in the weekend news cycle when the public is not paying attention is released.

 

[TailsMK4]

The whole thing was a waste of time and money from the beginning, but we may as well just officially close it out...so the socialists and liberals can begin MORE investigations at the taxpayer's expense in search of something that doesn't exist, instead of spending the effort to actually fix the problems with the country, which is what Trump wants to do. Meanwhile, Clinton's case about her mishandled emails has been reopened in a sense, although I don't know when an official investigation will take place. Turns out there was enough evidence to put her on trial, but the departments didn't want to do it. Interesting stuff.

 

[Grey Wind]

The whole thing was a waste of time and money from the beginning

There were 34 indictments.

 

[EnglishALT]

There were 34 indictments.

None for collusion though, which is at the heart of the whole thing, you can give a special prosecutor free reign over any administration for two years and you will get indictments for things that have nothing to do with it's original purpose.

 

[Nah]

Hopefully Barr will have the sense to publicly release the investigation report, we've all been waiting quite a while now to see the conclusion of this.

 

[EnglishALT]

Hopefully Barr will have the sense to publicly release the investigation report, we've all been waiting quite a while now to see the conclusion of this.

I don't think you have to worry either way, there will be leaks either way especially when it gets reported to Congress. There is too much each side has riding on this to not leak it if the Attorney General tries to quiet it.

 

[Nah]

The whole thing was a waste of time and money from the beginning, but we may as well just officially close it out...so the socialists and liberals can begin MORE investigations at the taxpayer's expense in search of something that doesn't exist, instead of spending the effort to actually fix the problems with the country, which is what Trump wants to do.

I think that you're letting your political alignments and preconceptions color your view of this a little too much. I'm sure that if the investigation was about a Democratic president you'd be singing a much different tune.

Regardless of who won the presidency, whether it was Trump or Clinton or Sanders or my neighbor's cat, this investigation is something that needed to be done. Is there any reason at this time to doubt that the Russian government attempted to influence the 2016 presidential election? If not, it's important that the American people know whether or not the person who became the President of the United States and/or their campaign staff knowingly worked with a foreign nation to screw with our democratic process and twist things in their favor. An investigation into the matter of one nation interfering with another's major elections is not what I'd call a waste.

 

[Frequency]

An investigation into the matter of one nation interfering with another's major elections is not what I'd call a waste.

Especially when it's been hinted at countless amounts of times, even before mans got elected.

 

[EnglishALT]

Especially when it's been hinted at countless amounts of times, even before mans got elected.

By the same token however it was also pushed heavily as the prevailing reason Clinton lost by her camp in the days following the election and has not stopped since. In a way that does set a dangerous precedent that the losing party can push for an investigation to delegitimize a presidency and basically tie it up for the next three years.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.wash...ssian-collusion-myth-was-hatched-team-hillar/

 

[Frequency]

By the same token however it was also pushed heavily as the prevailing reason Clinton lost by her camp in the days following the election and has not stopped since. In a way that does set a dangerous precedent that the losing party can push heavily for an investigation to delegitime a presidency and basically tie it up for the next three years.[/url]

Yeah...

I won't sit and act like it isn't VERY strange that Hilary pointed the fingers where she pointed them after the election...but you gotta blame somebody when "someone who shouldn't have won the election did, in fact, win the election".

I kinda want to read that book the article mentioned. Feel like seeing the perspective provided in that book would be nice.

 

[Maedar]

I quote from Mr. Barr's letter to the heads of the Senate and House of Representatives Judiciary:

In addition to this notification, the Special Counsel regulations require that I provide you with "a description and explanation of instances (if any) in which the Attorney General" or acting Attorney General "concluded that a proposed action by a Special Counsel was so inappropriate or unwarranted under established Departmental practices that it should not be pursued." 28 C.F.R. 600.9(a)(3). There were no such instances during the Special Counsel's investigation.

To summarize, he admits the investigation was NOT "inappropriate" or "unwarranted", a frequent accusation made by Trump's base.

Continuing:

Separately, I intend to consult with Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and Special Counsel Mueller to determine what other information from the report can be released to Congress and the public consistent with the law, including the Special Counsel regulations, and the Department's long-standing practices and policies. I remain committed to as much transparency as possible, and I will keep you informed as to the status of my review.

Not a bad idea, IMOHO. And best of all:

Finally, the Special Counsel regulations provide that "the Attorney General may determine that public release of" this notification "would be in the public interest." I have so determined, and I will disclose this letter to the public after delivering it to you.

I should point out that I in no way trust Barr, but at very least, he seems, unlike his boss, willing to act professional. Hopefully, we will soon see what's in this thing.

Edit: More:

https://www.rawstory.com/2019/03/tr...eport-fox-news/?utm_source=push_notifications

 

[TailsMK4]

Is there any reason at this time to doubt that the Russian government attempted to influence the 2016 presidential election? If not, it's important that the American people know whether or not the person who became the President of the United States and/or their campaign staff knowingly worked with a foreign nation to screw with our democratic process and twist things in their favor. An investigation into the matter of one nation interfering with another's major elections is not what I'd call a waste.

Oh, I don't doubt at all that Russia tried to influence the election, as the US is guilty of that by trying to elect certain leaders in other countries. You heard the reports of multiple social media accounts being closed because of seemingly Russian influence? Pretty standard stuff now, I'd say.

My problem is the whole reason this investigation took place. They did the investigation BECAUSE Clinton lost, DESPITE not having any actual evidence to begin the investigation in the first place. They were thinking of doing the investigation even if Trump had lost, but maybe wouldn't because they were certain that Clinton was going to win. I would definitely be singing a different tune if it wasn't clear to me that the Democrat party is acting like a bunch of sore losers.

It's very hard for me now to take Democrats at their word, and for that reason, most of the liberal social media. I used to believe that the liberal viewpoint was a different and fresh approach to issues to be considered and mixed in with conservative approaches, but I am anti-socialist and that's where the Democrat party is headed. As long as the Democrats continue to go down this path and gain more control, I am 100% certain the country will become a third-world country. They only went after Trump because he is an outsider to their ideals and is actually trying to put independent-thinking people in the WH instead of furthering their agenda. I didn't even vote for Trump in the Republican primary (I was Ted Cruz instead), but while there are certain aspects of Trump I don't care for, I do very much approve of what he's done so far.

 

[Maedar]

Tails, can you even define "socialism"?

Please, at least try before you start ranting about some socialist liberal media conspiracy, cause it's getting old.

 

[TailsMK4]

Socialism is the idea of having the central government regulate most of a country's resources, whether it be through social or economic programs (while they can be maintained by private groups, they do have to be approved by the government first). There's actually different types of socialism, so not one definition will fit them all. Regardless of which socialism is being discussed, the issue I have with it even though on paper it sounds like it should be a good thing: it doesn't work. Why that is the case is beyond the scope of this thread (and a google search on it would yield more examples than I can name anyway), so I'll just end it with a link to someone significant in history that had something to say about socialism.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/other-peoples-money/

 

[gimmepie]

Snip

What does it matter what the motivations were when so much legitimate evidence of illegal dealings with the Russians has already come out publicly at this point - let alone whatever Mueller has dug up. It is literal fact that Don Jr. had that meeting and that he was making a deal to obtain information against the Clinton Campaign. It is literal fact that several other members of Trump's campaign have also been proven and indicted/convicted of having dealings with the Russians in a similar manner.

Whatever motivations Clinton/the Democrats may have, this isn't some baseless lashing out or outright lying (you know, unlike what Trump does routinely). There is hard evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with a foreign nation to try and subvert American democracy to suit their own ends. Whatever way this report goes, that is undeniable.

I think it says a lot about your biases that you're more concerned with the Democrats being "sore losers" than you are about the fairly high likelihood that the President and/or his staff were actively (or even inadvertently tbh) working in the interests of a foreign nation that the US has a decades long history of political tension with.

Edit: Also worth noting that Thatcher was loathed by many and her policy played a big part in that. Not that discussions of socialism have any real place in this thread.

 

[EnglishALT]

What does it matter what the motivations were when so much legitimate evidence of illegal dealings with the Russians has already come out publicly at this point - let alone whatever Mueller has dug up. It is literal fact that Don Jr. had that meeting and that he was making a deal to obtain information against the Clinton Campaign. It is literal fact that several other members of Trump's campaign have also been proven and indicted/convicted of having dealings with the Russians in a similar manner.

Whatever motivations Clinton/the Democrats may have, this isn't some baseless lashing out or outright lying (you know, unlike what Trump does routinely). There is hard evidence that the Trump campaign colluded with a foreign nation to try and subvert American democracy to suit their own ends. Whatever way this report goes, that is undeniable.

If that is such an undeniable fact as you put it Why has there not been one single inditement for such a thing? Why was nothing found by the Senate investigation into it?

For an investigation that lasted over two years and cost millions of dollars there is not one iota of evidence of collusion. That is a fact.

 

[gimmepie]

If that is such an undeniable fact as you put it Why has there not been one single inditement for such a thing? Why was nothing found by the Senate investigation into it?

For an investigation that lasted over two years and cost millions of dollars there is not one iota of evidence of collusion. That is a fact.

I guess that meeting that we all know happened, that has been openly admitted to, was just in my imagination then. Same with all those trials and convictions for Trump's associates.

 

[EnglishALT]

I guess that meeting that we all know happened, that has been openly admitted to, was just in my imagination then.

The Trump tower meeting in which they were promised incriminating information of which they did not receive, and a meeting that looks like it was a set up by the Clinton campaign to intrap the Trump camapaign.

https://www.realclearinvestigations..._meeting_looks_increasingly_like_a_setup.html

If the Trump Tower meeting was such easy proof of collusion there would have been inditements for such.

Same with all those trials and convictions for Trump's associates.

Please show me the trial and conviction for collusion to win the 2016 election in Trump's favor.

 

[gimmepie]

Snip

For starters, the 34 individuals that were subjects in the report include people of which several are Russian nationals or representatives of Russian businesses and several Trump aides who had extensive contact with Russian officials. The charges not being officially labelled "collusion" does not change the fact that this flat out fits the definition of the word.

Then there's Patten who was working for Ukraine, who are basically Russia.

Cohen wasn't working with Russia, but does further evidence that the Trump campaign was shady as all hell.

There was one or two other people who showed up in court too I'm pretty sure but I can't remember their names which is proving problematic. I'll get back to you on them if/when I can find more out.

I'll have to check out that meeting more as well since I haven't gone through your thing yet but quite frankly, even if it was a setup (which would be inexcusable), they still showed total willingness to collude with Russia and attempted to do so.

 

[EnglishALT]

For starters, the 34 individuals that were subjects in the report include people of which several are Russian nationals or representatives of Russian businesses and several Trump aides who had extensive contact with Russian officials. The charges not being officially labelled "collusion" does not change the fact that this flat out fits the definition of the word.

No they do not fit the definition of the word, Trump aides may have had "extensive contact" with Russian officials, but if none of them were about winning the 2016 elections then they were not collusion, furthermore not all 34 individuals that were subject to the report had anything to do with Russia.

Then there's Patten who was working for Ukraine, who are basically Russia.

Again no evidence of collusion.

Cohen wasn't working with Russia, but does further evidence that the Trump campaign was shady as all hell.

Cohen who admitted there was no evidence of collusion.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybe...ng-high-drama-and-almost-nothing-new-n2542331

I'll have to check out that meeting more as well since I haven't gone through your thing yet but quite frankly, even if it was a setup (which would be inexcusable), they still showed total willingness to collude with Russia and attempted to do so.

There was evidence to potentially take information if provided, however in the end the meeting provided no evidence, was turned into a discussion about Russian adoption, and in the end, ended with no collusion.