I am satisfied with Robert Mueller’s report, and I trust the conclusions therein. He is thorough, intelligent and has hawk-like instincts. He knows the law like the back of his hand. I believe that, as in the Casey Anthony case, or in the case of O.J. Simpson, there was insufficient evidence to make a conviction.
Mueller was supposed to decide if Donald Trump could be charged with Obstruction of Justice—or, if not chargeable, whether he should be referred to Congress for impeachment for Obstruction of Justice. But AG Barr usurped Mueller’s job and decided to make that decision himself. Wreaks of more Trumpesque corruption.
Barr was selected by Donald Trump himself upon Trump’s reading of documents written by Barr and sent to Trump allies that said Trump COULD NOT be charged with Obstruction of Justice. So in not forcing Mueller to make the decision his appointment obligated him to make, Barr was able to exercise technicalities and, in effect, TEMPORARILY saved Trump.
Rod Rosenstein, a witness in the Obstruction of Justice investigation against Trump, appears to have helped Barr—who had already put his position on Obstruction in writing prior to his nomination—in usurping Mueller’s obligation to make a decision on that question.
Obstruction of Justice is an impeachable offense, and therefore we now have a witness in a case and a man who made his views known on the case before he had any evidence on it—and who got his job because of his view on the question—saving Trump from impeachment for that.
On “collusion,” investigative reporters and independent journalists just spent years gathering evidence on a very specific allegation of collusion: that for his own enrichment, Trump traded away our foreign policy on Russian sanctions at a time he knew Russia was attacking us.
We are now being told that Mueller never investigated the collusion allegation Trump was facing—on a money-for-sanctions-relief quid pro quo—and instead investigated the allegation as Trump saw it, which was whether he struck an agreement with the IRA or Russian hackers.
For two years, as Trump’s team defined the collusion allegation against him falsely—saying he’d been accused of striking a secret accord with the Internet Research Agency and/or Russian hackers before-the-fact—his critics shrugged and said, “Yeah, we’re not looking at that.”
On this collusion allegation no one was even making against Trump, the Special Counsel didn’t find “no evidence”, he actually only found that he didn’t have the 90%+ proof of that form of collusion required for prosecution. Please re-read that if it didn’t sink in the first time. Bob Mueller did NOT say that he didn’t find evidence against Trump. Trump has ALREADY….within hours of the findings, lied about that…as Trump tends to do about virtually everything.
Any person researching and reporting on collusion—will know that we did not accuse Trump of striking a secret deal with the IRA or Russian hackers before-the-fact, and that “collusion” has never been about that.
So we alleged Obstruction—and people ineligible to make a decision on that issue made the decision. We alleged collusive activity—and it appears the activity we alleged was never investigated. That is how critics of Trump should be seeing what has just happened. That….but they won’t. Trump’s admiration for the uneducated will definitely play to his advantage today. They will get the “vindication” message out there for him, even though he has not been vindicated.
What will happen now is that Trump will say that Mueller found no Obstruction—false, because Mueller made no conclusion on that (though he was supposed to). Trump will then say that Mueller found no collusion, and that will be wrong on two separate and distinct grounds.
The first way in which Trump’s coming statement will be wrong on collusion is that the collusion he was actually accused of wasn’t fully investigated—or perhaps not investigated at all. The second issue is, Mueller failed to exonerate Trump as to any collusion.
American discourse surrounding Mueller’s investigation is at this moment in dire danger—because most in the media do not understand that a proper Obstruction finding was never made, and that a full collusion investigation was never conducted.
Since the Obstruction determination was not made by Mueller—and was improperly made by Barr and Rosenstein—it now falls to Congress to review the underlying evidence and, if House Judiciary finds it appropriate, initiate impeachment proceedings.
Trump’s collusion with Russia continues to be properly investigated—not in the narrow way Trump demanded and apparently Mueller’s team acceded to—in multiple other federal jurisdictions; 2) the inability to indict on the investigated collusion is not an inability to impeach….but I don’t see him being impeached. I DO see him going to prison after the Southern District is finished with him, but he will be out of office by then.
Like everyone else, I also note that if Mueller felt that DJT should be exonerated, he would have stated that implicitly. He would have made a specific declaration of exoneration.
I first understood that there was no evidence Trump colluded via secret agreement with the IRA or Russian hackers, so now, of course, I want to know why Mueller said he wasn’t able to “exonerate” Trump on that allegation. Trump is clearly still in deep, deep dodo.
As to the collusion allegations never investigated—as opposed to the ones Trump self-servingly himself raised only because he knew he wasn’t guilty of those I tell my gentle readers not to be discouraged. There are now 19 federal jurisdictions working on Trump probes that will resolve that issue.
Some of those jurisdictions are Congressional, and many working on cases involving people never interviewed by the SCO face-to-face—Trump, Trump Jr., Prince, Ivanka, and so many others—In other words, this is merely thebeginning of the real collusion investigation.
On Obstruction, once Congress gets all Mueller’s hard evidence, they should either proceed with impeachment or wait for other federal prosecutors to finish their collusion investigations. Think about it. If the public evidence made a prima face case—it did—so did Mueller.
I ask people to distribute this post. Misinformation spreads fast—the nation already misunderstands what happened today, as media wrongly uses terms like “exoneration,” “vindication,” and “collusion.”
Mueller did NOT vindicate nor exonerate Donald J. Trump. He, in fact, took the very unusual step of stating implicitly that the report does NOT exonerate DJT. These types of reports usually do not make statements of that nature.
Trump is NOT exonerated, even though Trump, of course, has already lied about that within minutes of the announcement of the findings. (He did that as I was typing this.)
As I stated previously, Mueller was clever to hand off all those findings/cases (19!!!) to the Southern District when he did. Those cases are serious, pending and will conclude this issue one way or the other. Whatever they conclude, good or bad, I will support it.
The hand of justice works slowly. Based on Mueller’s strong message of no exoneration, I conclude with this thought: Casey Anthony is now remarried and has another child, but she can’t really show her face in public, because everyone KNOWS she did it. OJ? Washed up. Forever.
I understand that some of my friends here feel differently and will interpret the results of this case as evidence of DJT’s innocence and feel that this is a time to rejoice. I’d probably do the same thing if I got all my information from Fox and Breitbart. (chuckle) Innet, Fluffy?