Mueller: No Russian Collusion

The summary of the findings of the Special Counsel is out and, as predicted, it has found no Russian collusion. It declined to make a finding on obstruction and left the matter to the Congress and the public. Frankly, the latter finding seems a bit curious. There is a criminal code on the elements of this crime and we did not wait for two years for Meuller to say “meh.” Attorney General Bill Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein however did look at the evidence and concluded that the evidence does not amount to obstruction.

As I have written for two years, there never was a compelling case for a collusion crime. There has been a type of collective willful blindness to the glaring factual and legal flaws in criminal theories despite assurances from many legal analysts. While obstruction was stronger due to Trump self-defeating actions, there never was a serious case to be made for actual prosecution. Unfortunately, trying to offer objective analysis was often denounced as carrying the water for Trump or even the Russians. The result has been a national delusion over collusion.

Here is the summary: Barr summary


Dear Chairman Graham, Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Feinstein, and Ranking Member Collins:

As a supplement to the notification provided on Friday, March 22, 2019, I am writing today to advise you of the principal conclusions reached by Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III and to inform you about the status of my initial review of the report he has prepared.

The Special Counsel’s Report

On Friday, the Special Counsel submitted to me a “confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions” he has reached, as required by 28 C.F.R. 600.8(c). This report is entitled “Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election.” Although my review is ongoing, I believe that it is in the public interest to describe the report and to summarize the principal conclusions reached by the Special Counsel and the results of his investigation.

The report explains that the Special Counsel and his staff thoroughly investigated allegations that members of the presidential campaign of Donald J. Trump, and others associated with it, conspired with the Russian government in its efforts to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, or sought to obstruct the related federal investigations. In the report, the Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.

The Special Counsel obtained a number of indictments and convictions of individuals and entities in connection with his investigation, all of which have been publicly disclosed. During the course of his investigation, the Special Counsel also referred several matters to other offices for further action. The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public. Below, I summarize the principal conclusions laid out in the Special Counsel’s report.

Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. The Special Counsel’s report is divided into two parts. The first describes the results of the Special Counsel’s investigation into Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation was whether any Americans — including individuals associated with the Trump campaign — joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. 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 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

(Footnote 1: In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the Special Counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign “coordinated” with Russian election interference activities. The Special Counsel defined “coordination” as an “agreement — tacit or express — between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.”)

The Special Counsel’s investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

The second element involved the Russian government’s efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons associated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for the purposes of influencing the election. 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.

Obstruction of Justice. The report’s second part addresses a number of actions by the President — most of which have been the subject of public reporting — that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards regarding prosecution and conviction but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion — one way or the other — as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel’s report states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

The Special Counsel’s decision to describe the facts of his obstruction investigation without reaching any legal conclusions leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct described in the report constitutes a crime. Over the course of the investigation, the Special Counsel’s office engaged in discussions with certain Department officials regarding many of the legal and factual matters at issue in the Special Counsel’s obstruction investigation. 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.

(Footnote 2: See A Sitting President’s Amenability to Indictment and Criminal Prosecution, 24 Op. O.L.C, 222 (2000).)

In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding. In cataloguing the President’s actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that, in our judgment, constitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent, each of which, under the Department’s principles of federal prosecution guiding charging decisions, would need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to establish an obstruction-of-justice offense.

Status of the Department’s Review

The relevant regulations contemplate that the Special Counsel’s report will be a “confidential report” to the Attorney General. See Office of Special Counsel, 64 Fed. Reg. 27,038, 37,040-41 (July 9, 1999). As I have previously stated, however, I am mindful of the public interest in this matter. For that reason, my goal and intent is to release as much of the Special Counsel’s report as I can consistent with applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.

Based on my discussions with the Special Counsel and my initial review, it is apparent that the report contains material that is or could be subject to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(e), which imposes restrictions on the use and disclosure of information relating to “matter[s] occurring before [a] grand jury.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 6(e)(2)(B). Rule 6(e) generally limits disclosure of certain grand jury information in a criminal investigation and prosecution. Id. Disclosure of 6(e) material beyond the strict limits set forth in the rule is a crime in certain circumstances. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. 401(3). This restriction protects the integrity of grand jury proceedings and ensures that the unique and invaluable investigative powers of a grand jury are used strictly for their intended criminal justice function.

Given these restrictions, the schedule for processing the report depends in part on how quickly the Department can identify the 6(e) material that by law cannot be made public. I have requested the assistance of the Special Counsel in identifying all 6(e) information contained in the report as quickly as possible. Separately, I also must identify any information that could impact other ongoing matters, including those that the Special Counsel has referred to other offices. As soon as that process is complete, I will be in a position to move forward expeditiously in determining what can be released in light of applicable law, regulations, and Departmental policies.


As I observed in my initial notification, the Special Counsel regulations provide that “the Attorney General may determine that public release of” notifications to your respective Committees “would be in the public interest.” 28 C.F.R. 600.9(c). I have so determined, and I will disclose the letter to the public after delivering it to you.


William P. Barr

Attorney General


358 thoughts on “Mueller: No Russian Collusion”

  1. The Democrat party’s ongoing effort to silence Hillary critics has lead to this mess. There has been groupthink in the Dem party and it reveals itself here every day.

    Glenn says:

    “Just three weeks ago – three weeks ago – former CIA Director and now NBC News analyst John Brennan confidently predicted that Mueller was just weeks if not days away from arresting members “of the Trump family” on charges of conspiring with the Russians as his final act. Just watch the deceitful, propagandistic trash that MSNBC in particular fed to their viewers for two straight years, all while essentially banning any dissenters or skeptics of the narrative they peddled to the great profit of the network and its stars:”



    During an appearance with Israeli Prime Minister at the White House early Monday afternoon, Trump was asked by a reporter: “Do you think Robert Mueller acted honorably?”

    “Yes, he did,” Trump replied, before walking out of the Diplomatic Reception Room with without answering further questions about the Mueller report.

    Edited from: “Mueller Report Fallout: Trump, Russia, Others React To Barr Summary”


    For 2 years, Trump has attacked the Mueller Probe as a “witch hunt” and “fake news”. During this period Trump routinely humiliated former AG Jeff Sessions for recusing himself when the probe was first formed. Trump also abused Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein on a frequent basis along with the FBI. The term “deep state conspiracy” was used so often that Trumpers came to believe it was an accepted truth.

    Now, after 2 years of malicious attacks on the Justice Department, Trump feels ‘exonerated’ and half-heartedly admits that Mueller ‘acted honorably’. Yet White House Spokeswoman Sarah Sanders has called on various Democrats to apologize for past statements regarding Trump. This raises an interesting question:

    Will Trump be apologizing to all the parties he has insulted during the past 2 years?


      For over two years the country has been embroiled in a fantassy created by the left’s department of dirty tricks. During this time many things were neglected, American policy was hindered and Americans hurt. Trump is moving on. Not the left. They go directly to the sewers where all of this crap was being washed away and swallow it once again only to regurgitate it where ever they can.

      Peter is a proponent of that type of nonsense. He can’t even read alternate opinions without playing the game of character assassination.

        1. Fishtails, in this blog we have only been dealing with the complaints against Trump having to do with his campaign and Russian involvement in the elections. SDNY was not an issue. You have been making all sorts of comments about Trump’s campaign and Russian collusion. The Mueller report shows that you were wrong and have no credibility. You admit to your lack of credibility by refusing to list facts to back up your contentions. Now that the Mueller Report that you knew would prove Trump guilty is in and does not provide a shred of evidence of guilt with regard to Russian collusion so you now want to change the subject. There is no end to such arrogant stupidity.

      1. Allan: 1. Does Trump lie? 2. Were there multiple contacts between Trump’s campaign and Trump, Jr. and Russians? 3. Was Trump still working a Moscow hotel deal even after getting the nomination? 4. Did Trump claim he didn’t know any Russians, which was a total lie?; 5. Did Russians interfere with the 2016 election, or are all of the American intelligence agencies simply wrong?; 6. Did the Trump campaign provide polling information on key precincts to Russians, who then used this information in a targeted social media campaign to smear Hillary Clinton; 7. Were Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager, and Cohen, his attorney, convicted of lying? 8. Did Barr write a white paper setting forth his criticism of the Special Counsel, after which he was nominated to replace Jeff Sessions? 9. Was Sessions fired for complying with the Rules for Professional Conduct? 10. Did Barr refuse to recuse himself despite criticizing the Special Counsel’s investigation and his anti-presidential indictment beliefs? The letter released on Sunday was BARR’S SUMMARY of the Special Counsel’s findings, not the Special Counsel’s findings.

        You and the other Trumpsters are the ones living in a fantasy world.

        1. “Allan: 1. Does Trump lie”

          Natacha to some extent we all lie. Does he make mistakes? Yes. Does he sometimes over exagerate? Yes, but that is quite common. However in his favor he made campaign promises and he has kept to them better than any recent President. If you wish to list 5 significant lies go ahead and we can discuss them. Obama made some very significant and intentional lies. I didn’t generally bother accusing him of lying but debated the significant issues surrounding what I thought was not true. I don’t think you have the ability to do that, do you?

          “2. Were there multiple contacts between Trump’s campaign and Trump, Jr. and Russians?”

          Contact is meaningless. I have contact with all sorts of people of different ethnicities and some of them might even be crooks. The issue is how those contacts are being used. Are you able to discuss that? I don’t think so.

          “3. Was Trump still working a Moscow hotel deal even after getting the nomination? ”

          I don’t know. We all have non serious discussions while we explore the world around us. In any event nothing done was illegal or even abnormal for a person who is involved in a business like Trump’s. I’m not sure what exact dealing Trump had after the nomination. Do you the exact particulars and do you have proof? I don’t think so.

          “4. Did Trump claim he didn’t know any Russians, which was a total lie?)

          Provide the in context quote, a source and the date making sure to include more than the one sentence you see interested in. I don’t think you will.

          “5. Did Russians interfere with the 2016 election, or are all of the American intelligence agencies simply wrong?”

          Absolutely, but Obama said something else until Trump was elected. Don’t you believe all governments spy on each other and might interfere with foreign elections. Obama certainly did.

          I think that is enough answers for now since we all know that your knowledge base is very thin and you can’t hold a two way discussion for more than an instant or two. After you handle the first five we can go to the next five. You are demonstrating a firm grasp of what happened nor a firm grasp of national or international affairs.

    2. The concern was that Mueller would pull a Comey. Comey abused his office to protect the Democrat candidate, lied, and claimed federal law required intent to commit espionage. He also failed to investigate her for pay to play. Many people worried that Mueller would do something similar, and lie about the law. Trump probably is expressing his gratitude that Mueller didn’t make anything up, as Comey did. It is chilling to consider the weaponization of government agencies against conservatives, and alleged soft coup attempts.

      We want justice and the truth, regardless of whether it benefits or harms Republicans or Democrats. If Trump was a Russian spy, we’d all want to know it. He’s not. He was the victim of a conspiracy between Hillary Clinton, the DNC, DOJ, FBI, and Russia in order to defraud voters.

      I am grateful that it appears that such wrongdoing will finally be investigated.

  3. Lisa Page to Peter Strzok, “POTUS (Obama) wants to know everything we’re doing.”

    Lisa Page to Congress, “The texts mean what the texts say.”

    “Mueller Exonerates President Trump”

    Now America can “move on” to the true crime, the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious scandal in American political history, the Obama Coup D’etat in America.

    The co-conspirators in the Obama Coup D’etat in America are:

    Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Kadzic, Yates, Baker,

    Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud,

    Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan, Clapper, Lerner,

    Farkas, Power, Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Sessions, Obama et al.

  4. NO ONE IN AMERICA GETS EXONERATED (A must read for those that do not understand our system of justice.)

    Nota Bene: No One in America Gets Exonerated
    Editorial of The New York Sun | March 25, 2019
    Why is it that when a jury acquits someone of a crime, it uses the phrase “not guilty” — rather than, say, “innocent”? The answer is fundamental to the understanding of due process in America. It’s central to understanding where the burden lies. It is the key to understanding the report of Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigation of President Trump and his camarilla. It’s central to understanding where the burden lies.

    “While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” Attorney General Barr quotes Mr. Mueller as writing. This is being met with excitement among the Democrats. Speaker Pelosi suggests that Congress needs urgently to look at the full Mueller report because “on a charge as serious as obstruction” the report fails to exonerate the president.

    Yet of course Mr. Mueller failed to exonerate the president. No one can exonerate him. Nor would anyone, in a normal — or abnormal — criminal case, ever be expected to exonerate a person who has been accused or is merely suspected. Neither, though, is it necessary for President Trump, or anyone else in this case, to be “exonerated.” That’s because, in America, the burden is solely on the prosecution.

    It is our principle that no man, no woman, no child, no matter their circumstances, no person suspected, or accused, of a crime can be required to prove his innocence. No matter the crime, no one needs to prove his innocence. He is presumed innocent. The burden of proof is solely, one hundred percent, completely, entirely — and without exception, even if the president is involved — on the accuser.

    Forgive the redundancies above, but we just seek to nail that point. It is an essence of due process in America. On top of it is the additional fact that President Trump was never, in the formal, judicial sense, accused of a crime. What just happened in respect of Mr. Trump is that the special prosecutor couldn’t even adduce enough evidence to make an accusation.

    It’s hard, sadly, to imagine that this is going to satisfy the Democrats. They demanded a special prosecutor in the first place. In disbelief at that same Special Prosecutor’s failure to levy charges, the Democrats are going frantically to seek Mr. Mueller’s full report, including underlying documents and testimony. They are going to go through all that madly in hopes of finding something Mr. Mueller overlooked.

    They are going to attack the integrity of Attorney General Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and, conceivably, Mr. Mueller himself. They are going to drive themselves clinically crazy over the Special Prosecutor’s statement that he did not exonerate the President of America of obstruction — when neither the Special Prosecutor nor anyone else ever had to hoist that burden in the first place.

    1. We’re all presumed innocent in the eyes of the law. That’s the default position not something we have to prove. “Not guilty” reaffirms that presumption. Basic civics known to everyone but the NYT.

      1. Nobody has deprived Trump of his presumption of innocence. There’s a bloody regulation that says that Trump cannot be indicted. In the absence of a sodding indictment of Trump, the presumption of innocence cannot possibly be a bloody issue. You hysterical and incoherent affirmative action male privilege castration anxiety eunuchs, you.

        1. L4D calling others “hysterical” and “incoherent”. 😉😊😃😄😂
          This just gets better and better.

    2. Alan: The New York Sun is a legacy newspaper that first went out of business 70 years ago. It then made a brief, 21st Century comeback before disappearing again during the Great Recession. Here’s what Wikipedia has to say:

      “The New York Sun was an American daily newspaper published in Manhattan from 2002 to 2008. It debuted on April 16, 2002, adopting the name, motto, and masthead of the earlier New York paper, The Sun (1833–1950). It became the first general-interest broadsheet newspaper to be started in New York City in several decades. Its op-ed page became a prominent platform in the country for conservative viewpoints. Since 2009 The Sun has operated as an online-only publisher of political and economic opinion pieces, as well as occasional arts content”.

      So, in other words, Alan reads ghost newspapers to find opinions that match his decidedly old fashion viewpoints.

      1. What a fool you have to be Peter to judge things based on your ideological claims rather than the intellect of the people that write articles. The Sun, today only on the Internet, happens to have some of the best editorials written by people that are well known and write for other publications including books. The high quality of their writing doesn’t necessarily have the attraction of low quality work.

        One has to take note of the stupidity of making claims that are meaningless. Tell us how the substance of the editorial is wrong. You can’t because what was said is true and well written. You love half baked ideas from the Washington Post that most of the columnists from the Sun could totally destroy in a few sentences.

        Start looking for content Peter Shill and stop relying on character assassination.

        1. It is circular logic. If Peter will only believe Democrat media, and Democrat media refuse to investigate Democrat wrongdoing, or report the news on Trump in an unbiased manner, then Peter will never read anything contrary to his own belief system. He will never stretch his opinions, or have to defend them.

          If a propaganda machine doesn’t print the truth, some may never know or even seek the truth. The conditioning is that deep.

          1. Karen, when I respond to Peter I don’t expect him to admit truths or change his opinions. Those opinions are locked solid in concrete.

      2. Peter – are you saying that Democrats will now lay the matter to rest, then, and investigate the wrongdoing by Hillary Clinton, Comey, et al?

        You know, follow the thread of known Russia collusion by the perpetrators, rather than the victim?

        Trump did not collude with Russia. He complained about the investigation as improper, and I agree, because they did not investigate the known perpetrators. Mueller spoke to everyone he needed to, and got every document he needed.

        Trump did not hide an illegal, secret server in his bathroom in order to withhold evidence and evade the records act. He didn’t upload top secret information to the Cloud. He didn’t grant access to top secret information to people with zero clearance or even a basic background check. He didn’t use Bleach Bit to wipe the hidden server he’d lied about clean while under subpoena. He didn’t smash his and his staff’s laptops and Blackberries with hammers to destroy evidence. And he didn’t allow top secret information to illegally end up on an unsecured laptop in the hands of a convicted sexual pervert with no clearance.

        THAT, Peter, is obstruction and criminal activity.

        Mueller had access to everything that he needed. Trump just complained bitterly about it the entire time, just as I have harped on the injustice of only investigating Trump while ignoring the known perpetrator.

        Why did Russia pay a lot higher than Bill’s usual speaking fee while the Uranium One Deal was going down? Why did they donate $145 million to the Clinton Foundation? Why did donations to the Clinton Foundation fall dramatically after she lost the election? What did foreign entities think they were buying?

        We need to investigate whether Comey refused to property investigate the Democratic Presidential candidate, because the only valid conclusion of her illegal activity would have made her forfeit the race, and guaranteed Trump, whom he loathed, would win. Hillary Clinton broke many federal laws, which I can lay out under separate post. Intent is not a requirement, which is why a sailor was dishonorably discharged and jailed for sending a selfie inside a nuclear sub.

        1. Karen, you are so gullible. How do you know that Mueller had complete, truthful information, and why would you be willing to believe this is the case, given that Trump is a liar?. His campaign manager is a convicted liar. HIs attorney is a convicted liar. Everyone associated with Trump lies: Sarah Sanders, Kellyanne Conway. Everyone associated with Trump is a proven liar, so why would anyone believe that Mueller had all of the evidence that could exist on the question of the extent to which Trump cooperated with Russians to “win the victory”? Trump cheats on everything, including his wives. Do you really believe that his cohorts wouldn’t dump e-mails, shred documents or lie for him? Mueller couldn’t force Russians to come here to testify, and any other witnesses would be associated with Trump and therefore under his control. How stupid do you have to be to believe that Trump is a victim? Did you miss the phrase that he was not exonerated? You do know, don’t you, that the letter was BARR’s summary of a much longer report. Barr was appointed to replace Sessions because Sessions complied with the ethics rules for lawyers, something Trump couldn’t tolerate.

          Trump lied when he said he didn’t know any Russians. His campaign manager was working with Russians. His attorney was working the Trump Moscow hotel deal, even during the campaign. These are facts.

          Why do you continue to obsess over Hillary Clinton? Is it because Hannity, et al constantly harp about her as a cover for all the misdeeds of Trump?

          1. “How do you know that Mueller had complete, truthful information, and why would you be willing to believe this is the case, given that Trump is a liar?.”

            1. Because the investigation never hinged upon anyone’s word, let alone Trump. No investigation would hinge on perpetrators admitting they did it. That’s absurd.
            2. There has been no allegation made that Mueller was denied access to anyone or anything. For instance, if a server was wiped clean with Bleach Bit, or phones and laptops smashed with hammers. Instead, we have heard about Mueller investigating person after person, as well as various process crimes, and a couple of cases of tax evasion from long ago. In addition, we know that due to an improper FISA warrant, obtained through Democrat opposition research, the conversations of Trump and his associates were not only recorded, and listened to, but unlawfully unmasked. Why do you assume that Mueller lacked access to information?
            3. Why do I obsess over Hillary Clinton? Because it was a high crime for the FBI to protect her from being charged with multiple felonies, because they supported the Democrat party. Because she sold 1/5 of our Uranium to Russia. Because she got away with pay to play. Because of her, I believe there is no equal justice in America. That wrong has not been righted…yet.
            4. Trump did not expect to win the Presidency. Why would either he, or Russia, spend billions of dollars to make someone into a Manchurian candidate whom no one expected to win?
            5. Cohen is an established liar, already guilty of lying to Congress. In that we agree. His testimony is poisoned fruit. You admit he’s a liar, but then base accusations upon what a proven liar said, in order to allegedly get leniency for his wife. You cannot have it both ways. There is no way the investigation could suddenly make Cohen discover integrity.
            6. After the Russian reset, politicians and businessmen did plenty of business in Russia. Worrying about Russia was so 80s. Trump signed a letter of intent regarding interest in building hotels in Russia. This project was put on hold until the election, w which the world anticipated he would lose. What good would it do Russia to cultivate an asset who was expected to be a failed Presidential candidate with low popularity numbers? What would Russia gain in investing billions? That’s more than they invested in Hillary Clinton when she was SOS. When Trump won the Presidency, he did not build any hotel in Russia, although he likely would have if he had lost. It is also impossible for anyone, including you, to say they don’t know any Russian spies. Someone with a midwestern accent could be a Russian spy. An economics professor could be a Russian spy, or at least an asset, funneling information back to the Russian think tank undermining capitalism and promoting Socialism. Trump might think he doesn’t know any Russian spies or handlers, but he’d have no idea. Nor would Hillary Clinton know if the Rosatom deal with Uranium One was promoted by FSB. The Democrats have been claiming for years that Trump was working with the Russians, which would have required incredible foresight and years long planning on the part of Russia. He has denied this ad infinitum. An exhaustive report found no evidence of collusion, and it’s not enough. He’ll be denying this into old age. Let’s call it what it is – another soft coup attempt by Democrats refusing to accept the result of a lawful election. Abolishing the elector college would be another effort to win by any means possible.

            1. Facts still don’t faze you, because you are a true disciple. You have absolutely NO IDEA what evidence Mueller obtained, much less the veracity or completeness of same. We DO know that Trump is a liar, he tried to derail the investigation and that his attorney and campaign manager are both convicted liars. We do know he was working a deal with Russia and lied about this. We do know that multiple Russians were indicted, but that they can’t be forced to come to the U.S. to testify, and that just leaves us with Trump and his associates. Nevertheless, you are convinced that Mueller developed enough evidence to somehow prove Fatty’s innocence, because YOU WANT TO BELIEVE.

              The “improper FISA warrant” line comes straight from Faux News. We already know you are a true disciple and faithfully watch. The warrants were not improper, despite what Hannity says.

              You keep repeating the lie you heard on Faux News that Hillary herself sold weapons-grade uranium. That is simply another lie. 9 different U.S. agencies signed off on the sale, and it was not weapons-grade uranium. Hillary was thoroughly investigated by the FBI, and was found not to have committed any crime, but you just can’t let it go. Hannity can’t let it go. It’s a pivot to deflect away from all of Trump’s failures as a person and president. Facts don’t faze you. You are a true believer.

              The “soft-coup” verbiage is another Hannity-ism. More lies. You speak of winning by any possible means. How about Trump lying about Obama being born in Kenya, and that he would produce proof of same*, all of the lies about Hillary Clinton, Russians manipulating social media in a few key precincts in a few key states, and “winning” despite losing the popular vote?

              What about Trump bragging about fondling women without consent, praising White Supremacists, cheating on his wife with a porn star and nude model, and then paying them off and lying about it? How about caging young children and lying about this, and paying privateer political supporters $750 per day to incarcerate migrants seeking asylum? What about the historic deficit due to tax cuts for the super-wealthy, the trade deficit made worse by the Trump tariffs, no replacement for Obamacare, and the biggest whopper of all: “Mexico will pay for the wall”? Facts don’t faze you. You are a true believer. Dumb, gullible true believers like you are the biggest threat this country has.

              *Interview with Meredith Vieira: “I have people down there investigating him, and you won’t believe what they’re finding out.” Yeah, you’re right. We wouldn’t believe it. He never produced their findings.

                1. Low estimate of the number of words L4B will write in her columns here
                  between now and Nov. 2020.

                2. “+1,000,000”

                  When people print too much sh-t even the compliments have to become inflated.

                  I think Greshams Law in economics (Bad money drives out good) applies in some way to the complements we are seeing.

  5. Yes, it’s been tough these past 2 years. The cold, the blizzard, loneliness in the wilderness. It’s time to do a deal with Russia.

    1. interesting they translate the word patroushka for comrade, I think that means cheesecake. My Russian friends use the word tovarishch for comrade.

  6. 500 plus pages from Mueller, 4 from Barr, I’ll wait till the other 500 pages are read.

    1. So you’ve got the new spin, spinning in your head, Fishy? It goes something like… “This Mueller report is the end…OF THE BEGINNING….of Phase 2” !!! That’s right, Fishy….. But wait! There’s more!

      This gem from L4D lays out the ‘new’ media/Dem spin/talking point very well:

      “The one and only person in the United States who can’t be indicted for anything ordering an investigation of the people who didn’t, because they couldn’t, indict Trump.”

      Because you know Fishy, you just know it…..that the really really baaad stuff is coming….it’s coming….it’s there….not much longer….sooon…..the “get Trump phase 2” is now activated….the leakers will be leaking report details soon….stay tuned….;)

      1. Don’t blame FishWings for L4D’s comments. Gin up some courage and go mano y virago with L4D, TBob.

        1. Good point L4D….but first….I must ask if you will join me in a toast….to “Robert Swan Mueller the Third…He who will not be deterred…”

          Will you join me? We’re toasting today with an especially delicious cocktail called a “Russian Kahlusian” …’s made with Kahlua and a good Russian Vodka over ice…. 😉

        2. PS….you said to “Gin up”…. but I prefer to Vodka up…and toast to your Saviour of American Democracy Robert Swan Mueller the Third He Who Will Not Be Deterred…

          Ooooh so lame….right L4D? served up just for you, my friend….;)

          1. Get your courage however you like, TBob. No matter what, the lame part comes later. Much later.

            1. Oh we can get lame right now, L4D, why put off till tomorrow what you can do today?

              L4D said, “Gin up some courage and go mano y virago with L4D…”

              Did you know that Fishwife is another word for “Virago”? FishWings, FishWife….Hmmm…. 😉

              a coarse-mannered woman who is prone to shouting.
              “the screech of a fishwife”

    2. “I’ll wait till the other 500 pages are read.”

      Note, Fishtails will wait until it is read by someone else. Mommy still reads him his bedtime stories.

      1. Wrong again, blowhard. FishWings alludes to the improbability that AG Barr had read all 500 pages of Mueller’s report in between Friday afternoon and Sunday morning before Barr wrote his 4 page summary of Mueller’s report. IOW, Barr’s summary is a perfunctory presentation of a foregone conclusion that has little to do with anything that Mueller actually wrote.

        1. Good point L4D….and have you considered this: How many weeks has AG Barr been on the job? Two weeks? And he just reeled in Mueller’s never-ending ever-expanding two and a half year investigation in search of a crime….and brought it to a close. I’d say AG Barr is off to a pretty good start in his new job.

          1. He’s a real go-getter, TBob. And Barr has pulled this routine before. Coincidence?

            Did you know that Barr’s audition memo for Trump’s AG argued that the president couldn’t obstruct justice because the statute for obstruction of justice didn’t specifically mention the president one way or another?

            Did you also know that the murder statute does not specifically mention the president one way or another?

            On the odd chance that you seriously think that AG Barr is a seminal intellect, consider the high praise that Turley has heaped atop Barr’s head and then seriously reconsider your prior consideration of Barr’s intellect. Pshaw!

            Did I forget to mention Pshaw? O bother. Pshaw!

        2. Diane, I didn’t talk about what anyone else read or didn’t read. I talked only about Fishtails, “Fishtails will wait until it is read by someone else. Mommy still reads him his bedtime stories.”

          1. There’s really no need for Fishwings, or anyone else, to read an additional 500 or whatever pages, or to read the Mueller report, or even Barr’s brief summary of the Mueller report.
            We have L4D here to give an objective, accurate summary 😉😊😄 and interpretation of all of these, so why waste time on all that unnecessary reading?

    3. I’ll wait till the other 500 pages are read.

      That’s hilarious! You think AG Barr is going to get away with drafting a summary of the report that is inconsistent with Mueller’s findings?

      Here’s a nugget for you to reflect on:

      The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation was whether any Americans — including individuals associated with the Trump campaign — joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime.

      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 U.S. presidential election.

      That’s right, Mueller was looking for any Americans and those associated with the Trump campaign. However Barr’s summary reflects the latter group has been cleared. Hmm, why didn’t he state no Americans as well? Is it because Mueller did find Americans had conspired or coordinated efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election, just not on Trump’s side of the ledger?

      You’re welcome.

      1. I know a little cabal of Americans who paid Russian spies for false information about the Republican candidate, released it just before the election in order to defraud voters, and then gave it to a political activist, who withheld the opposition research source, used it to improperly get a FISA warrant, and then leaked the details to the media.

        I do wonder if Hillary Clinton would have gotten the popular vote if Comey had applied the law and not misused his position to exonerate alleged felonious activity. I guess she would have been arrested just before the election, and perhaps her VP would have taken over?

        It could have been a new season of Orange is the New Black, the Pantsuit Spinoff.

        The abuse of government power to target Trump and protect Hillary Clinton (and Obama) was breathtaking. I particularly enjoyed how Obama lied and said he never knew she had a private illegal server, all while he used other email addresses to contact her on her illegal private server.

        Does the law apply equally, or not?

        1. No it does not! And, Yes the media lies….and continues to tell us what a liar Trump is…while they continuously and completely ignored the major big huge whopper lies that Obama and his administration told for years…Obama was a liar…a big liar…one might even say a pathological liar…he blatantly lied about who he was and what he order to get elected….and then he told big lies in office….and yet all of the big consequential blatant policy lies told by Obama were all but completely ignored by much of the media….BUT now the mostly inconsequential lies told by Trump are blown up and given daily tallies and counts including visual displays of gumballs in jars plastered all over CNN….Trump lies and lies we are told….yes lots of lies….8,974 lies told by Trump…to date…see here all these gumballs in jars….yes…THIS IS CNN….Fake News Media….Trump has exposed them….and Obama is now living the lifestyles of the rich and famous hanging with his rich and famous friends….courtesy of the American taxpayers….in other words: you didn’t build that billionaire lifestyle you now enjoy Mr. Obama…

          1. Sorry….got on a roll there….but to sum up…if you want to see what an actual pathological liar with a God complex looks like…two words: Barack Obama.

      1. your remedy for your complaints is voting in 2020. sorry to disappoint you in the meantime.

      2. Peter, what was released demonstrates Trump was not involved in any Russian collusion. The article from the Sun explains to those without much of an education how our judicial system perceives guilt and innocence. You ought to read the Sun op-ed again so you better understand what you are talking about.

        1. Wrong again, blowhard. What Mueller said was that [paraphrase] the investigation did not establish that the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government to interfere in the 2016 election. The key words are Russian government and election interference by the Russian government. Mueller’s statement is narrowly tailored exactly to fit the scope of his appointment authorization. Your statement goes well beyond the narrow conclusion that Mueller was allowed to draw.

          1. So Mueller concludes that he did not establish conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the “Russian government”.
            If that’s what Mueller stated in his report, it’d be interesting to compare the supposed “non-Russian governmental conspiracy” in the Trump campaign case, with the conspiracy involving the Russians in Steele Russian Dossier Project.

          2. I’d recommend that anyone interested read Rosenstein’s mandate to Mueller.
            He obviously was not restricted to draw ‘a narrow conclusion”: to the directives from Rosenstein we’re, in fact, quite broad-based re the areas Mueller could investigate.
            And obviously nothing prohibited Mueller from drawing conclusions about the results of his investigation.
            If in fact Mueller had been restricted to ONLY drawing conclusions about direct, ilkegal involvement of the Trump campaign with the “Russian government”, we would not have seen all of these indictments and convictions on matters totally unrelated to a Trump campaign/ Russia conspiracy.
            Also, if one now decides to claim that Mueller could only draw conclusions about illegal coordination between the Trump campaign and the “Russian government”, why we he pass on charging illegal cooridination of Trump campaign individuals with Russian individuals?
            He did not feel restricted to go after targets whose offenses had nothing to do with the campaign, so why would Mueller then inconsistently decide that he could not prosecute individual Trump campaign members guilty of illegally conspiring with “Russians” ( as opposed to the “Russian government” itself.
            If somebody wants to insist that individuals associated with the Trump campaign illegally conspired with Russian on matters related to the 2016 campaign, and that was Mueller’s actual conclusion, where are the indictments for that offense?

            1. “why would he pass”, not why we he pass;
              There are numerous typos…Everytime I scroll up to proofread a comment, the entire comment disappears.
              So I have to review it only after it’s posted.

            2. What Comey told Congress the FBI was investigating before Comey was fired:

              1.The Russian government’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 election
              2.The nature of any links between individuals associated with the Trump campaign and the Russian government
              3.Whether there was any coordination between the campaign and Russia’s efforts

              What Rosenstein authorized Mueller to investigate just nine days after Comey was fired:

              •any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and . . . [stay tuned for the bit about obstruction]

            3. And now for the conclusion of the previous sentence:

              •any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and

              •any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation;

              •any other matters with the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).

          3. Diane, you can remain with your awkward understanding of our government and the law. No one can help you because you create facts to suit your purposes.

            Trump did not collude with the Russians though it appears some Democrats did while others attempted to change the results of a legal election. You can stew all you want about the results.

            1. A common error – probably purposeful misinformation from their handlers – is thinking the charge was with “Russian” collusion. It was specifically and more seriously “Russian government” collusion. It is established by our intelligence agencies and the FBI that Russia interfered in our 2016 election with one purpose being to elect Trump. Given that, and the animosity between Putin and Hillary dating back to her time as SOS, along with the fact that the author of the “dossier” was the trusted – by us – ex head of the MI6 Russia desk (Steele) , it is unlikely that the Russian government attempted to aid anyone but Trump, unless they were clever enough to fool Steele. He’d be among the last we would think could be fooled by them, but, hey, anything is possible. That still leaves unanswered the fact that we know the Russian govt. wanted Trump to win and Hillary was Putin’s mortal enemy.

              1. “A common error ”

                Anon, this demonstrates your naivete and/ or your absolute submission to the leftist talking points.

                The Steele Document was phony on its face and likely was the sole criteria that permitted the FISA court to provide the FBI with the powers granted. The Steele Dossier was created by the Hillary campaign.

                Putin did what has been done for ages but didn’t affect the vote count. The Obama administration didn’t consider Russian intervention in our election to be significant. Russian collusion was later used as a mechanism of infiltrating the core of the Trump campaign and all the Russian attempts to do so appear be by the FBI not Russians.

                Your analysis of how Putin thinks and why he would be aiding the Trump campaign is totally faulty and based on your imagination.

              2. That still leaves unanswered the fact that we know the Russian govt. wanted Trump to win and Hillary was Putin’s mortal enemy.

                I fully expect foreign governments to have opinions as to who they would prefer elected POTUS. I also expect foreign governments to do anything and everything imaginable to get the outcome they prefer. The United States has a long history of doing the same thing.

                What the Mueller investigation has exposed however is the lengths and depths entities within our own government, within our own political parties, within our own media and within our own academia will go to achieve the outcome they prefer.

                So what should we really learn from this debacle? The greatest threat to our national security is not foreign, but domestic. And if you don’t see this as a problem, then at best you are an unwitting co-conspirator with that threat. At worst, you know what your are doing, which makes you an enemy of the state.

                1. So, you’re saying Comey’s unloading on Hillary weeks before the election while protecting Trump from the same revelations (under FBI investigation) was a conspiracy to achieve an “outcome they prefer”?

                  1. Good for you. See how easy that was to shift your focus from the known foreign threat to the unknown domestic threat? Now all you need to do is to continue pulling that thread, ask objective questions, and be willing to challenge your beliefs.

      3. P. Hill — I’ll answer your question….you know who didn’t lie about Russian Collusion? Hint: it was NOT the Lefty media (they lied), NOT the Democrats (they lied), NOT Adam Schiff for Brains (still lying), NOT Comey, Brennan, Clapper, McCabe (they lied), NOT Rachel “Follow Me Down the Russia Russia Russia!!! Conspiracy Rabbit Hole” Maddow (she’s been lying and spreading propaganda for years now, and has actually distinguished herself as being MORE of a Conspiracy Peddler than say, Alex Jones…kudos to Rachel for that achievement)….etc….etc….etc….

        So who did NOT lie about Russian Collusion? That would be Trump. So, yes, I’ll take Trump’s word for it.

          1. For sure….there were some who pushed back…like Greenwald, Taibbi, Katrina VandenHeuvel…and others….but their voices of reason were drowned out by what Trump correctly refers to as the “Fake News Media”….how many times was Adam Schiff for Brains on CNN spreading lies? How about Brennan and Clapper becoming paid cable pundits going on-air daily to spin their own crimes? How about Avenatti being given a platform to lie and spin on CNN? Why did Rachel Maddow’s ratings go thru the roof? Those are the ones who got the airtime…and frankly, people who listened to Info Wars were MORE accurately informed than anyone watching CNN or MSNBC these past few years….

      4. Peter – no one is taking Trump’s word for it. The report will be released. Barr will take questions. It will be determined if Mueller will take questions. Mueller had access to all people and information. As mentioned, Trump did not hid documents on a private server and then used Bleach Bit to hide evidence. That was Hillary. It has also been well documented that Republicans can, and often do, disagree or break with Trump. It’s not like the Democrats in Congress, who all fall into lockstep no matter how egregious the behavior. If there’s anything one can say about Congressional Democrats, it’s that they are team players, however Machiavellian.

        Are you interested in the truth and justice, or are you willing to do whatever it takes to take down a lawfully elected President? If so, what era will you usher in, if this is how it’s going to go? Would you like both sides to behave this way?

        I found it telling that Graham laid out in careful detail a summary of improper behavior by Democrats and Comey that must be investigated, and the journalist pool ignored it. They also skipped over the part where there was no evidence to indict Trump for collusion, and question after question tried to arrive at a collusion conclusion anyway, in spite of the evidence. That’s not justice. That’s the behavior of a banana republic.

        The Left claims that it fights Trump because it opposes fascism, racism, and tyranny. However, the Left has abused government agencies to target conservatives. The Left silences conservative speech in universities and on social media. The Left tech giants openly claimed they want to change the next election. The Left is going after multiple Constitutional Amendments. The Left seeks to get rid of the electoral college, which is what makes our country representative in its Presidential elections. It wants a few kingmakers, Democrat, of course, and the rest of the country can become nuclear waste dumps. The Left also refuses to condemn illegal behavior by Hillary Clinton, including conspiring with Russia to sell 1/5 of our Uranium and defraud voters in the election, while refusing to follow the law regarding Trump.

        This is not justice. It’s a hit job.

        1. You’ve been corrected on Hillary selling uranium to Russians, so it’s hard to call that anything but a lie.

          As to the rest – a scattershot of partisan blindness:
          The GOP already tried to removes an elected president, and one who actually was approved by a majority of voters.
          The GOP perfected lock step voting as the senate minority under Obama where they skyrocketed past any previous records for filibusters and in the House instituted the Hastert Rule by which no legislation would brought to the floor, even is it would pass – like the 2013 comprehensive immigration bill which the senate had akready passed on a bi-partisan basis – unless a majority of Republicans would vote for it.
          The GOP is pro-active in ignoring the Constitution by refusing to advise and consent on an elected president’s lawful and legitimate nomination to the Supreme Court and now by handing the congressional power of the purse on an issue fully vetted by the Congress and in disagreement with the president, to the president.

          Your GOP ain’t what you pretend it to be.

          Karen, your post is complete self serving BS and it’s hard to believe someone as intelligent as you can actually convince themselves of this nonsense.

          1. The GOP lacks a lot and it is fair to blame the GOP for some of our problems. On the other hand it appears the Democrats have moved so far to the left that the party of JFK would now call JFK a right winger and a racist. The leaders of the Democratic Party are on tape moving 180 degrees in the opposite direction when it comes to the security so that they have placed politics ahead of national security and ahead of the needs of American citizens.

            Anon, you call Karen’s statements BS, but it appears you are totally ignorant of the facts.

            1. See Sowell’s Vision of the Anointed. I don’t think Sowell quite anticipated the degree to which public policy questions are now just MacGuffins in the world of liberal politics. It’s status games and wars on social enemies all the way down.

              The Democrats have always been more disrespectful of procedural norms, but from about 1937 to about 1974, you could say that the distance between the parties was growing narrower in some realms and wider in others. Since that time, the parties resemble each other less and less, and its now apparent that neither elite level nor street level Democrats are capable of adhering to procedural norms or maintain ordinary courtesies. (See the Kavanaugh imbroglio for a grotesque example). This is going to make it difficult for political process to operate. See Spain in 1933 or the South American Southern Cone between 1930 and 1990 for where this is headed.

    1. Those who kick his a.s:
      Lil’ Kim
      Prince MbS
      Health Care
      Federal budget
      Balance of Trade
      Women and suburban voters

      I could go on.

      1. Please do go on and when you’re done he’s still the most powerful person on the planet. I love a spoiled kid tantrum.

  7. Has Jerold “Lipo” Nadler already included Barr in his “Subpeona Cannon” volley?.
    Or is he reloading the cannon? To date, I think he’s “only” issued 80-85 subpeonas; the one issued to Trump’s very elderly 4th grade teacher about Trump allegedly chewing gum in class seemed especially excessive.

  8. Excuse me, that was liberals. They’ll have bad livers when they’re done with me!

    1. We’ll just have to marinate you in balsamic vinegar. Or would you recommend a dry white wine?

    1. That might not be such a good campaign strategy for Trump. The one and only person in the United States who can’t be indicted for anything ordering an investigation of the people who didn’t, because they couldn’t, indict Trump. Are you sure, I-Bob? Are you really sure?

    1. To hell with Hillary Clinton. Good riddance.

      BTW, Trump sells the foreign policy of the United States for personal financial gain.

      1. “BTW, Trump sells the foreign policy of the United States for personal financial gain”.
        And he’s paid in rubles to do so; wouldn’t surprise me if L4D claims to have the paycheck stubs, signed by Putin.
        And video showing Trump going to the bank with a wheelbarrow full of Russian currency to exchange into U.S. $Dollars.

        1. Mueller was authorized to investigate any links or coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian election interference. Every time Mueller came across evidence of bribery, graft and official corruption, Mueller handed that investigation off to another United States Attorney. There are bunches of them out there investigating Trump and crew for selling the foreign policy of the United States for personal financial gain. A lot of the money reportedly comes from various Middle Eastern countries. And then there’s all of that Inauguration money from Russians and Russian-Ukrainians and even some Ukrainian-Ukrainians, too.

          Happy Phase Two Day, Ptommy.

            1. In addition to the various Mideast countries, Russia, the Ukraine, etc., I think there were also allegedly under the table payments received by Trump from Grand Fenwick.

              1. Thanks for the tip. My keepers were remiss. They did, however, say something about Qatar having knuckled under to Kushner and MbS’s extortion blockade. I wonder how Kushner got Trump to sign off on that one. Don’t you?

                1. She mentioned wine earlier…. I was going to comment that I pictured her as an MD 20/20 conesseour, but I decided to take the high road, an not bring that up.

          1. “There are bunches of them out there investigating Trump and crew for selling the foreign policy of the United States for personal financial gain.”

            A whole bunch (selling foreign policy for personal gain) yet Diane can’t seem to mention any with evidence outside of the hallucinations she reports daily to the nurses.

            1. A whole bunch of United States Attorneys investigating bribery, graft and official corruption committed by Trump and crew.

              Read more carefully before you roar that mouse of yours and maybe you’ll get a little tidbit of that cheese, that cheese, too.

              1. Diane, earlier Karen gave examples of activity and proof that Hillary Clinton was guilty of certain actions. Note that Karen provided facts, details and a crime. Tell us the crimes (starting with Trump’s campaign) and details against Trump and crew that you believe are being investigated. Try to do it even 1/10th as well as Karen did.

                  1. A stupid response Diane, but we can see that you are unable to tell “us the crimes (starting with Trump’s campaign) and details against Trump and crew that you believe are being investigated. Try to do it even 1/10th as well as Karen did.”

    1. Trump is still tender, juicy and succulent, I-Bob. Give it another 18 months or so and then Trump will be well done.

      1. OMG, Trump-Haters Late4Yoga and Anon still working the comment board incessantly, like Ever-Ready Bunnies. My advice to you lefty loons, lefty media, and political hacks like Adam Shifty Schiff, Eric Swallows, Ted Loo, Mad Maxine Waters, and girly men Jim Comey & Andy McCabe – In the immortal words of Kenny Rogers “You got to know when to hold ’em, know when to fold ’em, know when to walk away, and know when to run…”

        1. Bill Martin,
          I think that L4B should continue to believe whatever it is she needs to believe in🤔.
          Things like facts and objectivity should not, and must not, interfere with that need.
          If she remains reasonably content🤗, her keepers say she’s easier to manage.

          1. When Trump says, “no collusion; no obstruction,” it’s literally unbelievable. When Barr says, Mueller says, “no collusion; no obstruction,” it’s also literally unbelievable. When Barr says, Rosenstein says, Mueller says, “no collusion; no obstruction,” it’s also, also literally unbelievable.

            Now, if, or when, Mueller says, Mueller wrote, “no collusion; no obstruction,” then, and only then, will Mueller’s conclusion be literally believable. So, if you want to manage L4D more easily by making L4D content, then show L4D the contents of Mueller’s report in its entirety. You see, if the claim “no collusion; no obstruction” is factually and objectively true, then there’s no good reason not to post Mueller’s report on L4D’s computer screen in its entirety.

            Don’t worry. If and when L4D posts Mueller’s words on this here blawg, then they will actually be Mueller’s words and not Barr’s words, nor Rosenstein’s words, nor Trump’s words, nor Turley’s words. And you, too, will be able to verify that by means of reading your very own copy of Mueller’s report on your very own computer screen.

            1. Barr read L4B’s comment, and is now transmitting the Mueller report in it’s entirety to L4B’s institution so she can see it.
              Barr noted that L4B bent over backwards defending the hyper-secrecy of the OSC probe.
              But to mollify L4D, Barr is willing to release everything right now to L4B…..even if that means compromising ongoing investigations by the NYSD, blowing the cover of confidential informants, revealing classified information, or interfering with Lipo Nadler’s subpeona cannons.

            2. Dumb girls need to stop saying literally all the time. it’s much misused and overused. Kind of like……

        2. Comey is already”‘all aTwitter” in response to yesterday’s news, according to a headline I just saw.

          1. To hell with Comey. Good riddance.

            The more you make the 2020 election a referendum on the 2016 election, the worse it gets for Trump’s re-election prospects.

            1. Yes…..Huffington Post only gives Trump a 1-2% chance of winning the election, and the Democratic candidate with a 98-99% chance.
              Oops…..that was for 2016….we’ve yet to see their predictive talents for the 2020 election.

              1. The system was rigged. But he ought to be allowed to run, anyway. Crooked DT; Vote the bum out!

                1. Every tennis match I ever lost was rigged, too.
                  Everytime my favorite team loses, it’s because the other team cheated.

                2. Who are we supposed to vote for? I asked your lot almost two years ago to get a platform. You have nothing to offer, plus you get to live the fact that your party has wasted two years wasting money to try to prove a Clinton scam, and you honestly believe you have some sort of high ground here? Yeah, take that “cow fart, two years of wasting resources, dividing the country at every opportunity, telling half of the voting public they are idiots” platform on the road… I guess in your book that is a winning platform. Maybe I’ll print up some DNC-branded crying towels for the inevitable repeat of election night 2016.

                  1. Vote for whomever the blazes you want to vote, Slow Horse.

                    When are you going to stop nursing the grudges you’ve been harboring for . . . how Long? Your whole life already? You pathetic twerp you. How was anyone else supposed to know how sensitive your delicate petals are?

                    1. It sounds to me like you are referring to yourself, not me. I don’t have any grudges, I’m good with it. It’s just a shame you people think your bizarre nay-saying is somehow useful to the country. You lot have been the ones who have been wrong on all counts since Nov 2016. Bottom line is that you have nothing to offer but inflammatory replies. I guess that’s the difference in the end. There are those of us who act and get things done, then there are the nay-sayers on the bench. Looks like you’ll be keeping that bench warm for years to come.

            2. I anticipated much of the angry, anguished, desperate mourning we’re seeing today from people like L4B, Natacha/Anonymous, etc.
              But I wasn’t expecting them to start eating their own.
              L4B’s “to hell with Hillary Clinton” and “to hell with Comey” rants were a bit of a surprise.
              If the force of L4B’s entire coven is united in that curse, neither Hillary nor Comey are safe.

          2. Picture of Comey needs to accompany definition of narcissist:

            a person who has an excessive interest in or admiration of themselves.
            “narcissists who think the world revolves around them”

            1. Won’t argue with that, which is what explained his behavior 3 Octobers ago, not a conspiracy..

              1. Anon,
                I didn’t see that allegations about Comey being made, but I may have missed it.
                Mostly, I saw you repeatedly denying that Comey was involved in a conspiracy; given the lack of that claim being made, the repeated denials seemed odd.
                One of the popular conspiracy de jour is that Barr, Rosenstein, and others conspired to whitewash the Mueller report and unfairly summarize what was in the Mueller report.
                I point this out because conspiracy theories and theorists of all stripes abound.

                1. The alternative reality constructed by Fox, the “freedom caucus”, and the WH has it that Comey, Rosenstein, Mueller, McCabe, etc are part of a conspiracy to further Hillary’s Dossier fueled attack on Trump. They have taken this nonsense to the floor of congress and while in the House majority held hearings on it. I’m surprised you have not heard of it.

      2. L4D still using employer’s electronic systems

        Authorized Usage

        The Company’s electronic communications systems must be used solely to facilitate the business of the Company. Users are forbidden from using the Company’s electronic communications systems for private business activities, personal, or amusement/entertainment purposes. Employees are reminded that the use of corporate resources, including electronic communications, should never create either the appearance or the reality of inappropriate use. Inappropriate use might result in loss of access privileges and disciplinary action, up to and including termination.

    1. Bribery, graft and official corruption by means of quid pro quo deals with foreign powers is next on the agenda.

        1. Remember the results of yesterday’s pop quiz? “Yes, yes, no and no.” Believe it or not, but I, too, had all four of those answers the same as you had them. Ha-Ha!

    1. I-Bob, Trump can’t stop talking about his historic “exoneration” for more than one day. Trump will keep this political issue alive at least through the 2020 election season by proclaiming his innocence incessantly. And Trump’s incessant proclamations of his own innocence will cost Trump his bid for re-election in 2020.

      BTW, Trump sells the foreign policy of the United States for personal financial gain. Deep State has not yet begun to leak.

      1. “BTW, Trump sells the foreign policy of the United States for personal financial gain. ”

        Diane, Trump has been reported to be losing money based on his present gig and logically that has merit. If he actually wanted to sell the US down the river (which he doesn’t) he could easily take lessons from Hillary and Bill Clinton. They learned to make money much faster than Trump did it as a businessman and with a lot less effort. They went from “poverty” to riches almost over night.

        …And the Nobel Prize for theft goes to Hillary Clinton.

        1. Every last single time that Mueller found evidence of a crime not related to Russian election interference but related to bribery, graft and official corruption Mueller handed that investigation off to another United States Attorney.

          Those investigations are all ongoing. It’s not over yet, Allan.

          1. The concern is whether Trump colluded with Russia or obstructed the investigation. That is all that counts. The Mueller report says there was no collusion and one can’t find definitive facts indicating obstruction.

            Yes, Diane, you can go back and accuse Trump of all things, even those that happened before Trump was born like Enigma did, however, that type of statement sounds pretty stupid.


            they’re not actually busy fighting crime? i mean i wonder what you guys think they do all day, just wait for another opportunity to mess with the boss? maybe that’s why you don’t work at the dog even though you been spending every day telling them what to do. lololol

  9. Attorney General Barr in his own words from his Senate confirmation hearing:

    Obviously, the President and any other official can commit obstruction in this classic sense of sabotaging a proceeding’s truth-finding function. Thus, for example, if a President knowingly destroys or alters evidence, suborns perjury, or induces a witness to change testimony, or commits any act deliberately impairing the integrity or availability of evidence, then he, like anyone else, commits the crime of obstruction.

    “Do you believe a president could lawfully issue a pardon in exchange for the recipient’s promise not incriminate him?” Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) asked Barr during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

    “No, that would be a crime,” Barr said.

    1. From AG Barr’s letter summarizing the Mueller report:

      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.

      In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,” and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction. Generally speaking, to obtain and sustain an obstruction conviction, the government would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a person, acting with corrupt intent, engaged in obstructive conduct with a sufficient nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding.

      [end excerpt]

      There’s evidence that Trump dangled pardons for Flynn, Manafort and even Cohen while he was still part Trump’s JDA omerta in just such a way as to tamper with witnesses and suborn perjury. Those obstructive efforts by Trump may very well have led to Mueller’s inability to establish “an underlying crime related to Russian election interference” (to use Barr’s words).

      So, at his Senate confirmation hearing, Barr said that what Trump did would be a crime, but, now that Barr actually is Attorney General, Barr is saying that an underlying crime has to be established and that a legal proceeding has to be pending or proceeding in order for Trump to commit the crime of obstruction of justice in the act of dangling pardons to tamper with witnesses and suborn perjury.

      And Barr is leaning heavily upon Rod Rosenstein for back-up on that flip-flop. AG Barr is going to have to explain himself to the satisfaction of one Jerrold Nadler. The easiest way for AG Barr to satisfy Nadler is to release the Mueller report in its entirety so that the American people can see for themselves whether Mueller actually wrote what Barr says that Mueller wrote.

      1. Jeezus you Ph’in Retard!

        Where is all that steel , “evidence” ,from all those NYC buildings that collapsed on 9/11/2001??????????????????????????????????????????>?

        Where is it you American hatin Trash!

        WMD Iraq, please tell us more, where is it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

        OKC, you Aided/ abetted the murdered the ph’k out of Federal Employees & lil kids there to protect the Clinton’s, Bush’s & deep state Dinos/Rinos & other assorted American Hat’in Traitors!

        The Waco, the JFK, The MLK, the, RFK, Nixon, & on & on, the ph’in on, the same MO, You Ph’kers are so Busted you can’t sell that slop to a drunk at a Licker Store @ 9 in the morning!

        I digress, you Ph’in Retards. IE: Marty Robbins: Ain’t I Right!

          1. L4D,

            I think we may have meet before.

            Remember those lawyers that came into court very quietly, kicked your azzes & just as quietly left?

            1. Pa Joad, I only have one azz to kick. How many azzes do you Joad’s sit on? I’m asking, because I need to know how many extra legs to put on my mechanical azz kicker. Just in case any of you Joads would be so kind as to hold still while turn the crank on the confounded contraption. It would be appreciated.

                1. Pa Joad, if you all remain butt hurt over the fact that Trump was investigated, you just might end up being butt hurt about Trump losing the 2020 election–possibly even to A Woman.

                  1. there is zero chance the Democrats will field the best candidate. it’s a certainty their motley coalition will tear itself to shreds in the primaries

              1. Remarkably accurate–except for the hair and the teeth. See if you can find one that balder and gummier.

        1. Wow!!!! This is new, I swear, I did not post this video, but I’ve been seeing other content added to my posts recently. Rather odd!

          They might think twice before playing that game as “They” can be tracked down rather fast now.

          What are you going to do??? Melt down another of my PC’s !

          Go ahead… Get you some you commie aholes.

          Now, I’ll see if I like their Vid. lol;)

  10. Nothing new here.

    “Americans” are television fed and movie educated.

    The media are in the business of creatio ex nihilo, creating something from nothing.

    Americans breathlessly express their distress and embarrassment about a non-existent truth or lie.

    The Manchurian Candidate, Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and, my favorite, “this ruthless dictator ( Saddam Hussein) whose troops have bayoneted pregnant women and have ripped babies from their incubators in Kuwait.”

    The media’s ( government’s? ) non-existent truth or lie keeps the masses occupied with a distraction. The distraction generates income, immeasurable income, for the media. Ideally, it generates income, immeasurable income, for the military industrial surveillance security state (M.I.S.S.S.).

    Two words: Judith Miller; N.Y. Times “journalist”

    N.Y. Times mea culpa re: its “journalism” re: America’s war of aggression against the people of Iraq

    The lies have been going on for over a century.

    I was born July 18, 1950. During my life time “America” has gone from the world’s greatest creditor nation to the world’s greatest debtor nation.

    Citizens of the United States during the same time created, further created, an empire, the greatest empire, that has ever existed.

    Has it enriched life? Has it preserved, protected and defended liberty? Has it created happiness?

    I return you now to your regularly schedule “blue” team, “red team” … liberal, conservative … communist, capitalist theater of distraction and embarrassment.

    dennis hanna

  11. Quite amusing how a number of the individuals here who previously showed no mercy on our President now sing a different song. I’m sure next week you’ll be right back at it with the name calling and agreeing with another Witch Hunt started by the Nadler-Schiff Find a Crime Security Agency.

  12. I am a liberal and I am happy with the Mueller report. A US president colluding with a foreign government is very bad, and if it happened then those involved need to be prosecuted. But it is much better for it to have never happened in the first place. Mueller did a thorough and independent investigation and I have confidence in his conclusions. Every American should be happy that the collusion did not happen and we should all be thankful that we conducted the investigation. From historical perspective, an early and complete investigation was necessary.

    1. I’m OK with that, but we should all still want to see the properly redacted report. Remember, Mueller did not exonerate Trump for obstruction and Barr and Rosenstein’s statement to that effect is not internally logical.

      1. Read page 3 paragraph 3.

        Anon, one can only draw conclusions from what evidence promotes. A lack of evidence presumes innocence. One doesn’t expect a lack of evidene to exonerate anyone from any offense so the statement you made is ignorant of the law and logic.

      2. Still on that guilty until proven innocent kick Any decent grade or high school civics class graduate would nail that mistake in a heart beat so maybe the title of the exercise should be “Whose The Foreigner?”

    2. “I am a liberal and I am happy with the Mueller report. …”

      That is the sign of a mature and sensible person no matter which party one belongs to. You demonstrate a ray of hope.

    3. Hey MollyG-Will you feel as happy at prosecuting those who wrongfully “colluded” to start the Big Lie going back to the last administration. How about going after the MSM who carried their water. How about telling the Dums you have had enough of their “looking for a crime investigations” and get back to work to make America Great Again. Do you feel that happy yet?

Comments are closed.