Here is the Mueller Report

I am doing legal analysis for CBS News and BBC in New York today but, for those who have not read the report, it is linked below.

As I discuss in today’s column, the report does clear the President of the original allegations of collusion with little ambiguity or reservation. Ultimately, he was also cleared of obstruction through the decision of both Barr and Rosenstein.

I believe the report also vindicates Barr on the criticism of the expected redactions. There was surprising light redactions, particularly on obstruction. Moreover, while some are insisting that Barr’s summary to Congress was not reflective of the report, it did accurately give the conclusions. As for his press conference, it is doubtful that any description would be acceptable to many people. That is why he would have been wise to minimize those descriptions in favor of his discussion of the process.

Here is the Report: Redacted Mueller Report

265 thoughts on “Here is the Mueller Report”

  1. Real justice is coming. Many actual indictments from Grand Juries against top political figures. But it won’t be Trump and his team under the gun this time. Juries, not the corrupt media, will decide their fate.

  2. 1, AG Barr has put himself in the same class as Kellyanne Conway and Huckabee Sanders, and of course Trump, as one of the greatest fake news artists of all time. 2. The ones on this site who are on the far-right, are by any definition, hypocrites. If a Democrat President had a report on them such as Trump got, they would be demanding public beheadings. 3.Trump supporters see nothing wrong with twisting facts, truth, and their moral compass to justify and protect a unfit man as POTUS.

    1. “AG Barr has put himself in the same class as Kellyanne Conway and Huckabee Sanders, and of course Trump …”
      Yeah, Barr really needs to model Mad Maxine Waters, Creepy Adam Schiff, Tipsy Nancy Pelosi and Leaky Jim Comey.

      You really oughta do standup!

    2. “If a Democrat President had a report on them such as Trump got, they would be demanding public beheadings.”

      This happened with Bill Clinton and I supported him then on impeachment by the Republicans and still do now. You are talking out of your asss as usual.

    3. Define “unfit.”

      Last I checked, “Bull in a china shop” does not make a man “unfit” to be POTUS. Nor does being an unethical, immoral, foul-mouthed liar make one “unfit” to be a political leader or a politician wheeling and dealing in the cesspool of corruption that is Washington, DC.

      “He’s unfit” sure sounds like a good reason….but it’s not a deal breaker in Washington DC. 😉

      1. Fishy — Name another politician who could survive the kind of scrutiny Trump was put under — being attacked nonstop by the media, the Democrats, the Never Trump Republicans, the leakers in the White House and on the Hill…all of Hollywood….etc…AND… being spied on and surveilled by the Obama administration for all this time….yet STILL….try as they might… they could NOT NAIL him with a SINGLE CRIMINAL CHARGE?

        I’d say Trump is clean as a whistle compared to almost any Democrat politician sitting there on Capitol Hill today trying to take him out. Not one of them would survive this kind of scrutiny and still be standing. Not one.

        1. Tbob,
          These folks are vigorously working the L4D Project, searching for the mysterious black hole holding all the evidence that proves President Trump must have committed a crime. He had to have committed a crime because only a criminal could outwit criminals. So I suggest we honor that effort by posting L4D Project whenever they provide anything other than physical evidence to prove a crime was committed.

          Regarding obstruction. I suggest we give them as much rope as they need and for as long as necessary. They will unwittingly end up hanging their own and in the process they will completely undermine their chances for 2020.

          This is popcorn time once again. 🙂

          1. They seems to be mixing up ‘a belief’ in something as being one in the same as ‘the truth’ of something…

            Like how Fishy once “believed” there was an Easter Bunny….until the day he learned “the truth” — that there was no such thing…

            Maybe we could call it the Easter Bunny project 😉

            1. They seems to be mixing up ‘a belief’ in something as being one in the same as ‘the truth’ of something…

              Well Tbob, they pretty much sums up progressivism.

              1. Ha-Ha! I have become a legend in Chief Olly’s mind. Ha-Ha! I didn’t even break a sweat. Ha-Ha! I didn’t even lift so little as one pinky finger. Ha-Ha! This is too easy. Ha-Ha! Way far too easy. Ha-Ha!

    4. Fishy says, “if a Democrat President had a report on them such as Trump got, they would be demanding public beheadings.”

      he needs reminding about findings in the Ken Starr report ——————>

      Whitewater convictions included:

      Jim Guy Tucker, Clinton’s successor as governor of Arkansas, convicted on three fraud counts and removed from office.

      John Haley, Tucker’s attorney, convicted of tax evasion.

      William J. Marks Sr., Tucker’s business partner, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud.

      Stephen Smith, an aide to Clinton when he was governor, who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of conspiracy to misapply funds. Clinton later pardoned him.

      Webster Hubbell, a Clinton political supporter who was a partner at the Rose Law Firm, where Hillary Clinton worked, and later served as associate attorney general. He pleaded guilty to embezzlement and fraud in connection to phony billing records at the law firm.

      Jim and Susan McDougal. Jim McDougal was a banker and Clinton supporter convicted of 18 felonies who served time in prison until his death in 1998. His wife, also a Clinton supporter, went to prison on multiple fraud convictions. She famously sat in a jail cell for 18 months on a contempt charge, refusing to answer questions from Starr’s team about whether Clinton lied in his testimony during her Whitewater trial. Clinton pardoned her just before leaving office in 2001.

      David Hale, a banker and Clinton supporter who was a key witness in the Whitewater case. He pleaded guilty to defrauding the Small Business Administration in an unrelated case.

      The Whitewater probe obtained convictions against seven others — a bank president who embezzled funds for Clinton’s campaign; a pair of real estate brokers who committed loan fraud; an appraiser; a bank CEO; and two others who committed bribery.


      And even with this history, plus a whole lot more Clinton baggage…..the Democrats STILL nominated Hillary Clinton believing the country would enthusiastically choose to put Bill and Hillary BACK in the White House??

      This is why we have President Trump 🙂

      1. Note that after Gov. Tucker and the McDougals were convicted in 1996, a journalist named Lyons was promoting the notion that the Whitewater scandal was a media-generated mirage. He was allowed space in Harper’s to propagate this view. Lyons wasn’t some random crank. He’d been on the editorial staff at Newsweek at one time. In my youth, the left were wrong on policy questions and had trouble distinguishing between wishes and realities. It was during the Clinton era that the left turned sociopathic.

  3. The squealing Dems need to finally get off the can and move for impeachment. Enough with the endless accusations, make it official if you believe what you say. That way Trump can win the next election in a landslide.

    1. Its official: Next week, after Uncle Joe makes his announcement, the Dems will become livid, deadly, walking zombies gutting each other with intense ferocity. Should be fun to watch



      Reports: Joe Biden Will Enter the 2020 Presidential Race Next Week

      Joe Biden is set to make it official.

      In a story first reported by The Atlantic and confirmed by the Associated Press, the former Vice President will announce his bid for the White House next week.

      The AP cites three sources with “knowledge of Biden’s plans” as stating that the former veep is set to declare his bid. The Atlantic reports that he will release a video announcement next Wednesday.

      Biden will enter the race as the front-runner, with polls consistently showing him ahead of the pack. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has placed a close second in most surveys, with other leading contenders such as Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA), former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX), and surging South Bend, IN Mayor Pete Buttigieg also showing support from prospective primary voters.

    2. Obama and Clinton have gotten away with:

      Uranium One
      Fast & Furious
      IRS targeting
      Cash to Iran
      Rigging a primary against Bernie
      Illegally storing emails
      Paying for a fake dossier
      Lying under oath
      Spying on Trump

      And Trump was the one under investigation? 🤔

      @CharileKirk11 18 Apr 2019

      1. Anonymous, if Trump couldn’t get anyone to investigate all these matters, then he is about as ineffectual as they come. Experience matters.

  4. Mueller noted in the report that he had no problem saying no obstruction and so also has no problem saying that there was obstruction. Barr touched on the fundamental issue of corrupt intent and said that Trump did not display such intent. Obviously the conclusion was that the facts do not support an obstruction and if they did Barr/Rosenstein would have said so and Mueller should have said so.

  5. Good Old William “Whitewash” Barr Has Been Down This Road Before. It’s Deja Vu All over again at the link below:

    Barr’s Playbook: He Misled Congress When Omitting Parts of Justice …

    3 days ago … When Barr withheld the full OLC opinion in 1989 and said to trust … What’s different from that struggle and the current struggle over the Mueller report is …. is about whether courts can review an executive branch action, with …

  6. I can see Nadler’s point; after only 2 1/2 years of this dog and pony show, “it’s too early” to **** or get off the pot.
    There are still hundreds of statements Lipo Nadler can make and probably hundreds more TV episodes in the Chairman Pencil Neck series.

  7. Rep. Jerry Nadler had issues with Trump way back in the 1990’s

    Now Jerry, aka “Fats Domino” provokes a blood feud.

    Rep. Jerry Nadler on impeachment: “That’s one possibility. There are others. We obviously have to get to the bottom of what happened and take whatever action seems necessary at that time. It’s too early to reach those conclusions.”

  8. It is very strange (or not) that appointment of special counsel specified only the Trump campaign. If this were really a quest to deal with potential Russian interference then why did the order not also specify the Clinton campaign? Still, other vague language in order appointing OSC did have language allowing Muler to investigate cash which actually changed hands and involved foreign nationals i.e, Steele and his Russian-subcontractors financed by DNC/HRC campaign. Actual dollars changed hands, actual coordination/collusion – yet not a peep from Muler on this important issue.

    1. Please tell us about Russian government efforts on behalf of the Clinton campaign. That would be real news.

            1. Muler Report just a tease, Mad Maxine, Pencil Neck, Fat Jerry, Eric Swallows, Rachel “Mad Cow” Madows, Hyperventilating Morning Mika et al gonna find the real Russian colluders and “lock Trump up!” Impeach 45! Impeach 45!

        1. So, you have information that the Russian Government was part of the Steele Dossier? Amazing. What was their goal?

          1. OMG Anon. Get a life. All of this is nonsense. Muler investigation should never have been launched. Goodbye.

            1. So, you’re sitting on this explosive information and won’t share it? I’m starting to guess you have nothing except the BS you pick up from other true believers – that’s a problem for lot of posters here. Hey, if it’s fact, share it so we can check it out.

              1. You’re right Anon. The best thing that could happen for this country is a protracted debate on what constitutes obstruction of justice. I’ll accept Mueller’s 2.5 year investigation and report clearing President Trump of the crimes Mueller was tasked to investigate.

                Now in honor of the EHT project that brought us the image of the black hole, I’m going to call the anti-Trumper’s efforts moving forward as the L4D project. You see, there must be some horrific reason that Trump beat astronomical odds to become President. There must be some mysterious dark force preventing all our intel agencies, the FBI, Mueller and his team, as well as any foreign entity (shh, of course none were used) from seeing what was so obvious.

                Remember now, if I post the comment: L4D Project; the purpose will be to acknowledge the ongoing efforts to find a crime President Trump has committed somewhere in the vast reaches of space. I won’t say anything further as to obstruct that mission.

                Speaking of obstruction; I pray the anti-Trumpers go all in and the American public get say, another year’s play out of it. They will be exposed to what defines obstruction and what evidence would be necessary to prove it. So let’s begin with the idea that obstruction of justice involves an effort to hide a crime or hinder the investigation of an actual crime. This is where it gets interesting.

                Do we have a fairly recent case where someone committed a crime but the FBI didn’t refer for prosecution because they discovered no intent? Now what if the investigators were prevented by the suspect from access to relevant hardware? Maybe it was destroyed, you know, like destroying evidence. Would that be considered obstruction? How about material witnesses not being made available to testify, or pleading the 5th, would that be considered obstruction? What if the suspect didn’t provide all required emails and other correspondence, would that be considered obstruction?

                So yes, let’s go down the obstruction path and expose everybody. That is we’re principled enough to want that.

                  1. Obstruction? That is what fools claim. There was nothing to obstruct since Russia, Russia, Russia didn’t exist. Moreover, all documents were turned over and all White House personal were told to speak freely when the President could have exerted executive priviledge.

                    Anon thinks that when Trump blinked his eyes that could be construed as a threat or obstruction. I agree fools can create the idea of obstruction based on almost any human action but what the fool has to do is to make his case by proving obstruction occurred even though no crime was committed to obstruct.

                  2. Anon is still smoking the collusion crack pipe with his buddy Adam Schiff for brains….

                    Rep. Adam Schiff said: “If the special counsel…had found evidence exonerating the president, he would have said so. He did not. He left that issue to the Congress of the United States, and we will need to consider it.”

                    So…try as he might, Mueller did not find evidence of a crime with which to accuse or charge Trump…and yet….Mueller is suggesting he came close….but no cigar….and even though there is still NO CRIME….he’s saying Trump sure “acts” guilty of “something”….so it’s now up to Congress to pursue it and keep digging…laying the groundwork for impeachment….there is no actual evidence of a crime, but in their world, Trump must PROVE his own innocence? See how this spin works in the Russiagate cult?

                    Have another hit at that crack pipe Anon…

                    1. Learn to read and think TomBob. Collusion, which the Trump campaign is guilty of and the reason for all the lies, is not a crime unless it rises to the level of criminal conspiracy, which Mueller decided he could not prove. That’s what I said above. Are you happy with “Vote for Fatso! He’s a …hole but not indicted!”

                    2. but in their world, Trump must PROVE his own innocence?

                      This is the root of their legal theory. This is third world stuff. This is precisely the legal foundation of the Salem Witch Trials. Kavanaugh was a victim of this. The real danger is they’re so entrenched in this practice, they may believe they must do anything necessary not to lose power. In their mind. having power in the hands of their perceived enemies means they will be subject to the same legal theory. That would be the best motivation for their attitude towards justice. The only other option is they are just flat out evil. At this point it’s a toss up.

                  3. Anon said: “Collusion, which the Trump campaign is guilty of and the reason for all the lies, is not a crime unless it rises to the level of criminal conspiracy, which Mueller decided he could not prove.”

                    So…you’re saying that Trump is guilty of collusion and lying about it…and this is not a crime…nor has he been charged with criminal conspiracy, b/c try as they might, Mueller’s team could not find evidence of *any* crime….and even though Mueller’s report said no collusion…and no obstruction….Trump is still guilty of a non-crime called collusion and maybe even obstruction of a non-crime…but Mueller’s team couldn’t prove anything…and so they tossed it over to Congress to keep trying…and Trump should prove his innocence and also be impeached. Did I get that right?

                    Have another hit of that crack pipe, Anon…

                    1. Anon…ok, if you say so…but here’s the thing…people can read your words for themselves…and even if you can’t see it…people can read what you said and what I said about what you said (and what Adam Schiff said) and see that what I said you said is in fact what you said… 😉

                    2. TomBob, I encourage anyone to read my earlier post which i fully stand behind.If you disagree with it, why don’t you specifically point where, rather than spinning it incorrectly as you just did. I’m happy to discuss any element of the report, but not your version of my viewpoint, which is incorrect.

                    3. Anon — Which earlier post? The one I’m commenting on is the one in which you said this —>

                      “Learn to read and think TomBob. Collusion, which the Trump campaign is guilty of and the reason for all the lies, is not a crime unless it rises to the level of criminal conspiracy, which Mueller decided he could not prove. That’s what I said above.”

                    4. To which I replied to Anon, and said —>

                      “So…you’re saying that Trump is guilty of collusion and lying about it…and this is not a crime…nor has he been charged with criminal conspiracy, b/c try as they might, Mueller’s team could not find evidence of *any* crime….and even though Mueller’s report said no collusion…and no obstruction….Trump is still guilty of a non-crime called collusion and maybe even obstruction of a non-crime…but Mueller’s team couldn’t prove anything…and so they tossed it over to Congress to keep trying…”

                      Tell me where I’m getting your words wrong Anon… 😉

          2. There’s some circumstantial evidence to indicate that Oleg Deripaska (not the Russian government) may have fed disinformation to Steele for the sake of misdirecting the DNC, attempting to misdirect the FBI (didn’t work), discrediting Steele and attempting to discredit the FBI (hasn’t worked, yet). Of course, Deripaska is close personal friend and ally of Vladimir Putin. And Manafort’s “handler,” Konstantin Kilimnik was working for Deripaska the whole time he was pretending to work for Manafort. So, the same Russian-affiliated individuals appear to have been playing both ends against the middle, as it were.

  9. Rep. Rashida Tlaib has been busy

    Sponsoring an impeachment resolution


    Assisting Mohammad Deif, the supreme military commander of Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas’s military wing.


    The Mueller report makes unmistakably clear that Americans were attacked by foreign military units: specifically Russian “Military Units 26165 and 74455.” And it reminds us that the president and members of his campaign invited and welcomed those attacks, even if it did not arrange them, and that they were eager to profit from the proceeds of those attacks. That should be of immense concern. If the attack were a bombing rather than a hacking, perhaps the magnitude of the problem would be clearer. The hack was no less an attack than something more literally explosive.

    We should all be disturbed by the lack of clarity regarding our ability—and our will—to deter similar future interference in our election process. And though I don’t know whether that will be the element of the Mueller report that matters most for the remainder of the Trump presidency, it should be.

    Justin Levitt is an associate dean at Loyola Law School and was a deputy assistant U.S. attorney general from 2015 to 2017.

    Edited from: “The Surprises In The Mueller Report”

    POLITICO, 4/19/19

  11. How Trump Got Off



    With the public release of a redacted version of the special counsel’s report on Thursday, Americans also at last got a clear answer for a central question raised by the terse — and now clearly misleading — summary offered four weeks ago by Attorney General William Barr: Why did Mr. Mueller decide not to make a finding about whether President Trump obstructed justice?

    “We determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the president committed crimes,” the report explains, because “fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought.”

    In other words, Mr. Mueller felt his hands were tied. Longstanding Justice Department policy prohibits the indictment of a sitting president, and it isn’t fair to make accusations without giving the president a legal forum in which to respond.

    A bit further on, the 448-page report says, “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state.”

    1. More accurately, Mueller punted. He could have reached a conclusion on the conspiracy issue without an indictment and then left it up to Congress to decide if they wanted to pursue it. ( The House will pursue it anyway, with the Adam Schiff TV series, Mad Max, and Nadler; but for campaign purposes, and not as an impeachment issue).
      I mentioned before that, in addition to Barr, both Mueller and Rosenstein should give public testimony. With some exceptions, Mueller is now free to talk about the investigation and I his conclusions, and “non- conclusions”.
      Rosenstein oversaw almost the entire OSC investigation, and is also a “key player” in this saga.
      I noticed that in this morning press conference with AG Barr, he was asked some questions about what Mueller meant, or “how Mueller felt’ about this or that element of the OSC investigation, or Barr’s handling of the post-report on the past c.4 weeks.
      It’d make more sense to direct those questions to Mueller himself, should he ever consent to speak publically and address some of the questions/ speculation swirling around.

    2. If the OSC had confidence that the president DID obstruct, they would say so.
      So we’re back to punting call made on the 4th down.

    3. Hey PeterOverTheHill: Obstruction was secondary issue for Muler, and now it remains only as a political issue i.e.House tries to impeach and the Senate removes. You are left with a piece of crap to sell to the electorate and congress: Trump pushed back on the investigation of a non-crime that was confirmed to be a hoax. Nancy P ran away from this piece of crap long before Muler findings revealed Leny Stoyer ran away from it yesterday. That leaves Old Pencil Neck, Eric Swallows, and Fat Jerry holding on and hugging this pierce of shiite. Looks like L4D not even going to to try and spin this piece of shiite. Party is over.

        1. Should be per se…..many thanks to the auto fill feature of this p.o.s.for changing “se” to “sessions”.

      1. Very few predicted a legal end to Trump’s presidency, though he may well face that when he leaves office. With verification now of the facts we already mostly knew through the excellent reporting at the WSJ, NYTs, and WaPo and about which the President has been lying all along, the political party starts. The collusion and obstruction is documented, and the only reason he is not now charged with obstruction while agents and prosecutors work over underlings while seeking further evidence of criminal conspiracy is because he is the president.

        Speaking of lying, Sanders admitted to Mueller that she made up her repeated and emphasized claim that she had heard from countless FBI agents happy that Comey had been fired. Fake news source revealed.


    Mr. Trump did not stop pressing Mr. Sessions to take back control of the investigation. On Oct. 16, the president met privately with Mr. Sessions and said he should look again at Mrs. Clinton’s emails. Mr. Sessions made no promises.

    Two days later, the president posted the first of several tweets in the coming weeks complaining that the Justice Department was not investigating Mrs. Clinton. One of the tweets concluded: “DO SOMETHING!”

    The pressure on the president rose in November when Mr. Flynn’s lawyers told Mr. Trump’s team that he would be accepting a plea deal. One of Mr. Trump’s lawyers left a voice mail message for one of Mr. Flynn’s: “[R]emember what we’ve always said about the president and his feelings toward Flynn and, that still remains.”

    On Dec. 6, five days after Mr. Flynn pleaded guilty to lying about contacts with the Russian government, Mr. Trump pulled Mr. Sessions aside after a cabinet meeting and again suggested he “unrecuse” himself. “You’d be a hero,” he said, while saying he was not going to “direct you to do anything.”

    Edited from: “A Portrait Of The White House And It’s Culture Of Dishonesty”

    THE NEW YORK TIMES, 4/18/19

  13. If It Walks Like A Duck And Quacks Like A Duck..


    Trump officials frequently were drawn into the president’s plans to craft false story lines. In one instance, while he was watching Fox News, Trump asked Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein to hold a news conference and claim that Trump fired James B. Comey as FBI director based on Rosenstein’s recommendation. Rosenstein declined and told Trump that he would tell the truth — that firing Comey was not his idea — if he were asked about it.

    White House press secretary Sarah Sanders attempted to buttress Trump’s cover story. She said at a news briefing that countless members of the FBI were seeking Comey’s removal, but she later admitted to Mueller’s team that her comment had been completely fabricated, calling it a “slip of the tongue” that was not founded on evidence.

    In another example, Trump dictated to communications director Hope Hicks an intentionally misleading statement for the media about Donald Trump Jr.’s 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer at Trump Tower.

    President Trump’s drumbeat to end the investigation was driven by his belief that the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusive determination of Russian interference threatened the legitimacy of his election. It was, as Hicks told Mueller’s investigators, his “Achilles heel.”

    The report exhaustively documents the fraught relationship between Trump and McGahn. In the weeks following Mueller’s May 2017 appointment, Trump repeatedly considered firing the special counsel. On June 17, Trump was at Camp David and twice called McGahn at home and directed him to call Rosenstein, who supervised the probe, and explain that Mueller had conflicts of interest and could not serve.

    “You gotta do this. You gotta call Rod,” Trump said on the first call, according to the account McGahn gave investigators.

    McGahn did not act on the request, but Trump called a second time.

    “Call Rod, tell Rod that Mueller has conflicts and can’t be the special counsel,” Trump said, according to McGahn. The president told him, “Mueller has to go,” and “Call me back when you do it.”

    McGahn told investigators that he felt trapped and decided to resign. He drove to the office to pack up his belongings and prepare to submit a resignation letter. He also called Priebus and chief White House strategist Stephen K. Bannon and told them of his intentions, but they urged him to stay, and McGahn returned to work that Monday.

    Trump’s claim that Mueller had “conflicts” — a dispute over membership fees at a Trump golf course in Virginia — was called “ridiculous” by Bannon and “silly” by McGahn. The report is peppered with similar times of aides grousing behind Trump’s back about his tirades and impulsive directives.

    Edited from: “Paranoia, Lies And Fear. Trump Presidency Laid Bare By Mueller Report”


    We learn here that Sarah Sanders told an outright lie when she said, “countless members of the FBI were seeking Comey’s removal”


      Unlike Mark M and Natacha, Peter doesn’t pretend to be a lawyer. Or to have much common sense.

      1. A young girl was raped in an area close to where Peter resides. Peter couldn’t prove otherwise so Peter must have raped her.

        That is the sum total of how Peter thinks. When the cops came to his house Peter wouldn’t let them in without a search warrant so Peter committed obstruction.

        If It Walks Like A Duck And Quacks Like A Duck..”

        A duck has more common sense than Peter.

      2. Tabby, Trump demanded that McGhan order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. That was obstruction and McGhan knew it so he refused. Trump also urged Sessions to ‘unrecuse himself’. Sessions refused. After firing Comey, Trump had Sarah Sanders read a false statement claiming Comey was highly unpopular among rank & file agents. And she ‘did’ which makes her a liar which she admitted to Mueller.

        The problem is that Justice Department policy allows no mechanism for indicting a sitting president.

        So Tabby if ‘your’ law skills are so refined what I am missing here??

        1. Trump demanded that McGhan order Rosenstein to fire Mueller. That was obstruction and McGhan knew it so he refused. Trump also urged Sessions to ‘unrecuse himself’. Sessions refused.

          Let me see if I follow your logic: Trump demanded something, both McGahn and Session refused, so that’s obstruction? Was it obstruction because he demanded something he never got? Or was McGahn and Sessions obstructing the President?

        2. That was obstruction and McGhan knew it so he refused.

          Mueller is an employee of the Department of Justice, Peter. He’s terminable at will. (And he was investigating non-crimes).

          1. And he was investigating non-crimes.

            I believe the problem here is what we believe defines a crime and what the Left believes defines a crime. Peter has concluded that McGahn preventing the President from doing something that may have been considered obstruction, is obstruction. So when the Left argues not obstructing justice = obstructing justice, we have to conclude what they consider lawful and just is not the same as what we believe.

        3. Peter Shill, it appears there is another Mueller analysis you have not considered to explain why the world is flat, the Earth is the center of the universe, and why pesky Klingons hang from Uranus in spite of David Brock having his yahoo firmly embedded between your cheeks. Ask L4D to investigate


          ‘Boating World Magazine’ Giving Live Updates As Its Team Of Reporters Reads All Of Mueller Report

          FOUNTAIN VALLEY, CA—Urging readers to “stay tuned” and follow along on its website for more, Boating World Magazine was providing live updates Thursday as its team of reporters read through the more than 400 pages of the Mueller report. “So far, we have not uncovered any breaking news within the report about recreational boating or boating lifestyles, but we cannot rule out the possibility that the redacted sections contain information on the latest waterskiing trends and other family-friendly activities for speedboaters,” said executive editor Alan Jones, who promised readers Boating World would uphold its usual standards of journalistic excellence in its minute-by-minute analysis of the report’s findings in regard to fishing vacations that won’t break the bank and the best outboard motors on the market today. “We do have some promising leads: For example, it is entirely possible that some type of yacht or catamaran was used during Blackwater founder Erik Prince’s secret meeting in the Seychelles islands to set up a Trump–Putin back channel. At the very least, we’re hoping that at some point before we finish reading this thing, we find evidence of Paul Manafort or Don Jr. or someone putting on a life jacket.” At press time, the Boating World team had published its first update, which began with the words “Ahoy, there, readers!”



    As Robert S. Mueller III slowly unveils the evidence that he has gathered since his appointment as special counsel in May 2017, he has not yet shown that any of the dozens of interactions between people in Trump’s orbit and Russians resulted in any specific coordination between his presidential campaign and Russia.

    But the mounting number of communications that have been revealed occurred against the backdrop of “sustained efforts by the Russian government to interfere with the U.S. presidential election,” as Mueller’s prosecutors wrote in a court filing last week.

    The special counsel’s filings have also revealed moments when Russia appeared to be taking cues from Trump. In July 2016, the then-candidate said at a news conference, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” referring to messages Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton had deleted from a private account. That day, the Russians made their first effort to break into servers used by Clinton’s personal office, according to court documents.

    As Americans began to grip the reality that a hostile foreign power took active steps to shape the outcome of the race, Trump and his advisers asserted they had no contact with Russia.

    Two days after Trump was elected president, a top Kremlin official caused a stir by asserting that Trump’s associates were in contact with the Russian government before the election.

    “I don’t say that all of them, but a whole array of them supported contacts with Russian representatives,” Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told the Interfax news agency on Nov. 10, 2016.

    The claim was met with a hail of denials. Hope Hicks, then Trump’s top spokeswoman, responded, “It never happened. There was no communication between the campaign and any foreign entity during the campaign.”

    After Trump took office, in February 2017, he reiterated the denial. “No. Nobody that I know of,” the president told reporters when asked whether anyone who advised his campaign had contact with Russia. “I have nothing to do with Russia. To the best of my knowledge, no person that I deal with does.”

    It is now clear that wasn’t true.

    Edited from: “Russians Interacted With At Least 14 Trump Associates During The Campaign And Transition”


Leave a Reply