Robert Mueller, Former F.B.I. Director, Is Named Special Counsel for Russia Investigation

William Barr testifying will be very interesting.

His "press conference" was already a disaster and boiled down to: "I'm the Attorney General, I can do whatever I want... **** you."

 

I mean think about what that paragraph says.

The President's aides shouldn't be charged with any further crimes because when the President of the United States ordered them to break the law they refused. LOL

 

A subject involving Donald Trump and William Barr and Michael Flynn and Paul Manafort and Roger Stone and Michael Cohen and Rick Gates and ... you some how choose to use the word "psychopath" to describe Weismann?

 

Reading more of the report, I don't understand how it doesn't prove collusion.

It confirms that George Papadapolous was working to get information from Russia, confirmed that he got word from them that they had the emails and would leak them to hurt Clinton. The only thing missing is confirmation that Papadapolous told Trump. We do have confirmation that Trump found out that lol. Just can't make that small thread connection because why? Because Georgie lied to the Special Prosecutor.

 

An early assessment of the report from experts. It's blistering.

https://www.justsecurity.org/63665/the-redacted-mueller-report-first-takes-from-the-experts/

 

Mueller had no intention of proving collusion, but to present the evidence of such to Congress for the House to decide to pursue impeachment, following the precedent set for Watergate.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/mueller-report-impeachment-referral/587509/

 

It is clear that the House must impeach Barr.

 

??????

 

"The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balanced and the principle that no person is above the law.”

 

I do not see why the House should waste their time with Barr.

Just go straight to the source, Mueller.

 

Go read Seth Abramson's timeline. He put's together a 250 tweet thread pulling from the Special Counsel's report specifically about Papadapolous.

 

Yes. Collusion is extremely hard to prove and technically isn't a criminal charge.

At the end of the day, the most likely and easier crime to prove is obstruction of justice.

Mueller punted on that and left it to the Attorney General to decide whether to bring charges.

 

Barr has made his position clear. I'm not sure what more there is to ask him.

Mueller should go on the record, but honestly Congressional hearings don't really get to much truth. They'll just use it to generate sound bites.

 

Mueller had unlimited budget/time/labor/resources to conduct an investigation that found no collusion with Russia by any American. He got total cooperation from the Trump team. He was not impeded in any way (even though as POTUS Trump had every right to exercise his executive authority, he didn't).

It was the opposite of obstruction.

 

Nook, I like you so don't think I'm arguing with you out of anything more than thinking you are worthy of conversation!

He didn't leave it to the attorney general. Mueller says that HE can't prosecute so he'll make no decision on criminality. He then specifically says "The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balanced and the principle that no person is above the law.”

He NEVER defers the authority to the AG.

 

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha

Multiple people who work for him are on the record in this report as saying they simply refused to obey his orders when he tried to "exercise his executive authority" but you try to say that's a feather in his cap. Nice.

 

First of all, there is no criminal act of "collusion". What you are looking for is a criminal "conspiracy," which is 1) the commission of a criminal act by 2) two or more people. If you cannot establish that there was a criminal act, then it is not possible to have a criminal "conspiracy". No such criminal act was identified during the course of this investigation.

This whole exercise has been a fictional conspiracy theory, fabricated at the orders of Hillary Clinton and the DNC against their political adversary in the 2016 presidential race, with the assistance of the Obama administration led DOJ, FBI and other intelligence agencies, and promoted by Democrat left politicians, with the aggressive, often hysterical and passionately partisan support of the Democrat left mass media.

Was this a conspiracy between Hillary, the DNC and these departments of the Obama government? I do not know for sure, but it certainly needs to be investigated thoroughly, with any wrongdoers prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. That is where the attention now needs to focus on within the DOJ.

 

On one hand I think it would be very interesting to see Barr explain what powers he believes the Attorney General has and also to explain why he has lied numerous times. However, at the end of the day it isn't going to change anything. It is obvious to anyone trying to be objective that Barr overstepped his authority.

 

He found no legal conspiracy under the mandate given to him. But did Trump act appropriately from a public perception point of view...? Nope as the polling shows.

Does executive authority mean you can hinder an investigation into yourself? That’s what’s at heart here and the public thinks that’s shady behavior.

Not according to the report....