The Mueller Report

Red Dreams said:
Legal reasons that Congress should not be aware of??

That is simply not true.

If that were so Congress would not have voted unanimously to release the report in full.
Click to expand...

They are aware of them. They are just appealing to their base. Have you not even read the reasons why some of the report will be redacted? He specifically cites discussions with the special prosecutor about it. If Muller was being used as a political pawn for denying the chance for the American public to see the report, I see no reason to believe he wouldn't release a public statement to the contrary. And we already have evidence that grand jury testimony is often redacted, even in landmark reports. Lots of evidence.
 
Last edited:
Well I for one am shocked, the White House is advising details pertaining to the obstruction charges will be covered by privilege and not released.

When you know how clever your supporters are, it's actually pretty brilliant. Have the whole house vote to release the report in its entirety (bipartisanship, hoorah!) have Trump say he supports releasing it all. Then don't release any bad bits, but do say how for transparency you are, and look how many pages you did release!
 
Regardless, if the American people do not get to see that report and end up having to eat a 4 page summary and move on... That is a feckries.
 
Beachryan said:
Well I for one am shocked, the White House is advising details pertaining to the obstruction charges will be covered by privilege and not released.

When you know how clever your supporters are, it's actually pretty brilliant. Have the whole house vote to release the report in its entirety (bipartisanship, hoorah!) have Trump say he supports releasing it all. Then don't release any bad bits, but do say how for transparency you are, and look how many pages you did release!
Click to expand...

There's like a 100% chance someone in the FBI is going to leak this. The only way for Trump to lose it from here is if he puts out a heavily redacted report and then have the original one leak in a day or two.
 
Brwned said:
They are aware of them. They are just appealing to their base. Have you not even read the reasons why some of the report will be redacted? He specifically cites discussions with the special prosecutor about it. If Muller was being used as a political pawn for denying the chance for the American public to see the report, I see no reason to believe he wouldn't release a public statement to the contrary. And we already have evidence that grand jury testimony is often redacted, even in landmark reports. Lots of evidence.
Click to expand...

I said unanimously voted to release. Not just Democrats.

Redacted from the general public. Not from Congress.

Congress would not ask the report to be released if there were legal reasons why they should not be.
 
Is there anything that could block a release of the full report? Feck the summary.
 
langster said:
CNN's actual news coverage is excellent imho, CNN international that we get here in the UK is also very good, as is Shep Smith on Fox. I also think Anderson Cooper and Chris Cuomo are very fair it's just many of their guests are one sided. Overall there really is no comparison between CNN and Fox. Fox is way more to the right than CNN is to the left.
Click to expand...

Appreciate it. That's helpful.
 
Red Dreams said:
I said unanimously voted to release. Not just Democrats.

Redacted from the general public. Not from Congress.

Congress would not ask the report to be released if there were legal reasons why they should not be.
Click to expand...

It's generally thought that releasing it to the congress will result in releasing it to the public, right? That's the consensus I've read from both sides.

Maybe I've missed something in the last 12 hours. Has someone said that the report will be released in a heavily diminished form? As I understand it, the Senate intelligence committee will receive it in full, by law. After that there are legal considerations to weigh up, in terms of releasing it further. None of that sounds very sinister to me.

If he was intent on secrecy, why would Barr release the summary report publicly, instead of just sending it to congress, when it contains the most important assessments by Muller?

Pexbo said:
Are you aware of Barr’s previous while you are giving him the benefit of the doubt?
Click to expand...

I watched his confirmation hearing which discussed his letter to Trump in great detail. Is there more to it than that? His previous time didn't seem particularly controversial. He earned the benefit of the doubt from me in that hearing and his subsequent actions, which have been entirely in line with what he said he'd do.

If he goes on to hide a shitload of stuff that isn't related to the grand jury then I'd really be very surprised. I'm not saying it's impossible but I don't see any evidence for it being the most likely outcome, based on what's happened so far. What am I missing?
 
Last edited:
Most likely scenario imo is that Barrs summary is factually true and actually a fair assessment of the conclusions regarding the case, since it would be mad for him to whitewash something from a report that a.) everyone and his dog want released and b.) has been passed around several dozens of people that are ready to correct it, Mueller himself being the first of them.

My theory is that Republicans block the release because they expect some degree of political damage from the details of what has been investigated even though these actions weren't illegal, for some reason or the other.

Or Republicans could be blocking it because Barr has totally misrepresented the findings and needs them to cover his ass all the while hoping that dems don't leak whatever they can. That's possible, too. Just very implausible imo.
 
Brwned said:
It's generally thought that releasing it to the congress will result in releasing it to the public, right? That's the consensus I've read from both sides.

Maybe I've missed something in the last 12 hours. Has someone said that the report will be released in a heavily diminished form? As I understand it, the Senate intelligence committee will receive it in full, by law. After that there are legal considerations to weigh up, in terms of releasing it further. None of that sounds very sinister to me.

If he was intent on secrecy, why would Barr release the summary report publicly, instead of just sending it to congress, when it contains the most important assessments by Muller?
Click to expand...

The Speaker has demanded it be released complete immediately (she knows the law)After it was voted unanimously to do so.
There were no further indictments. So that excuse does not hold water.

The Summary report was meant for public consumption by Barr for politics obviously as yesterday's Trump and his supporters celebrations...short lived as it turned out...proved.
 
Red Dreams said:
The Speaker has demanded it be released complete immediately (she knows the law)After it was voted unanimously to do so.
There were no further indictments. So that excuse does not hold water.

The Summary report was meant for public consumption by Barr for politics obviously as yesterday's Trump and his supporters celebrations...short lived as it turned out...proved.
Click to expand...

Can you just lay out explicitly what you think, instead of the circular discussion? Is it likely, in your view, that the essential conclusions of the report were not included in Barr's summary?

If yes, what has led you to that conclusion? If no, is the rest of it so important that it should occupy so much of your focus?

It makes sense to want the full report. I'm finding it difficult to understand why you don't want to engage with the key conclusions of the report, though. It would be quite a big conspiracy for it not to include the key conclusions, don't you think?

My view mostly chimes with @Javi's, for what it's worth.
 
Last edited:
Sweet Square said:
I think its like the QAon stuff some Conservatives are into(Well ok Maddow is far educational) or when I'm watch Alex Jones quite accurately describing the inner works of Twin Peaks(Again Maddow far more educational). In the end is just a bit of fun.

The only issue I have is when people start to take it seriously and start basing their politics off this stuff. Fox News would be a brilliant piece of television if it didn't turn everyone grandparents into Nazis.
Click to expand...
I agree. My sympathies to anyone that bases their politics on them.

 
Brwned said:
Can you just lay out explicitly what you think, instead of the circular discussion? Is it likely, in your view, that the essential conclusions of the report were not included in Barr's summary?

If yes, what has led you to that conclusion? If no, is the rest of it so important that it should occupy so much of your focus?

It makes sense to want the full report. I'm finding it difficult to understand why you don't want to engage with the key conclusions of the report, though. It would be quite a big conspiracy for it not to include the key conclusions, don't you think?

My view mostly chimes with @Javi's, for what it's worth.
Click to expand...
Those are purely conclusions on criminality right?
 
Brwned said:
Can you just lay out explicitly what you think, instead of the circular discussion? Is it likely, in your view, that the essential conclusions of the report were not included in Barr's summary?

If yes, what has led you to that conclusion? If no, is the rest of it so important that it should occupy so much of your focus?

It makes sense to want the full report. I'm finding it difficult to understand why you don't want to engage with the key conclusions of the report, though. It would be quite a big conspiracy for it not to include the key conclusions, don't you think?

My view mostly chimes with @Javi's, for what it's worth.
Click to expand...

As you have accepted the Speaker has the right to demand the full report with every vote behind her, the real question is why Trump/Barr do not want to release said report in full.

What any of use think about what is really in the report is irrelevant to this discussion.

Nor is it relevant about any other poster agreeing with you.

If Barr will not comply with Congress demands, it will be subpoenaed.

The fact it will take a subpoena to release a report is highly disturbing.
 
ErranMorad said:
I have no doubt Russia tried to meddle and plant seeds of discontent. Putin's life goal seems to be destabilizing the West & thwart democracy. What he found in Kumquat is a useful idiot. An egomaniac who wouldn't care about norms or the rule of law. So, he decided to put his weight behind him.

We have known this all along. Unfortunately, little has been done in those regards to create systems to better prevent these kind of interventions from Russia or China or another foreign power.

Anyway, I have always maintained the best route available to get Trump out of office is through the ballot box. Dems did well and took control of the house in '18, not because of Trump & Russia but because of Trump's nasty rhetoric & the republican policies aimed to boost the already wealthy. The same needs to be highlighted in 2020 as well. Not many give a flying feck about his Tax returns or investigations into his foundation or businesses. Not that they shouldn't be pursued, but that is not the main story here. Everyone knows, including his supporters, that his is a crook.
Click to expand...

Those who are invested in Trump do not care about him being a criminal. They think "they all do it".
They do not have the intellect to comprehend being subordinate to a foreign power.
What they Do understand is Trump's rhetoric on racism.

They see the country becoming more and more non white.
They see non white people at work, on the streets and in the malls.
They blame these people for the loss of their jobs, poor wages, their shitty jobs, their debts and no future for their own kids who may not even have their shitty jobs to pass on to.
He is their last hope.

We have seen this movie before in history.
 
Red Dreams said:
Those who are invested in Trump do not care about him being a criminal. They think "they all do it".
They do not have the intellect to comprehend being subordinate to a foreign power.
What they Do understand is Trump's rhetoric on racism.

They see the country becoming more and more non white.
They see non white people at work, on the streets and in the malls.
They blame these people for the loss of their jobs, poor wages, their shitty jobs, their debts and no future for their own kids who may not even have their shitty jobs to pass on to.
He is their last hope.

We have seen this movie before in history.
Click to expand...
A terrible truth, but one I see every day. Good post.
 
Red Defence said:
If Barr’s known for 3 weeks why did it take him so long to write a 4 page letter. Unless perhaps there was a lot of other incriminating stuff to wade through.
Click to expand...

That's because the obstruction aspect was only one part of the probe. Mueller continued the investigation after ending the obstruction probe and then handed over the full report on Friday to the DOJ.
 
shabadu84 said:
Those are purely conclusions on criminality right?
Click to expand...

Mueller is a prosecutor and he picked up a counterintelligence investigation which added on elements of a criminal investigation. Naturally that is the focus of his report and the key conclusions relate to that.

Of course many of the details picked up in the report will describe Trump's ethics, judgment, priorities, politics and more, and they are of great interest to congress and the public, but they are by definition a secondary part of the investigation.

If you decide you don't like the primary conclusions so you only care about the secondary conclusions, that makes a lot of the posturing about the investigation now highly questionable. It adds legitimacy to the right wing criticism all this time, that folks on here and others like them deemed utterly ridiculous.

The criminal component of the investigation certainly wasn't an afterthought in the months proceeding this. Why are some people acting like it is now?
 


The level of gloating is sickening. These cnuts are liars and criminals, everyone knows it, I'm sure even their dumbfeck supporters do too, they just don't care.

Meanwhile Trumps golfing bills top $91 MILLION.

My disgust for these crooks is at an all time high. The majority of us work our arses off and go out of our way to be honest and kind while these crooks are evil and make millions out of being dishonest cnuts....

 
Last edited:
Brwned said:
Mueller is a prosecutor and he picked up a counterintelligence investigation which added on elements of a criminal investigation. Naturally that is the focus of his report and the key conclusions relate to that.

Of course many of the details picked up in the report will describe Trump's ethics, judgment, priorities, politics and more, and they are of great interest to congress and the public, but they are by definition a secondary part of the investigation.

If you decide you don't like the primary conclusions so you only care about the secondary conclusions, that makes a lot of the posturing about the investigation now highly questionable. It adds legitimacy to the right wing criticism all this time, that folks on here and others like them deemed utterly ridiculous.

The criminal component of the investigation certainly wasn't an afterthought in the months proceeding this. Why are some people acting like it is now?
Click to expand...
I would think the totality of it all is what matters most, especially given that issues of "Trump's ethics, judgment, priorities, politics and more" would all have been touched upon if not assessed. Those factors should not be an afterthought any more than the criminal culpability question, should they?

For example, in Roger Stone's indictment, we found out he was in communication with WikiLeaks about the timing of the release DNC stolen emails, relaying information to a Trump campaign official. That's not been deemed criminal, and wasn't part of the charges against him but seems like a pretty fecking important detail about the behavior and would be equally important to know. By calling that a secondary conclusion, you're making this solely a question of legality and not also of propriety.

I think the whole picture is also especially important given that we know the report, in Barr's summary, presented evidence which left open the question of obstruction justice - a question historically answered by Congress, not the AG.
 
shabadu84 said:
I would think the totality of it all is what matters most, especially given that issues of "Trump's ethics, judgment, priorities, politics and more" would all have been touched upon if not assessed. Those factors should not be an afterthought any more than the criminal culpability question, should they?

For example, in Roger Stone's indictment, we found out he was in communication with WikiLeaks about the timing of the release DNC stolen emails, relaying information to a Trump campaign official. That's not been deemed criminal, and wasn't part of the charges against him but seems like a pretty fecking important detail about the behavior and would be equally important to know. By calling that a secondary conclusion, you're making this solely a question of legality and not also of propriety.

I think the whole picture is also especially important given that we know the report, in Barr's summary, presented evidence which left open the question of obstruction justice - a question historically answered by Congress, not the AG.
Click to expand...

Yes let's keep dealing with answers to questions we don't like by asking new questions and ignoring the old ones. That's a sure fire way to build legitimacy and show the country what the priorities are
 
shabadu84 said:
I would think the totality of it all is what matters most, especially given that issues of "Trump's ethics, judgment, priorities, politics and more" would all have been touched upon if not assessed. Those factors should not be an afterthought any more than the criminal culpability question, should they?

For example, in Roger Stone's indictment, we found out he was in communication with WikiLeaks about the timing of the release DNC stolen emails, relaying information to a Trump campaign official. That's not been deemed criminal, and wasn't part of the charges against him but seems like a pretty fecking important detail about the behavior and would be equally important to know. By calling that a secondary conclusion, you're making this solely a question of legality and not also of propriety.

I think the whole picture is also especially important given that we know the report, in Barr's summary, presented evidence which left open the question of obstruction justice - a question historically answered by Congress, not the AG.
Click to expand...

One of the main issues I have with the Barr summary is his decision to make a judgement rather than congress.


He’s made the argument that the President has no criminal exposure and yet he has removed the only checks and balance left on the President with that view point by leaving Congress out of the question.

If the President is not criminally liable then he has to be politically liable and answer to the House before the Senate decide if he has committed a crime.

Barr has made him god emperor. The Executive branch are protected fully by the DOJ. It’s althe definition of a constitutional crisis.
 
shabadu84 said:
It's not a new question. It's an unanswered question.
Click to expand...

Do you have any thoughts on the answers already provided? Or, better yet, so you have any thoughts on this?

2cents said:
Has the Taibbi article been posted yet? Well worth the (long) read:

It's official: Russiagate is this generation's WMD
The Iraq war faceplant damaged the reputation of the press. Russiagate just destroyed it
Click to expand...

I'm personally shocked by this report. I've followed a lot of this story and so much of the reporting contained in there went totally under my radar, and from the stuff posted on here, most people's radars.
 
Brwned said:
Do you have any thoughts on the answers already provided? Or, better yet, so you have any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...
The SCO did not find evidence of the Trump campaign conspiring with Russia to interfere in the election. That is good for Trump. That is good for the office of the president.

Is it good for the USA? TBD.

Trump's actions (or lack of) should impact how we view him as President, especially on the obstruction issue, and I don't think any us can give a definitive judgement on that very important question. I'd say it's even more important given that the Barr letter is now being used as a testament to his fitness for office and that we have another election coming up.

And I do think enforcing certain norms and standards is important. We can't just keep lowering the bar for Trump. Certainly not to just legal/not legal?
 
Brwned said:
I'm personally shocked by this report. I've followed a lot of this story and so much of the reporting contained in there went totally under my radar, and from the stuff posted on here, most people's radars.
Click to expand...

I felt similar reading it first. Especially the stuff about Steele’s credibility (or lack of). I always understood the dossier had many problems, but I still assumed all along that it was produced with basically honest intentions by someone respected in his field. Looks like he’s just a hack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.