The Mueller Report

The "obstruction" thing is completely pointless if there was no "collusion".

I'd argue the opposite. If he responds to a toothless attack on his presidency by obstructing justice, what do you think he'll do when they get close to his actual crimes? Tolerating such a response can have a lasting effect on presidential norms, making it easier for people like Nixon to exploit.

It doesn't matter what the case is. The president can't be allowed to obstruct justice. It undermines the entire system. That happens a lot anyway but allowing it to happen without a fight is ludicrous.
 
The "obstruction" thing is completely pointless if there was no "collusion".

Obstruction is a completely separate crime.

The scope of the investigation was not confined to “collusion”. Even if Trump did not “collude” he could have been worried that the investigation would have uncovered other more serious crimes and therefore obstructed it.
 
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.

Without ever having read the dossier myself I wouldn't feel comfortable making such a judgment, but it certainly raises suspicions. Surely we'll hear more from it at some point, as a follow up to this endless saga?

I'm more surprised that Isikoff would write a book on such dodgy ground, admit as much later, and make no attempt to renounce his claims in a public way. The idea that it would be interpreted as going against the resistance is a legitimate one though. He contributed to it but ultimately these folks don't control the atmosphere they operate in.
 
I'm more surprised that Isikoff would write a book on such dodgy ground, admit as much later, and make no attempt to renounce his claims in a public way. The idea that it would be interpreted as going against the resistance is a legitimate one though. He contributed to it but ultimately these folks don't control the atmosphere they operate in.

Had a look back over my posts in the relevant threads to see how they hold up now. While I posted some skeptical stuff, there were definitely a couple of points where I got carried away with everything. Still this from May 2017 isn’t too bad:

Seems to be a lot of second-rate journalists, chancers, and frauds trying to launch careers off of this story.
 
Obstruction is a completely separate crime.

The scope of the investigation was not confined to “collusion”. Even if Trump did not “collude” he could have been worried that the investigation would have uncovered other more serious crimes and therefore obstructed it.
This is how I as a lay person feels. But not how Barr and Rosenstein feel. And they're more qualified, sadly.
 
Had a look back over my posts in the relevant threads to see how they hold up now. While I posted some skeptical stuff, there were definitely a couple of points where I got carried away with everything. Still this from May 2017 isn’t too bad:

Think we all did to be fair. I think Trump really shifting the norms of how politics works and the utter insanity of his Presidency caused a lot of confusion at first. People were willing to believe anything any of his opponents said to bring him down. Although I don't doubt there's potentially a gem or two in there that's gone untouched that would be damaging to him, even if there's nothing to actually bring him down considering how solidly his party is now behind him.
 
This is how I as a lay person feels. But not how Barr and Rosenstein feel. And they're more qualified, sadly.

They also have their own biases and prejudices, as do plenty of people within the American legal system.
 
This is how I as a lay person feels. But not how Barr and Rosenstein feel. And they're more qualified, sadly.

There’s also the case that he was obstructing to protect other people. To protect Flynn, Manafort, Stone ect.

He quite clearly obstructed justice, Mueller clearly laid that out and was leaving it to Congress to deal with and Barr shut the door on everything.
 
There’s also the case that he was obstructing to protect other people. To protect Flynn, Manafort, Stone ect.

He quite clearly obstructed justice, Mueller clearly laid that out and was leaving it to Congress to deal with and Barr shut the door on everything.
Oh I agree, but don't see a world where McConnell doesn't know how damaging releasing it would be, hence we'll never know.
 
Oh I agree, but don't see a world where McConnell doesn't know how damaging releasing it would be, hence we'll never know.

Which is why I’m absolutely fecking preying that 2020 results in Democrats holding all 3 branches of government next year, releasing the report in full and bringing charges against all the criminal actors for Obstruction ect.


@Eboue Narrator Voice: Won’t happen, Democrats are right wing and enable the GOP.
 
If the report is supposedly damning in its entirety, then someone would leak it. The most probable outcome is, the summary is adequate. Otherwise, why would Barr risk his career for something so easy to verify.
 
CNN President Jeff Zucker Defends Network’s Coverage of Mueller Probe: ‘We Are Not Investigators’


After the conclusion of Robert Mueller’s investigation, which, according to a summary by Attorney General William Barr, found President Donald Trump and his campaign did not colluded with Russia, many are questioning the media’s wall-to-wall coverage of the fiasco.

While Mueller’s investigation did not make a determination on obstruction of justice, Barr and Deputy Rod Rosenstein concluded there wasn’t enough evidence for an offense.

Defending the network’s extensive coverage of the investigation, CNN President Jeff Zucker told The New York Times his employees are not investigators and he was “entirely comfortable” with their reporting.

“We are not investigators. We are journalists, and our role is to report the facts as we know them, which is exactly what we did,” Zucker said. “A sitting president’s own Justice Department investigated his campaign for collusion with a hostile nation. That’s not enormous because the media says so. That’s enormous because it’s unprecedented.”

When the quote was shared by
Brian Stelter
, CNN’s chief media correspondent, it received criticism from those pointing out that CNN’s pundits relied heavily on speculation while covering the Russia probe:

Basically showing what they are. An entertainment channel.
 
If the report is supposedly damning in its entirety, then someone would leak it. The most probable outcome is, the summary is adequate. Otherwise, why would Barr risk his career for something so easy to verify.
What is easy to verify?
How many people were you thinking had copies of this report?
 
Last edited:
If the report is supposedly damning in its entirety, then someone would leak it. The most probable outcome is, the summary is adequate. Otherwise, why would Barr risk his career for something so easy to verify.
At the very least, members of Congress with sufficient security clearance should be receiving the report in full and all of Congress should be receiving a scrubbed version given the counterintelligence sensitivities.

I can't think of why anyone, especially not members of Congress, would be against that except for political reasons.
 
What is easy to verify?
How many people were you thinking had copies of this report?
I do not know how many , but definitely more than 2 I'd guess. After so many leaks( not by OSC, but agencies in general), surely if this one is the one deciding if the president is involved in treasonous activity, someone would do it.

Moreover , the leak may not be to the public , but to a member of Congress.
 
I do not know how many , but definitely more than 2 I'd guess. After so many leaks( not by OSC, but agencies in general), surely if this one is the one deciding if the president is involved in treasonous activity, someone would do it.

Moreover , the leak may not be to the public , but to a member of Congress.
Well we know Mueller will have a copy and so will Barr but not sure anyone else will have one.
 
Well we know Mueller will have a copy and so will Barr but not sure anyone else will have one.
You think Mueller typed it himself in a one nighter ? Probably half a dozen staff members took part to prepare it.

Same for Barr, he did not lock himself in a closet and read the report under a blanket with a flashlight.
 
You think Mueller typed it himself in a one nighter ? Probably half a dozen staff members took part to prepare it.

Same for Barr, he did not lock himself in a closet and read the report under a blanket with a flashlight.
They might have helped to prepare it but it doesn’t mean they have a copy of it. Barr would have gone through it with Rosenstein and maybe others (especially daughter and son-in-law) which may mean they have seen parts of it but that doesn’t mean that they have their own copies of it to take home. Extra copies will most likely be stored safely. They can hardly refuse to give a copy to Congress but give a copy to staff members to keep.
 
Last edited:
You think Mueller typed it himself in a one nighter ? Probably half a dozen staff members took part to prepare it.

Same for Barr, he did not lock himself in a closet and read the report under a blanket with a flashlight.

I think that all 19 lawyers in the team have read the full report. That‘s just basic quality management. Must have been a dozen involved at DOJ too (you get that by just Barrs and Rosenateins staff).
 
The media has miss represented this BARR MEMO. This is not the mueller report. Barr is a political hack that has tried to lawerly write this report to make his boss look good. The barr memo is cherry picking things and if the media and others knew how to parse through feckery that lawyers due to make someting that its not they would realise that we need to see the report itself and not what Barr has sumerised it to be.

The biggest red flag is when Barr states that there are no sealed indictments that havent been made public. That is categorically false as we ALREADY know that Assange is subject to a sealed indictement by the SCO. We know this because a mistake they made in a redaction from November. But the media seems to have forgettien that. What Barr really meant was there are no sealed indictements for the POTUS. Which DUH he cant be indicted by their own accord. He could possible an unindicdted co conspirator for a multitude of sealed indictments already out there. Mueller had a narrow scope and has farmed out everything that wasnt in it to the DC and SDNY offices.

We need to see the mueller report and not a summary from a man that Trump hired and said well noting to see here.
 
Mueller's scope was always to see if Trump and his team coordinated with russia to hack the dnc. They didnt do that, no shit , who thought they did. The trump team were all about quid pro quo. Thats why when the BARR memo says '[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,'

For those who do english they will realise that this is the quote from the MIDDLE of a sentence and is not actually a full quote. Its something lawyers do to take something out of context. For all we know the ACTUAL MULLER REPORT could have said "Even though we found that trump , had a pee pee tape, is a putin stooge , had quid pro quo with the russian government to ease sanctions once they helped with the elections , The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,"

The BARR MEMO is very very carefully worded.
 
Last edited:
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.
I'd say Fox and MSNBC are a lot closer but would still put Fox as the more partisan.
 
Mueller's scope was always to see if Trump and his team coordinated with russia to hack the dnc. They didnt do that, no shit , who thought they did. The trump team were all about quid pro quo. Thats why when the BARR memo says 'The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,'

For those who do english they will realise that this is the quote from the MIDDLE of a sentence and is not actually a full quote. Its something lawyers do to take something out of context. For all we know the ACTUAL MULLER REPORT could have said "Even though we found that trump , had a pee pee tape, is a putin stooge , had quid pro quo with the russian government to ease sanctions once they helped with the elections , The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,"

The BARR MEMO is very very carefully worded.

If we need proof that summary report is garbage, all we need to see is the fact the GOP is blocking the release of the full report.
 
If we need proof that summary report is garbage, all we need to see is the fact the GOP is blocking the release of the full report.
Well that's also true and telling. But it will come out. It has to come out. Surely it will be atleast leaked.
 
Had a look back over my posts in the relevant threads to see how they hold up now. While I posted some skeptical stuff, there were definitely a couple of points where I got carried away with everything. Still this from May 2017 isn’t too bad:

You definitely seemed more wary of it than me! I didn't get that sense at all. Lots of partisan reporting but I hadn't realised how few journalistic ethics were on display by so many.

I think that article makes a compelling case for how difficult it would be for anyone who closely followed the story to not get carried away. I'm really surprised how unwilling the MSM were to fact check themselves on things when new evidence came up, or how unwilling they were to really own those mistakes instead of whispering about them in small book talks, minor radio shows etc. Makes the conspiratorial tone from many on here much more understandable. You can't absolve citizens of their responsibilities to be discerning consumers of important news, but you do have to acknowledge the various roadblocks put in place by major institutions. Still, the people doubling down on it now...I struggle to understand.
 
Its just another incredible juxtaposition that they are saying "complete exoneration" whilst refusing to release the report. Very, very basic logic dictates that if it were indeed an exoneration (or just generally in favour of Trump/GOP) then they would be keen to release it. How can they not be pulled up on that very simple fact?
 
Its just another incredible juxtaposition that they are saying "complete exoneration" whilst refusing to release the report. Very, very basic logic dictates that if it were indeed an exoneration (or just generally in favour of Trump/GOP) then they would be keen to release it. How can they not be pulled up on that very simple fact?
Im willing to bet my house that the report is extremely damning to the president and had the DOJ not had a guideline taht says he cant be indicted then the president would have been locked up at a minimum for obstruction of justice. Barr leaves so many clues in his summary that this is the case but because he has been a lawyer for 4 decades he knows how to spin a sentence
 
Its just another incredible juxtaposition that they are saying "complete exoneration" whilst refusing to release the report. Very, very basic logic dictates that if it were indeed an exoneration (or just generally in favour of Trump/GOP) then they would be keen to release it. How can they not be pulled up on that very simple fact?
Because the people we need to convince are incapable of that nuance.
 
Im willing to bet my house that the report is extremely damning to the president and had the DOJ not had a guideline taht says he cant be indicted then the president would have been locked up at a minimum for obstruction of justice. Barr leaves so many clues in his summary that this is the case but because he has been a lawyer for 4 decades he knows how to spin a sentence

The matter of a sitting president being indicted has not been tested...yet.
But we can be sure when the full report does come out...after a Supreme Court fight I expect, it will be highly damaging to Trump.

Barr is another Trump lackey without any integrity whatsoever.

The Democrats will keep pushing of course.
Meanwhile they need to focus on 2020 and Trump has already given them a head start saying he wants to repeal the ACA.
 
Why? It’s obstruction of justice not obstruction of collusion.

Yes, but the assumption was that the main goal of the "obstruction" was to hide the "collusion". If there was no collusion at all, then the obstruction thing is toothless. Trump can just say that he didn't like Comey's face, hair, behaviour or some other bullshit ... and that's why he fired Comey. It is a meaningless battle now.

And what exactly was the "obstruction" about beyond Comey? People can't even define it in a simple way. Compare it with Bill Clinton lying under oath, which was very clear-cut. Nothing happened to Bill, nothing will happen to Trump. It is better if the Dems focus on beating him getting more votes. It shouldn't be that hard, he is the worst president in the history of the US.
 
I keep seeing this parroted around. How is this going to change anyone's opinions? He's still an objectively terrible president. His approval numbers are still going to be low.

I don't see how it matters a jot. His supporters couldn't give a shit what he does.

Said it already but this idea Trump has to be a criminal to get people to turn on him is laughable, if not scary. He's a fcuking idiot, blatant racist and complete embarrassment - and yet he's still probably good for the 2020 win. :lol:
 
Agreed on that, ~42% approval rating seems to be his baseline. It's moved above and below but seems to always move back to that level over time. He may get a short term boost, but in a few months when he's invariably embroiled in another scandal or he's made some ridiculous political gaffe, his approval will come back to that same area.
 
Im willing to bet my house that the report is extremely damning to the president and had the DOJ not had a guideline taht says he cant be indicted then the president would have been locked up at a minimum for obstruction of justice. Barr leaves so many clues in his summary that this is the case but because he has been a lawyer for 4 decades he knows how to spin a sentence

Assume that Mueller did find something really bad:

1. If Mueller is independent, and found something important, and put it in the report, and then Barr hides that... then Mueller can give Democrats some clues and help uncover the whole thing. This is a huge personal risk for Barr to take.

2. If Mueller does not whisper anything to anyone, then obviously he does not care for the truth to come out. In that case, he probably wrote nothing really damning in the report in the first place, after all he is a Republican.

Again, that is assuming that there was something really bad to find. We don't know that, it is quite possible that there wasn't.

The biggest trap would be for the Dems to fight hard for months and months for the full report to come out, and then just before the elections the full report does come out and contains nothing important.