Opinion : "Mueller Report" will result in new investigations in Congress
Analysts are going through the now released Mueller Report.
There is more than enough in there to trigger investigations in Congress.
The report specifically states that the prosecutors were not able to conclude that Trump did not obstruct justice.
It also shows that Mueller's team was not able to acquire sufficient evidence about various topics because witnesses were not forthcoming.
I see calls for impeachment hearings forthcoming virtually immediately.
Tags
Who is online
76 visitors
Barr misrepresented the report. He is disgraced (no surprise).
What caught my ear was the report's claim that on some topics they were unable to develop all the evidence they needed to reach a conclusion. That is why congressional hearings will skyrocket now.
I guess conservatives got a different version of the report, so far everything I'm reading is a clear condemnation of Trump and the criminals and liars he surrounded himself with. Apparently conservative Republicans have completely abandoned any pretense of demanding an ethical standard of the President and have lowered the bar to "no concrete evidence of criminal conspiracy". Even Sarah Sanders admitted she lied to protect this inept moron in the oval office, but that doesn't matter to those with no shame, no ethics and don't care about truth as long as they feel they are getting their way.
I've been saying for three years that Trump supporters are the real problem in this country. Today is just more proof of it.
We are in a non shooting war.
And Iv'e been saying that progressive ideology is a cancer to our nation.
So the numerous indictments, guilty pleas and convictions of dozens of those around Trump that the Mueller report concluded "materially impeded" their investigation preventing them from confirming any actual criminal conspiracy, but certainly not exonerating them either, is the "good and pure conservative ideology" that will save our nation, while those who demand accountability, transparency, equality and justice are the "cancer" to our nation? What a seriously fucked up world view.
Mueller had all the force of the US government to make his case. He spent over two years and as of yet untold millions after other investigations, yet came up with not a single conviction of a Trump official conspiring with "Russia". So, why don't you admit what Mueller admitted - THERE WAS NO COLLUSION.
As for a charge of "materially impeded", we know better. Take a look at the part on George Papadopoulos. Tell me he wasn't set up? Better still, wait and see how that turns out.
The investigators and the leakers and the unmaskers are all going face investigations of their own. It's their turn now!
Yeah, but you are the ones that support Trump. Thats just pitiful.
My dearest boy, feel free to post all the derogatory Hillary stuff you want. Just please do not help put Trump back in office. Pretty please? With a cherry on top?
So it looks like your posit that no investigations have occurred, that no leakers have been exposed, and that 'unmaskers' haven't been prosecuted because of Mueller's investigation. So that tells me that Trump's DOJ can't walk and chew gum at the same time. You must be proud.
You really need to read the report. The indictments are for causes NOT related to collusion. They are PURE greed by the azzwipes indicted.
Sister - sorry, but for your information, Trump is STILL in office.
And when Hillary starts her trial - you better believe I'll be cheering for the prosecutor's side.
You do know that he didn't "Dr. Seuss" you.
I need to re-reg so I can vote that one up more than once.
Did you forget that it was Obama that protected Bears Ears/Chaco Canyon and it's Trump that opened it for gas/oil/mining exploration?
Seems that you did...I have a lot more if you want to go down that path, 1st.
But you supported crook Hillary, that's even more pitiful.
I didn't see any claim that Papadopoulos, Flynn or even the Russians indiceted were in it for profit. I must have missed that, what page is that on 1st.
And the Dems supported Hillary and Bill, which makes them equally pitiful.
Massive, irreversible, terminal HDS, there. Sad case.
So true, but at first glance, we find there is fodder for both sides in the report that defies DOJ guidelines. Remember all those unnamed sourced bombshell stories from the media?
We now know:
Michael Cohen never went to Prague. (that was one of the unverified claims of the Steele Dossier)
Carter Page was not a Russian Agent. (regardless of all those he met, he was never a Russian Agent)
Donald Trump did not direct Cohen to lie to Congress (Another Buzzfeed false story)
Cohen's call with a Russian did not prove "collusion" (Another Chris Hayes falsie)
Paul Manafort was not giving polling data to Putin (A John Marshall false story)
The underlying documents would help the Senate Judiciary Committee more than Nader's crew and Nader wants all of it even the Grand Jury stuff!
How droll.
"I see calls for impeachment hearings forthcoming virtually immediately.
Then I have but one question. Do you recall what Nancy Pelosi said about impeachment?
"Impeachment is so divisive to the country that unless there’s something so compelling and overwhelming and bipartisan , I don’t think we should go down that path, because it divides the country,” Pelosi said in a Washington Post interview published Monday.
Clearly, congressional Republicans don't see, as you do, "more than enough" for impeachment. You won't have bipartisan support and no conviction in the Senate and most important of all you won't have Nancy Pelosi on board, so how can there be impeachment?
Yet.
It took quite a while for Goldwater to reach the tipping point...
Lacking a conviction in the Senate didn't stop the House from impeaching Clinton, did it? As for Pelosi being on board, I think she'll wait to hear from Mueller before she decides whether his report is 'compelling and overwhelming' enough.
And that is why they will go absolutely nowhere. If the experts can't find clear and convincing evidence, I doubt that the Democrat bumblers will do much better.
Yeah, just like the Mueller report that "totally exonerated" Scumbag........
He disgraced himself before he was put in charge of the DoJ with that unsolicited legal blow-job for Scumbag that he wrote to get the job.
Perhaps they are waiting for Barr to testify about his bullshit summaries of the report and get him on the record lying...
You bore quickly. We have only had the evidence of Barr's bald faced lies for just over 24 hours.
It took 4 years to 'get' Nixon.
What did my comment state about Trump XD?
Please be specific.
Accepted.
What in my comment said anything about 'get BARR'?
There is TON of proof of 'collusion' in the report. Go read it.
There is a LEGAL distinction between Trump's favorite term 'collusion' and a violation of the statute prohibiting CONSPIRACY. The evidence of 'collusion' does not raise to a criminal violation of the CONSPIRACY statute.
That already happened in 2017. Did you miss it?
I already answered that question.
Patience.
Please do expand on that.
Enquiring minds really do want to know !
tick, tick, tick …... I expect some
as a response !
But what the heck.....I had to ask anyway !
102 pages under the subheading "Russian Government Links to and Contact with the Trump Campaign.
Enquiring minds have READ at least the summary of the report for themselves. You should try it.
Oh....I'm more interested in YOUR interpretation !
You up for it ?
Why post a bald faced lie?
Sure. Can you point me to someone willing to have such a discussion in good faith?
I'm truly interested !
Amuse me…….
Bet ya can't do it !
Why lie?
Nope.
I'll hold out until you double dog dare me. /s
I knew you couldn't do it.
Your wordy, but say nothing !
Couldn't do what? Post my interpretation? Ridiculous.
This from the emoji king...
This is a virtue that they will never seem to get, it seems. They were demanding that this investigation come to an end and it has and now they're complaining about the results (as we knew they would, of course).
This from a Scumbag supporter. 'Tis to guffaw.
It Figures !
One interesting revelation is that Mueller found that Trump asked white house counsel Don Mc Ghan to lie and say Trump had not wanted to fire Mueller when that was in fact what Trump had told McGhan.
Trying to get the white house counsel to lie sounds like an impeachable offense to me.
The Mueller Report destroys the right wing talking points that this investigation was based on a hoax.
Let's see how many on the right have the guts to realize that.
It was a hoax in all manner, right from the start with no criminal pretext and Mueller unlawfully leading any such investigation.
I take it you havent heard anything about the report.
He obviously gets all his information from fake Facebook accounts spamming Russian propaganda memes like that one.
She probably actually read some of it. You are the one who most likely "heard" about it and most likely from CNN & MSNBC
First of all 1st is a she. Second of all Facebook has claimed to have eliminated such accounts. Beyond that, I don't think there is a single human being who was influenced by that so called "propaganda".
Do you think FB is being used by "Russia?
If you don't think false advertising that reached 120 million Americans didn't influence a single person, then I don't think anything I say can penetrate the dense lead vault you must use to store your beliefs. As for the rest of humanity, the fact is most human brains are pliable and very susceptible to advertising. Study's have shown how we might not even recall having seen an advertisement but we are more likely to purchase a brand if we were even unconsciously exposed to its advertising. The Russian election interference was both overt and subliminal in that the advertisements were blatant in their content but were surreptitiously created with the intent to sway the viewer to accept a foreign enemies desired agenda. And sadly, in 2016 a lot of conservatives, independents and even rust belt Democrats were bamboozled by the targeted Russian propaganda into voting against their own interests and electing the most incompetent joke of a president America has ever had. 120 million Americans were targeted by the Russians with their online profiles being used just like some company that's trying to sell you diapers because you just bought a pregnancy test at Target.
" Advertisers are increasingly monitoring people's online behavior and using the information collected to show people individually targeted advertisements. This phenomenon is called online behavioral advertising (OBA)." "Advertisers see OBA as one of the most important new ways of reaching targeted audiences. Online advertising revenues are growing rapidly and setting records every year". " OBA is believed to be part of the future of advertising. It is one of the new options advertisers can choose to use in their campaigns that allows for more precise targeting".
Well 1st and I don't agree on everything, especially on the political situation, but the one thing that I'm going to have to agree with dismayed and 1st on is that he is a he.
Even his cat's think that he is a he.
I'll admit that we do dance together at times.
Use yourself as an example. Could any comment you read on facebook change your vote over to Trump? Be real! Do you think anybody could ever convince me to vote for a democrat?
Really? I got the impression 1st was female?
I don't know where you got that impression but 1st is a male...
When you can be that far off with something as simple as the gender of a fellow lonnng, long time member,
it doesn't improve the credibility of your closely held beliefs in ideologies and conspiracy theories.
Wrong, I know more than several, and I think it's plainly evident that FB was being used by Russia, and continues to struggle with 'bad actors'
That's your personal problem. I would have no problem voting for the best candidate, regardless of Party or lack thereof.
[delete.]
What lead you to that conclusion? Facebook Russian bot accounts had hundreds of thousands of likes and shares. That's exactly how Facebook AND Trump gauges 'influence'.
Oh, I've heard about it - and I've read 'bout a quarter of it.
How much have you read?
Damn DP - you came a long way for that one.
Who is the "she" Vic?
You wanna know who/what I am?? Click on my name and go to my homepage.
I'll accept your public apology.
But NO damn slow dances.
Man, that would really pizz off my former wives and present wife - and my daughter - and six cats.
Don't look now, but you are the ideal propaganda victim.
Standing at the base of the Canadian Defence Forces War Memorial in Toronto - 1999. Still think I'm a "female"?
To someone named 1st warrior, I apologize for that error. Should have known better
Alright Sir
And how many do you know who were influenced by all the msm media's anti-Trump coverage? Do you think the last minute dump of the "Access Hollywood Tapes" had any influence? Or constantly smearing Trump as a "racist"?
The "last minute dump" was Trump in his own words, not some invented smear piece. And the only person who "smeared" Trump as a racist was himself with his constant racist comments and racist dog whistles to white supremacists who heard him loud and clear and came out to support him in droves. That's a far cry from the fake Facebook ads claiming Hillary was running a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor or was some Bond villain who had Seth Rich and about a dozen others murdered. We know at least one dumb fuck conservative fell for the fake news fed them by the Russians.
" A North Carolina man was arrested Sunday after he walked into a popular pizza restaurant in Northwest Washington carrying an assault rifle and fired one or more shots, D.C. police said. The man told police he had come to the restaurant to “self-investigate” a false election-related conspiracy theory involving Hillary Clinton that spread online during her presidential campaign."
No problem sir - wuz just trying to have some tongue and cheek humor wid ya.
Have a super day, OK?
It ALWAYS must be someone or some other things Fault …... in "Liberal Land" !
They're to smart to be Faulty on their own.
Why deflect from the fact that a hostile foreign power used propaganda and illegal hacking to tampered with our election?
Obviously not enough.
Citing a fact isn't smearing.
I know you were.
Do you think anyone's even trying?
Was Mc Ghan telling the truth ?
Why would you doubt his veracity?
Secondly, the facts about that incident didn't just rely on McGahn's testimony. Priebus and others corroborated McGahn.
2 years of nonsensical investigations, people and politicians saying they have proof over and above Mueller, politicians crying wolf, "talking Heads" claiming they know EVERYTHING, etc.....
Why shouldn't I ?
What did McGahn have to do with that other than to cover Trump's ass for 2 years and tell the Special Counsel the truth, supported by documents and corroborating witnesses?
What Did Trump actually LEGALLY do wrong again ?
See Vol. II of the Mueller report on obstruction. It's very clearly written and easy even for non-lawyers to understand -- unless there's something preventing them from understanding it, of course.
Anything to prop up The Scumbag no matter how preposterous or dishonest.
What Atheist said.
READ Volume II. Each instance is listed under "Analysis: Obstructive Act"
Do expand on YOUR interpretation !
I'll wait.....AGAIN !
Please explain your need for my interpretation in lieu of your own?
STILL ….. waiting.
According to the report (page 216 of the pdf), June 17, 2017 - Trump called McGahn at home and directed him to call the Acting Attorney General and say that Special Counsel had conflicts of interest and must be removed. McGahn did not carry out direction.
(Page 217) Early 2018 the Press reports that Trump directed McGahn to have Special Counsel removed in 2017.
(Page 218)
Trump reacted to news stories. McGahn didn't carry out either direction. No retaliation from Trump for McGahn basically telling him to shove it.
Is that really an impeachable offense? How did the Press get the story in early 2018?
I look forward to McGahn's congressional testimony. When Dean did so, the revelations of Nixon's lying and obstruction rocked the country. I don't see how McGahn's could be any less explosive.
Of course. There is a lot of stuff to make political hay.
Nope. There is nothing criminal in the report.
The Mueller report says that the collusion investigation was MATERIALLY IMPEDED by all the lying that Trump associates did to the investigators about Russia. Congress can call these people to testify with the threat of putting them in prison if they don't tell the truth.
I think it is highly likely that congressional hearings will ramp up, and depending what is developed impeachment will happen.
This isn't any great revelation. The House has already said they would investigate everything they can up to and including where Trump purchases his underwear.
They would have to find something so egregious it couldn't be ignored. With Trump, it's possible, but there is a saying about eggs and chickens you should remember. It would be a political mistake to push impeachment without knowing they can get a conviction in the Senate.
I dont think they should go immediately to impeachment, but they will have hearings into the material from the report that is damaging to Trump , and that very well may lead to impeachment.
Mueller has already been summoned to two different committees. We'll see how that goes.
That is exactly what they are going to do. These liars will be brought before Congress who will lay out the Mueller report findings and then try to get to the truth of those lies. Of course the Trump loyalists will plead the 5th and we won't actually get the concrete evidence needed to impeach Trump, but it's going to be happening during the run up to and through the campaign, all of Trumps liars trotted out and forced to repeat their lies and then refuse to tell the truth all to protect the candidate who will be running for re-election. It will be as Trump predicted when he found out Mueller had been appointed to investigate the Russian election interference, "This is the end of my Presidency, I'm fucked...".
Can congress prosecute?
Yes, and incarcerate.
Sorry John - you're gonna have to point that out to us 'cause that's not in the report.
Absolutely right If the Dems don't quit this clown show pretty soon, it will likely end up to be the biggest political mistake they have even made....other than choosing HRC as a candidate.
The House leaders are already publicly distancing themselves from impeachment. How could they not?
They just want to hold hearing after hearing to attack Trump without actually doing anything.
What page is that on? Seriously, for those of us who have the actual redacted report...what page is that on?
Didn't read what's in Vol. II, then.
I don't think you've paid close enough attention to Vol. II and how the Mueller investigators basically set the stage for ten indictments for it. In fact, that's the part of the report that's set off Scumbag's current round of tantrums, and interestingly leading him to commit even further cases of obstruction by refusing to hand over documents and trying to intimidate even former WH officials from testifying.
"Analysts are going through the now released Mueller Report."
"Analysts" ( Media Talking Heads
) .… are doing this for "FREE" ?
SUCKERS !
They shoulda put in their resume' to the Mueller team. Those guys got paid a bunch to do research and come up with what they did.
I know from experience...."Free" means they'll just come up with anything to make someone happy....hoping for the big bucks later. Like when a car guy tells you, you need all this work done on your car, when you really DON'T !
"AS-seen-on-TV" analysists ( talking Heads ) are just your average everyday hucksters ! Those same "Analysists" have been Hairball Hacking on this for the last 2 years about how they definitively knew, and had PROOF, "IT WAS TRUE".
Gosh you sure spread a lot of fake news where do you get all that blah, blah
From actually listening to the actual Analytical?
"Talking Heads" blah, blah, blah...."As-seen-on-TV" for the last 2 years !
Remember those folks ?
They all said ….. THEY HAD THE BEEF under that Really, Really, Really BIG BUN they laid out !
I still say:
Ummm Duhhh..
Of course the House was going to investigate no matter what the report said.
This article could have been written last week.
But, especially since the report shows 10 areas of obstruction of justice which the SP could not exonerate your Scumbag. Let's go back to his exact words in the report:
Those are the words of a prosecutor who knows he's not permitted to indict a president but is making it clear that if it were possible to do so he would have done it. It also reveals one of the duties of a prosecutor: to make available any exculpatory evidence found during an investigation. Obviously there was none to be found.
The obstruction of justice charge is the last gasp of the anti-American left who’s hatred of Trump, conservatives, Christians, and the Constitution drive them in their destructive frenzy.
“OOJ” is a statist legal maneuver designed to destroy individuals and keep the tyrannical state in total control.
our founders would be aghast at the level of tyrannical power the state has assumed for itself
That's where Mueller went off the rails in Vol. #2, and made it an "Opinion Piece".
The way Mueller ran around convicting, before the report, Any honest person would know, Mueller had NOTHING on Trump, or damn sure he would have Trump up on charges !
Oh please do post links to Mueller's statements during the investigation. I'll even take Mueller's spokesman's statements.
Any honest person would recognize that comment illustrates that you haven't read the report. I suggest you search the term 'OLC' in the report an at LEAST read those sections.
Oh please....
going to pains to sound STUPID isn't becoming !
"Any honest person would recognize that comment illustrates that you haven't read the report."
Any honest person wouldn't bluster how "They Know", over and above what has been said ! Where is Schiffties indisputable evidence anyway.
On that note, You have something we don't know about yet ?
Why persist then?
You made the STUPID claim that "Mueller ran around convicting, before the report" yet can't cite even ONE statement by Mueller. Instead, as seems to be a regular practice of some conservative members of late, you made your reply personal. Well done.
Addressing only YOU, undoubtedly. The list of what I know that you don't is expansive. First on that list is how to debate an issue in good faith.
Mueller and his team convicted NO ONE in 2 years ?
Did you skip over that tidbit of reporting noting all Muellers Convictions ?
"The list of what I know that you don't is expansive."
Now that statement is worthy of another new "Dumb and Dumber" movie.
Remind me whom it is that makes "Stupid ignorant " statements again ?
Oh now it's 'and his team'.
I get it....your all bluster....and NOTHING Else.
This ain't hard.
DID
M
E
U
L
L
E
R
CONVICT
A
N
Y
O
N
E
OR NOT ?
I slowed it down for ya !
You mean finding the guilty parties and charging them and persuading a juries of their guilt? What is it about our justice system that you suddenly don't like? Seems to be who's been brought to justice makes the big difference to you. Also, there's an old saying that "justice delayed is justice denied." And that cuts both ways. But, don't let any of that stop the whining.
I'll make it big for "ya."
M A N A F O R T
G A T E S
F L Y N N
C O H E N
Now in the barrel waiting his turn is
S T O N E
+ persons unknown in about a dozen ongoing federal investigations between the SDNY, EDV and DC jurisdictions.
I'll make it even BIGGER for you !
NO RUSSIAN COLLUSION WHAT-SO-EVER !
Scream as loud as you like---it doesn't turn a lie into truth and never will.
And just for the sake of accuracy (I know it's laughable to bother in your case--but for the record) Mueller's report found plenty of collusion (the many contacts between Scumbag campaign and family members with Russians or others working on behalf of Russia) but stated that it could establish a strong case for conspiracy.
NO....IT DIDN'T !
Everyone in Politics throughout the decades, have met with "Russians …. All the Time !
Didn't you see Schumer having donuts and coffee with Putin ?
They laughed and laughed...……TOGETHER.
Baghad Bill Barr is full of shit and a liar just like orange conman
You Trump haters will still be creating lies and whining about our president until January 20, 2025 when He leaves office.
President Trump is the only thing standing between our liberty and the fall of our nation to the communism of the Democrats
You trump lovers lap up his lies daily
How many more times are you going to spam that line? That's twice already.
As often as leftists keep whining about Trump being president
Be my guest.
Nope - and I didn't forget that Eisenhower wanted to terminate all of us either.
I don't know who you are 'responding' to, but termination started in 1939 resulting in the Kansas Act of 1940.
it's a great topic for a seed IMHO, but Eisenhower was just a Lt Col back then not at all interested in termination.
Damn thing was "supposed" to respond to Kavika
The House concurrent resolution 108 of 1953 announced the federal policy of termination and called for the immediate ending of the Federal relationship with a selected group of tribes. Sure, termination had begun in 1801 under Washington, but Congress finally put a tag/title to it in 1953.
Not sure what that has to do with my question to you 1st. But since you brought it up, I'm very familiar with it. In fact my family are experts on public law 280...
Minnesota was one of five original states that that public law 280 affected. More were added later.
At that time our Tribal Chairman was Roger Jourdain, a damn smart and savvy chairman. He saw 280 for what it really was and intervened before the bill was introduced to congress and got Red Lake exempted from the law.
To this day we are a closed reservation and maintain our own police, court system and criminal code. The state of MN has no jurisdiction on Red Lake.
Nixon stopped it in 1970 or 71...
So yeah, I know exactly what Eisenhower tried and lived through it...
He also did the ''Operation Wetback'' which you're well aware of.
Seriously, and why do people think that retired "General's" would make a good president???? Truly, other than playing more golf than Obama (Trump's still out of consideration at the moment), I can't think of anything Ike did that was positive. Well, maybe the Interstate system, NASA, ending the Korean War - but helping fund military junta's to overthrow the governments of Iran and Guatemala and getting us involved in Vietnam???
Still, his termination policies as established by HR 208 and PL 280 really futched us over.
Like I said, this would make a great topic and maybe educate a few non Indians,
but it has nothing to do with Mueller, Barr, Trump et al.
Nada, off topic, way off the res.
Interesting, because the conversation started out between 1st and I
or because we have had many comments in common, further up the thread?
Either way I am commenting in black, not purple, understand the difference?
What'd I and other liberals say about how Scumbag and his NT supporters were doing their end zone victory dance from their own 20 yd line, 4th and 15? Now what they're going to to is ramp up the screaming about "hoax" and "witch hunt," etc., etc. :
As Red Sox fans used to say "you knew that was gonna happen."
Scumbag answered 27 of the 36 questions sent to him by Mueller's team were answered with "I dunno" or I don't recall." He learned his mob-boss routine very well.
Boo Hoo. Did you stomp your feet when you typed that?
You know damn well that the whole thing was a set up from the start. There was no evidence then and there is no evidence now. The whole collusion thing started when Clinton mumbled about it after having her ass handed to her. The idiot democrats saw it as a chance to oust Trump and it failed miserably. Just like every other attempt.
I know that you and those like you long ago showed your cards as never being willing or able to look at the facts and admit what a Scumbag you support. Fortunately for the country it doesn't matter whether you accept them or not. You're a small and dwindling group of dead-enders. No one ever expected anything but the cement to get even harder.
You're correct. I showed my cards and won't deny that I support Trump. Far better than supporting the candidate with 40 years of being the problem in Washington that EVERYBODY has complained about. At least I'm willing to say I voted for a change, and that change has worked wonders for the country.
But, you on the other hand, still throwing a tantrum because you lost don't see it. It must suck when you can't accept reality.
But you, on the other hand, helped put a psychopathic liar and criminal into the highest office of the land and stand-by watching (enjoying?) him trample all over anything and everything that should be the dignity, not to mention the responsibility, of that office and will not see it. It must suck to know you're an accomplice to this disaster and refuse to take your share of the responsibility for that.
Clinton lost.
"...But Brawndo's got what plants crave. It's got electrolytes..."
Far better to support a deranged malignant pathologically lying narcissist who's subverting and undermining every aspect of our system of government and who shows more allegiance and deference to our foreign antagnoists just because your personal bitterness at not getting your way every with every election? Is that what passes for "patriotism" with you, Jer?
Funny. Nobody ever claimed that until he beat Clinton. Take your tantrum someplace else.
More like well-known moral phonies who voted for Scumbag decided to ignore what a lying POS he is and finally gave up that pretense of having a speck of morality. It was something obvious all along but that act made it clear to us all.
Are having at temper tantrum because they lost.
And BTW, you didn't do anything to disprove my statement.
...and the band played on...