I've Now Read 100% of the Redacted Report | My Final Word

The obstructionist and seditionist of the "resistance" made a false accusation with no evidence to back up their claim that there was collusion between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin then backed down and claimed that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and "Russians" and after 2 1/2 years of conducting a witch hunt looking for collusion there was no collusion.

One "never Trump republican" (Mueller) and 17 Democrat lawyers who made large contributions to either the Hillary campaign or the DNC couldn't even conjure up any collusion taking place.

The Democratic party has turned America into a three ring circus.

 

Absolutely, he can. No longer a sitting President and no concerns about statutory limits on filing charges. No doubt, we have not heard the last of Trump's legal concerns as a Private Citizen. No doubt, Trump, is in very hot legal water once the dust settles on his last day in office.

 

Yes. that pretty much encapsulates this entire partisan witch hunt charade. But as for moving on -- as was suggested in the O.P. -- screw that! The Left and their RINO political allies attempted and failed to unseat a legally elected president with a soft coup. Fine. Nice try; and now the shoe is on the other foot and the people who illegally instigated and COLLUDED to make this happen are going to be examined up one side and down the other; names are going to be dragged before the public and heads are going to roll.

 

They are not one and the same. It is not a parallel question. That twists the logical arrangement of what was actually written by Mueller. They don't run in parallel. They run in series. There's a difference and a distinction. One sets itself up as the predicate for the other which defines itself as the conclusion. In this case, the underlying predicate is in completely disagreement and complete misalignment with the subsequent follow on conclusion. You cannot have presupposition that disagrees with the supposition and declare logical coherence both at the same time, unless you are attempting to prove or posit that the net effect is not born of a specific causation. But, that's not what's being done here.

 

There are many instances in the actual Report where you can conclude that Trump Camp Members flat out lied to US officials when questioned about their contacts with Russians. The question becomes: Why lie about contacts you had with Russians, if your contacts were benign? The answer is quite clear: They knew that Russians were trying to scoop the election and benefit Trump, in the process. This becomes crystal clear after you read the Report.

Mueller, was appointed by Republican Rod J. Rosenstein. The deep state would include both Republican face masks and Democrat face masks. They all wear masks, no doubt.

What target has ever had that opportunity or right? Under due process, that right does not transpire until trial.

He shows "collusion" through willful cooperation and coordination. He then asserts that he was unable to establish "sufficient evidence" of a crime upon which to charge. That's double talk. That's irrational talk. That's speaking out of both sides of your mouth in plain view. He shows that Russians, told the Trump Camp that it had and was going to turn over information deleterious to Trump's opponent at several meetings. Yet, no one in the Trump Camp, reported that to anyone in an official capacity to investigate. Trump, if he was not complicit, if he was not colluding, if he was not in direct cooperation, could have easily turned the tables and exposed the Russian contacts made to the light of day WHEN they were made - not attempt to ride those contacts and the information they had to glory on election day, which is exactly what he did. Crystal clear, after you actually read the Report.

 

There were crimes found.

 

What, in a nutshell, were the lies?

 

Try getting a Prosecutor to take a case through court without having first identified chargeable offenses. If you cannot produce a convincing charging document, you won't bother with the journey. It was about discovering the facts, making them available for Congress and letting history and tradition land on the President's shoulders by way of Congress. This is all true because the President was involved. Look at what happened to those around the President. They got indicted. They got charged. They were tried, found guilty and they will serve time in jail. Others pleaded out.

The President, however, in our current form of Republic and under our current Customs & Traditions for dealing with the Executive Office, would not be an indictable entity. You have to impeach the President. Unless the President does something he entire country cries out to be addressed criminally, and unless what the President did was in fact criminal, you won't get them in prosecution. This was a matter for the House & Senate to handle. Mueller, simply provided them both with reading material.

If Mueller, recommends criminal charges, that would have opened up a whole new can of worms involving a long and drawn out constitutional battle raging in Congress, ultimately to be decided by the Supreme Court. Maybe, it is time for such a battle. However, Mueller, did not believe so. Maybe this is why he waxed in obfuscation, claiming that Russians were active engaged and in contact with Trump's people, Trump's people were actively engaged in direct communications with Russians for the sole purpose of meeting about "engineering" the outcome of our elections, but then concluding that there was "insufficient evidence" to show "collusion." Collusion would have tipped the scales on criminality and that would have triggered an even bigger event which I believe Mueller, did not want to instantiate.

If he recommends the same then what? The President would then need to be charged while in office and that's not what OLC suggests. Handing such a recommendation to Congress, does place a lot of heat on both bodies, no doubt. Maybe it should have gone down that way to force Congress to do something - either indict or not indict. Given the congressional mathematics, it would have died in the Senate and another feather in the hat of total paralysis would have been earned by Congress.

Censure is probably the best path to take here, given the circumstances and what Trump and/or his Campaign actually did before, during and after the elections.

It is one of the reasons why people are so confused. They have not read the Report, they do not understand what constraints he was dealing with and the constitutional crisis that would have emerged had he flat out recommended indictment. He felt comfortable enough that the guilt beyond a reasonable doubt would not stand in a criminal proceeding and landed on "Russian involvement and deep contact with Russians" but "no collusion." Interestingly enough, both collusion and conspiracy to commit fraud was shown in his Report. It makes the entire matter even more bewildering given his conclusions. The whole thing is bizarre when you finally read it.

 

Ooops. My bad.

 

That Mueller was going to find something leading specifically to an indictment of the President. That the evidence was so overwhelming in favor of "collusion" that an indictment case could be made before the Report was concluded. That somehow, Mueller, was going to end this thing with some kind of slam dunk Report. Using rank speculation about what Mueller, was doing to extend a conclusion on camera that viewers would tune into every night to hear reinforced.

They did not reinforce the role of Mueller and his duties under the statutes - which I have outlined herein and which the Report itself outlines for those who wish to actually read it. The Media spent more time talking about parallels to Nixon, than to the doctrine of not indicting a sitting President having come out of the Nixon years. They talked about those things, but that was overridden by the insatiable appetite for ratings and discussions of imminent or pending indictment of the President. Now, they are dealing with this anticlimactic ending.

The biggest lie was the slam dunk nature of what Mueller was doing, instead of explaining to people the full set of restrictions and limitations both in law and tradition that Mueller had to contend with.

 

Hmmm, well that doesn't seem like "lies" to me. I don't think anyone expected a guaranteed slam dunk. I didn't. They speculated like pundits always do. Many thought O.J. was insanely guilty. But he was found not guilty.

Sometimes pundits go on about things, a great sports match up....and then the game is a dud or doesn't turn out how anyone expected. I don't consider them liars.

The hard news, on the other hand, presents facts of what is going on. As far as I know, that's exactly what they did.

 

That's the bizarre part. The Report, if you actually read it (which I strong suggest you do) does in fact show clearly collusion. This is the point I'm making. You can clearly see collusion on at least two major instances with physical meetings involving what can only be described as Russians with an agenda to impact our elections and no one from the Trump said stopping it, in fact everyone on the Trump side, applauding it and "cooperating" with it. Yet, Mueller, comes out of both sides of his mouth when he concludes "no collusion."

Mueller, says one thing, but then he delivers in his Report something quite different. You won't know this until you read his Report. Then you will see the contradictions coming out of Mueller. Why he contradicts himself? I have no idea, other than the fact there could be "others" involved that Mueller, is trying to protect from further investigation and exposure. Who are candidates for "others?" Your guess is as good as mine. But, his written conclusions do not match the actual evidence he uncovered, nor by the way, do they match the indictments handed out to others and the criminal proceedings they faced or will face.

It makes no sense that 30+ people got hit by this things rather hard criminally for "other crimes" - yet Trump and his closest family members who according to the Report were knee deep in meetings with Russians and knee deep in making contacts with Russians about information they knew was hot material, faced no reprisal at all. No consequences, whatsoever. That's not just odd - that's downright bizarre. How do 30+ people get hit, but the President and his family who were deep involved with everyone else walk away as if nothing ever happened. It makes no sense, unless Mueller, was teeing it up for Congress to deal with through impeachment or strong censure.

Pretty clear from reading the Report that Trump and his camp did that on its own. No help from anybody. They got contacted by Russians and Ukrainians with information about rigging our Presidential campaign, then decided to continue meeting with, talking with and emailing with these people - all while Cohen, is literally dying at the opportunity to set-up a meeting between Trump and Putin, over business dealings. It is all in the report. You should read it. Why is Trump, trying desperately to arrange meetings with Putin in Russia, during a Presidential campaign here in the United States? That's the three ring circus right there. It was a Russian Circus.

From my reading of it, I believe Putin, was trying to use Trump to embarrass the United States. To prove that he could impact the US from half way around the world without delivering a strategic ballistic missile. It looks like Putin's KGB underground sent operatives and agents Trump's way and Trump, was too naive to see hat was happening to him - how he was being played. Just the jubilation in Trump Junior's verbal voice when he hears for the first time that Russians have dirt on Hillary. He's like a kid in a candy store. He thinks its a great idea and he actually reaches back out and tries to engage those individuals with ties to Putin.

The circus was all Donald's and he was the Ring Master. Except, Putin, was the Puppet Master.

I'm afraid Trump, got played.

 

Come on. CNN became the "Indict Trump Nightly Network (ITNN) and Fox News became the "Get Him Off Before He's Indicated Network (GHOBHIN). They were both playing to two different audiences and raking in huge revenues while playing the game. The experts? Neither of them would allow more than a hot minute worth of opposition expertise that ran contrary to network spin.

CNN, especially, did not emphasize enough the role that Mueller was to play, in light of all the anti-Trump "expertise" they blasted 24/7/365. Fox, on the other hand, pretended as if any question about Trump and Russians was an abomination to fairness and should never be asked, even when highly shady characters like Popa and Page show up on everybody's radar.

 

Touche.

 

On what shows....the hard news? Actual newscasts....or opinion shows?

In general, 24 hour pundit-ing gets pretty tiring regardless. They have to fill it up with people blabbing. Fox blabs one way...and CNN blabs another.

I don't watch CNN much, but what I have seen did not give me any false hopes. I think Anderson Cooper, for example, seems pretty fair and balanced.

Fox shows that I have seen are pure comedy and have been for years.

 

LOL, now that was really funny. "Hard News." That was hilarious. I laughed so hard I nearly fell out of my task chair. "Hard News" went away with the Pterodactyl. But, hey. If you find some Hard News out there, be sure to drop me a line. I'm sure you will get recognized in a brand new Nobel Prize category of some sort as the one who re-discovered Real Hard Hitting News. It is just not out there, Bro. Everybody has an agenda these days. Everybody is on the take. It is exactly like Tears for Fears told us in the 80s: "Everybody Wants To Rule The World."

I don't find much fair and balance among any of them quite honestly. When I look at who owns Media outlets in this country, it gets rather depressing to know that your news is coming from deep commercial interests pretending to be fair and balanced. Its all Propaganda at this point. When CNN got rid of Bernard Shaw, changed its format to "Shock Drama Television" and brought in Wolf Blitzer, things took on a completely different tone at CNN. How much "Breaking News" can there be? Seriously. Everything can't be "Breaking News." Eventually, you will literally Break The News when you continue doing that. You will break it into a million pieces. The "News" will be laying on the floor saying "I'm the news. I've fallen and I can't get up. Somebody help me, please!" That's where CNN is right now.

Fox, went a different route much earlier on. Fox, outright made up news as it went along. Rupert Murdoch, turned Fox into that which gave birth to the Alternate Reality Universe of the Right Wing. Fox, put a green screen behind one of its reporters immediately after Benghazi, and proclaimed to be in Tripoli, having inside connections at the Pentagon with someone claiming that the attacks on the compound were planned and known about in advance by the Obama Administration. I posted the link to that video years ago on this forum when it happened, showing the frazzled edges of the green screen clearly. It was later found out that Fox, never had anyone in Tripoli, at that time and had reported the information falsely. Did the Right on this board care? Nope. That Alternate Universe had already begun expanding and nothing was going to stop it.

We have not had real Journalistic integrity in this country for decades now. You have entire generations of Americans, born under a pure propaganda media driven system for decades now. This is one of the reasons why this country is so screwed up Socially. You can't be a Journalist anymore in this country in mainstream formats unless you take the Oath. The Oath that guarantees you swing in a specific direction politically, first. Don't believe it. Take a close look at what happened to Lamont Hill. He got unceremoniously fired at CNN for violating the Oath, that you never tell the truth about Israel or Zionists.

Propaganda Wars. That's where we are today. Damn the Real Hard Hitting News. This is because those whose agenda is to control everything have bought-up all mainstream media and turned it into their primary Social Engineering Platform of choice. So, you are not getting news anymore. You are getting socially brainwashed and you think it is news. They don't call it Programming for nothing. Notice how they don't even pretend its news anymore. They simply call it a "show." "On my show we are gong talked about XYX, coming up next." "Stay tuned for Anderson Cooper, coming up next." Well, am I supposed to stay tuned for "Anderson Cooper," or am I supposed to stay tuned for the "news." Am I watching a "Show" or am I watching the "News."

I thought I had Showtime already. Guess not. Showtime is CNN, FOX, MSNBC, ABC, CBS, etc., etc., etc. This is why they are so blatant in their Cameo Appearances in Hollywood Movies. To me, that cheapens those who are supposed to bring the news. When I see an Anchor, doing a cameo in a movie, I can't help but wonder of that same Anchor, is not Acting when they deliver the news at 6.

CNN, the most busted name in news. Fox, unfair and completely out of balance. "Breaking News! Sorry, we just broke the news and we can report it will never recover."

 

The model for Fox News was invented by the Nixon Administration. He wanted a right-wing propaganda channel. Eventually that model was used to create what we see today.

 

Not what I am talking about here Please note the post to which I was responding.

 

The first paragraph is not the premise for the second. That's why they are different paragraphs.

If some one is doing things that benefit you with out your help and cooperation but it is illegal for you to work with them why would you work with them? It simply isn't necessary, and frankly, as I said by the time they knew it, the wiki dump, assuming of course the problematic cloud strike report is accurate, and there are reasons to doubt it, you have even fewer reasons to get involved and a whole lot of red flags.

The Obama administration was already complaining of Russian interference before the first wiki drop. The "Russian" contacts with the Trump campaign were surreptitious for the most part, most, were pretending to be Americans. And Trump not having his own spy agency would not have known otherwise nor would his people, because the government never warned him of this fact.

 

Shapiro analyzed the report quite well last week and explained in laymen terms how Trump never actually obstructed anything. His actions didn't prevented anyone from doing their job with the investigation. If Democrats think Trump is guilty of attempted obstruction or just throwing hissy fits and "backlash" then how is Hillary not in prison right now for deleting govt documents on servers she was never supposed to have and destroying govt owned hardware like phones and hard drives? Destroying evidence of the crime right after you get caught is as bad as you can get=) Like burying the body after the murder. And if Hillary can claim "she didn't recall" 80 something times, then Trump can easily claim he had no idea anything he was doing could hurt the investigation. If someone wants to interpret the report as Mueller never having any intention of impeaching Trump, then it puts Hilalry's sham investigation into even bigger focus since it was quite obvious there was never any intention of charging her with anything. C'mon. When you husband and former Potus(with dirt on EVERYONE) talks with the AG for an hour on a noisy tarmac and the next day you walk....nobody obstructed anything..../snicker=)

 

Washington (CNN)President Donald Trump questioned on Thursday why the FBI never warned his campaign that Russians might try to infiltrate his team, despite being briefed on the matter in August 2016.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/31/politics/trump-2016-russia-warnings/index.html

 

Perhaps it's a little too glib to suggest that there is nothing new in the Mueller report. That statement can only be true for those who have endured the past two years studying the progression of the Trump case. To those that have done so, the "no collusion" aspect of the affair had become a secondary issue behind the obstruction of justice portion which Trump puts on display daily through lies, misdirection, and his inspired tweets. There has been ample investigation by private citizens and member of the mainstream media to satisfy those of us interested in kicking over logs and chasing the bugs.

The circular logic of pages #1 and #2 is interesting in its intent. What mischief was Mueller up to here? I believe he created a dichotomy that invites resolution. This is likely to be a lengthy process in full public view. If the DOJ purpose was to hedge its bets, they played the wrong cards and table stakes just got a lot larger. What the Mueller report does is lend the previous investigative work the legitimacy of a formal DOJ investigation and road map that connects many of the dots that were suspected but not adequately documented. In my opinion, the Mueller report is an exclamation point at the end of a tragedy, an exclamation with the force of an atomic bomb. How this tragedy unfolds is in the hands of Congress and to a significant extent, the American public. The very public Congressional testimony phase is about to begin.

 

It is amazing that anybody- of any political persuasion- can be so biased as to deny all responsibility for their own bad behavior, and basically label everybody who does not agree with them in some derogatory fashion. They are liars, idiots, you name it; anybody who refuses to confirm the hate of the left is some kind of traitor to humanity- even if they were your shining knight last week.

You say that Trump initiated everything. What? By announcing he was running for office? The attacks on Trump by the press, the democrats, the liberals and the left were instantaneous- Trump was a joke, a fool, a clown, didn't stand a chance, bla-bla-bla. They were trashing Trump before Trump did anything or held any power- and you blame Trump for their conduct??? Those jackasses laid down the rules of the game they wanted to play. Trump beat the entire DNC and Clinton machine with 1/3 the staff and 1/3 the money- a feat unprecedented in our political history. The embarrassment and the sting of the loss was probably unprecedented in our history too, as is the sour grapes and refusal to accept reality that we see the left wallowing in everyday, with no sign they will ever get control of themselves again.

Trump's real crime was winning, and showing those people up for the pompous, self-righteous jackasses they made themselves to be- and to this day, they blame that on Trump. It's like a criminal blaming his imprisonment on the witness who identified him rather than the crime he committed. Such people lack the spine to be responsible for themselves- they think like small spoiled children in adult bodies. We keep hoping some of them will grow up and become mental adults, but hope is certainly fading. Shame on them all.

 

Thank you for the summation. I agree that the BLOTUS will not be impeached and that we need to move on and look towards a future without the impediment of an incompetent unindicted wannabe dictator who has essentially betrayed our nation for his own personal gain.