So far, there have been 37 indictments. I haven't looked at this website in a while but it has a timeline of everything that's happened.

https://themoscowproject.org/collusion-timeline/


-Trump National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, was indicted and became a cooperator in order to avoid jail time. He has apparently been a great help to the investigation.

-Trump Campaign manager, Paul Manfort is in prison. He will most likely die there, I think he gets sentenced today.

-Rick Gates, who worked for Trump's campaign also, pleaded guilty to Conspiracy against the United States. He is cooperating.

-Trump's personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, pleaded guilty, cooperated and was sentenced to 3 years in prison.

-Trump campaign advisor, George Papadopoulos, pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI.

-Trump's friend and campaign advisor, Roger Stone, has been charged with obstruction, false statements, and witness tampering. He was in contact with Wikileaks, a front for Russian intelligence, about Hillary Clinton's stolen emails. Don Jr was also in touch with Wikileaks.

The Trump Tower meeting happened.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/31/politics/trump-tower-meeting-timeline/index.html

The Southern District of New York is also investigating Trump.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/feb/09/new-york-southern-district-donald-trump-inauguration-prosecutors

Trump Organization CFO is cooperating and has been granted immunity
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/08/24/trump-organization-allen-weisselberg-immunity-795496

Deutsche Bank, who loaned Trump money when no one else would, was raided.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/29/business/deutsche-bank-police-raid/index.html

This too.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/418928-federal-agents-raid-office-of-tax-firm-that-previously-worked-for

and this.

https://www.businessinsider.com/jared-kushner-russia-back-channel-testimony-2017-7

Don't forget Maria Butina, Carter Page, George Nader, Erik Prince, and pretty much everyone around Trump having Russian contacts and lying about it. It's not just Russia though.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/get-ready-for-muellers-phase-two-the-middle-east-connection

The firing of James Comey and Andrew McCabe and Trump's changing stories for why. Also, constant obstruction of justice on twitter.

CNN's breakdown of the investigation.
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2017/politics/russia-investigations/#/

Apparently Schiff will be calling Felix Sater to testify, keep an eye out for that name.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-associate-felix-sater-sued-mariah-carey-s-former-manager-n979061

Twitter is buzzing that Mueller is going to drop some fresh, hot indictments tomorrow. We shall see.

To quell my anxiety/anticipation waiting for the next shoe to drop I've been reading about Watergate, and am just about done with the podcast "Slow Burn." The first season being about Watergate and some forgotten storylines. I'm sure that to some degree the host/writers told the story this way intentionally, but it is *crazy* just how closely the Watergate timeline/storylines mirror(s) everything we've seen to this point in the Russia probe. The initial breaking of the stories and the public's collective shrug, the administrations' transparent attempts at coverups, the presidents' blatant disregard for democracy and public condemnation of "attacks" from the left and the press, the shakeups w/in Congress & the AG and other admin positions, the eventual shifts in public opinion, etc. It's really uncanny.

Anyway I'm hoping the next Mueller Bomb is Don Jr. and Kush. I think that whenever that happens will be the "Nixon won't release the tapes !" moment of the Russia probe.

if something happens. I listened to that slow burn podcast, the Clinton one was good too.

I was of the age to kiiiiind of understand the Clinton saga while it was happening but I know for sure I've forgotten a lot of the gritty details, so I'm excited to dive a little deeper. Planning to read more about it as I go through it, like I am with the Watergate season now.

I'm curious about how the host/writers will approach the Clinton season. Cause like I said above, the Watergate season (he said as much) came to be largely because of the Russia probe and its similarities to the Watergate scandal. From what I remember the Clinton thing was *actually* a repug witchhunt (whereas Watergate & the Russia probe are clearly legitimate repug scandals no matter how much repugs in both instances try(ied) to tell us otherwise.

Assuming the facts are as I remember them, I assume the host will stay true to that perspective. But I wonder if he'll try to stay diplomatic so as not to seem like the podcast is just an anti-repug effort (even tho, again, the facts would support that effort). If that makes sense.

>If that makes sense.

I'm intrigued

Like I said, if it's not too diplomatic and sticks to facts (Gingrich, Starr, and their clearly partisan objectives) it should be great.

But either way should be a super interesting refresher on one of the major scandals of our lifetime.

I was blown away from the jump!

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/11/nyregion/deutsche-bank-trump.html

Best summation of the administration and current political climate I've heard

Fucking mind boggling

Trumpster couldn't successfully manage a McDonalds

disappointing, but he could still get more charges.

https://twitter.com/RVAwonk/status/1105873681308438532

itd basically be a waste of time for trump to pardon him now since these new state charges are fed pardon-proof.

And fuck the judges. "Blameless life" kiss my fucking ass. Hopefully the judge who said that gets some swift backlash for those comments in the wake of these new indictments.

https://www.palmerreport.com/analysis/matt-whitaker-flipped-trump-just/16695/



Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://Tupreme.com

https://www.thedailybeast.com/elliott-broidy-trump-fundraiser-had-office-raided-by-feds-looking-for-ties-to-foreign-nationals-report

both men implicated in selling access/influence to foreign nationals.

somehow the media never covers any of this as a stain on the entire republican party itself.

doj didnt leak it. and broidys team kept quiet about this too.

wouldnt be surprised if there was some cooperation there.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/03/18/trust-mueller-investigation-falls-half-americans-say-trump-victim-witch-hunt/3194049002/


Damn

b.) hyperpartisanship is a hell of a drug

c.) The nation is not nearly as close to the cusp of a progressive revolution as a lot of people want to think. The right-wing bubble isn't the only one that has misled people about the state of the nation.

and

d.) The fact that Manafort got off so light probably didn't help matters.


I haven't looked into the statistics here enough to know how seriously we should take the headline. I'll admit it's a shocker even to me. But when it comes to government these days, no amount of pessimism is too much.

was how easy Paulie got off.


And even if there is something funny going on in the poll, it still gives Don Don a headline to reference.


I agree with you on the pessimism and am worried people are too comfortable in thinking he's going down and/or 2020 is somehow a lock.

I’m like.. really??? Oh really?

THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE THAT THE PROBE IS ANYWHERE CLOSE TO FINISHED. Why does the media blindly parrot Trump cultist talking points ?? The *only* indication that Mueller is "winding down" has come from Trump's own acting AG and other repug/Trump operatives. And they cite ... nothing. Mueller's office has said nothing to that effect and their recent activity suggest that, if anything, they're ramping *up* the investigations. Business as usual. But every week we get another repug/Trump toadie, followed immediately by the media parrots, screaming "he's almost done ! Get ready for that report !"

Ugh. Anyway. The public shrugged off the Watergate independent counsel investigations for a long time too. I don't really put much stock in this polling at all.

narrative. its ken dilanian at nbcnews. dude has been on that 'this is the latest sign that mueller is winding down' since like last summer lol.

its clear these folks are perfectly happy using trump lackeys as sources.

i see dude tryna hedge his bets (and save his journalistic credibility) by now doing some semantic dance around the definition of the core/original mueller investigation and the different web of investigations/functions of the various other inquiries at sdny, edva, doj proper, etc.

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/status/1108000429542178822

im sure we will get another story about how the mueller investigation is finishing up this week tho.

>RE: rosenstein staying on a lil while longer at doj.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/world/national-security/mueller-began-investigating-michael-cohens-phone-and-digital-data-months-before-fbi-raid-warrants-show/2019/03/19/9e936cc2-49b5-11e9-b79a-961983b7e0cd_story.html&freshcontent=1


"Essential Consultants" lol. These fools.

https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1108047793057423361?s=21

since yesterday theyve all just spontaneously decided to start saying the mueller report was being delivered yesterday or today.

they just pulled this shit like a month ago.

im convinced their sources on shit like this are people on trumps legal team like giuliani.

or this is just a high brow form of clickbait. they cant run the sensationalized headlines that less-reputable outlets can run with impunity. but they can run these sketchily-sourced stories and reap the increased readership/viewership in the short term.

this shit is too sloppy and irresponsible for them to keep doing it.

they chill on it for a few months but then all of a sudden everyone is sure its about to drop. i wonder when the first claim that it was almost over was.

its the kind of speculation that is so annoying and unneeded. then you start getting speculation about the speculation.

who intentionally gave them wrong info. now they keep going back to the same well.

remember when trump supposedly forced rosenstein to go quit in a mid-afternoon standoff in the oval office with john kelly and the press supposedly had sources who had knowledge of the contents of the exit letter?

remember when rod rosenstein was supposed to leave the doj in mid-march?

the press is slowly becoming its own qanon conspiracy.

I personally don't think they are "falling" for anything.

They just want ratings. The media is awful.


At the end of the day, Trump has been very good for the media when you think about it. Its been non-stop stories for years now. And they don't even have to investigate anything for the most part, shit just drops in their lap and/or they invent/exaggerate/speculate on something like this. They don't even have to "work" for it anymore, for the most part.

I think Trump is getting re-elected for a few reasons- and the media is one of those reasons.


The media needs/wants a story. What the fuck would they do if shit was normal again?

Thats why, to your point in another thread, the Dems need to nominate someone who knows how to control the press and give them a story to have a shot.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/28/us/politics/trump-interview-mueller-russia-china-north-korea.html

“Another reason that I’m going to win another four years is because newspapers, television, all forms of media will tank if I’m not there because without me, their ratings are going down the tubes,” Mr. Trump said, then invoked one of his preferred insults. “Without me, The New York Times will indeed be not the failing New York Times, but the failed New York Times.”

... in the middle of Main Street and nothing would happen" or whatever it was. His sheep would follow.

Every day this week I've seen a "What to Expect from the Mueller Report" or "Mueller Report: Key Items" type bullshit headlines. Infuriates me.

Proven, repeatedly

Russian interference = Guccifer and Cambridge Analytica
Collusion = Paulie Manafort and literally ever other Trumpster associate that has been charged or convicted is a result of their dealing with Russia

Like I said in the Manafort post, that conviction should have been a spike the ball in the endzone, let me get my celebration dance on

MSM = 4th branch of the government (c)

They continuously move the goalposts, the general public has lost sight of the directive

= Russian interference, proven, time and time again.

will be covered as a 'victory' for trump. thats the only lens the media processes information through nowadays.

Have you

Obviously, MSM has a motive for the headlines

But for all the appearances and statements Dems make

I haven't heard anyone put it in the context of my previous reply

Have you?

Obviously Trumpster is going to die on that hill

Dems are allowing that to be the narrative IMO

it just hasnt received the same amount of attention/amplification as 'no collusion'.

That's option #1 in burying the story

Trumpster/Barr make some bullshit statements, etc...this weekend

Mon, we're back to our lives and the partisan speculation continues...

to ag barr by 5pm.
https://twitter.com/nakashimae/status/1109195566242779137

its 5pm now. i guess we will see.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1109198662868090881

guess the media was right this time lol.

If anything I think it's going to have so much black marker on it, it's gonna be indecipherable

why did this excite me

lol

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2019/03/22/special-counsel-mueller-has-submitted-a-report-to-the-attorney-general-signaling-the-end-of-his-russia-investigation/?utm_term=.6074b9fc3436

"The contents of the highly anticipated report from Robert S. Mueller III were not immediately known, but its submission signals the culmination of the nearly two-year probe of Russian interference in the 2016 election — a case that has consumed Washington and led to multiple guilty pleas from former advisers to President Trump."

.

.

https://twitter.com/BenWeiserNYT/status/1109101502768074752

he was in charge because the us attorney appointed by trump did the right thing and recused himself from matters related to trump.

trump has wanted berman to re-assume leadership of all probes involving trump.
https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1097923865970274304

could be nothing. could be something.

to put cover sheets on before he leaves.

I need this to be an extensive report that totally exposes Trump and all his treason. I have a sneaking suspicion I'm going to throw my hat down like T-Rex by the 20th page because the report is that good.

basically we all know hes guilty. otherwise why would he be going so hard firing people at doj and appointing henchmen to control the probe.

but the evidence wont reach the doj standard of indictable for a lot of folks (especially trump) and theres no way of knowing we will get to see the full array of evidence.

there was also a ton of obstruction and witness tampering in broad daylight. but we dont even know what happened to the obstruction probe. there was no trump interview, subpoena, anything. from reporting...it seemed like that would be a necessity before the conclusion of the investigation.

iono mayne. none of this shit seems like a good sign.

cushy cooperation deals if they werent gonna bear fruit in this investigation?

See I'm no lawyer and haven't followed closely, but I always wondered if there was a chance that the "deals" were done to a)avoid trials b)save prosecution extra work c) as far as the dudes actually pleading, getting a lesser sentence

In other words "Yo Flynn you guilty, we know it and you know it. If you cooperate and plea, save us extra work of a trial, we'll go easy on sentencing"

I always thought the idea of "oh shit they gave up all the goods and snitched on Trump" was sort of a pipe dream.

Maybe I'm missing some things.

mueller supposedly assembled a dream team of prosecutors including 'the lebron james of money laundering investigations'.

and the final result is the 2nd shortest special counsel investigation of all time and no charges for the campaign team within the core mandate of the investigation?

for better or worse.

I'm worried that Barr could choose to leave out important details from the report.

https://www.newsweek.com/robert-mueller-report-what-happens-now-1372890

https://twitter.com/Santucci/status/1109211579524898816

because then the wide ranging probes in congress almost certainly look like fishing expeditions.

Trump would *look* right to a lot of folks.

Really bad feeling. We/dems/the left put too much into this imo.

unseat incumbents, got me convinced the the dems are determined to fuck this up for the foreseeable future.

The report just dropped, and we still haven't seen what's actually in it, but early returns aren't looking to great politically.

republicans use strong arm tactics like that all the time but it doesnt make headlines. dems cant do that shit.

plus...only 2 dem house incumbents lost in 2018. which is the average.

the threat of 'progressive' challenges to incumbents is overrated imo.

53 of 79 candidates endorsed by justice democrats lost their primaries to moderate democrats overall.

and only 7 of 26 justice democrats won in november...all in safe democratic seats. 3 incumbents and 4 new members. and they didnt flip any red seats to blue.

primary candidates endorsed by the dccc red to blue list had a 95% primary win rate.

iono. that doesnt sound like something id be worried about putting my majority in jeopardy.

the Dems are the kings of unnecessary moves.

they are SO mad that AOC and others got in, despite the norm. they should be happy that they have more people in Congress and finding ways to get those numbers up.

like... the GOP is eroding democracy as we speak, exploiting every loophole

and these motherfuckers worried about primaries

https://twitter.com/JonLemire/status/1109223862175191041

https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1109218923227070468

prolly wishful thinking at this point...but doesnt seem like something he would do if good news was coming down the pike. you figure dude would grab the 1st camera he could find.

who knows man, report just dropped though. We're all pretty much reacting to speculation at this point.

>who knows man, report just dropped though. We're all pretty
>much reacting to speculation at this point.

Turned on MSNBC for 10mins before realizing they were just talking themselves into conclusions based on nothing. It’s day 2 of the NCAA tournament, I really don’t need to waste my time like this

Edit: I will say I’m going to my local congresswoman’s town hall tomorrow and am really interested what kind of focus there is gonna be on this stuff now

already briefed Congress.

I'm still expecting a fizzle, like I was from the beginning. I'm expecting it'll say Flynn broke the law, Manafort broke the law, Stone broke the law, but Trump and his family were all too dimwitted to know what was going on.

It's radioactive for Democrats regardless. People forget that the GOP and the voters didn't turn against Nixon until he was *on tape*, in the public domain, planning the coverup step by step. It doesn't matter how strong a case Mueller lays down. If we pursue it for impeachment the result will be a landslide for Trump and for the GOP in Congress.

Politically, I almost hope it does exonerate the president. Then at least people will have forgotten about the episode by election day and we can focus on the recession that likely will have started by then.

>
>we can focus on the recession that likely
>will have started by then.
>

It seems strange to hope for a recession, but I am
really leaning toward this being the only out.

Plenty of other shit to run on against him/GOP - like
the tax scam etc- but the Russia stuff has been too
much of a focus at this point.

I think the economy might be the only hope.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/21/trump-economy-election-1230495

From what little I know about these things, we're way overdue for a recession, for reasons that likely have little to do with Trump or Obama. Historically, recoveries from financial crises just take forever to work themselves out. Japan has been recovering from one for like 25 years now. Still, I'm feverishly reading every story I find these days about the yield curve. It's easy to convince yourself that it's right around the corner.

It's not so much about wishing for a recession, it's more just thinking that if a recession is inevitable, I'd want it to happen at a politically useful moment lol.

(And yes, I'm aware that Republicans we thinking pretty much the same way in the Obama years.)

especially with regards to it being the reason 45* got (s)elected
it was always a garnish to the main dish

so I'm kinda not looking forward to this, even if 45 is playing along and shutting things down.

the dude is a huckster who only cares about who he can swindle (or who he thinks he can swindle)

run someone who doesn't suck, attack the state-by-state cheating, and get this fucking 3rd Reich Mascot the fuck up outta here next year, please

that nothing short of an election is gonna get him TFO

and part of that pessimism is the way the GOP has behaved with him in his high chair

what they were doing to interfere. They peeped that Trump might be the nominee and they decided to approach him. Somehow, someway (i.e., intentionally, unintentionally or through dumb luck), Trump and his people stopped short of doing anything illegal enough for Mueller to charge any of them.

And then on top of all that, dozens of the people in Trump's orbit had a bunch of *other* illegal shit going that didn't directly involve the campaign, but which they decided to lie about, getting them in all kinds of trouble.

The rumors that white house counsel was basically dictating to doj and mueller that sitting pres can't be legally indicted...for basically anything, was when almost all the air went out of the bag. Couldn't even interview him

Then those creampuff flynn and manafort sentences was really the last straw in me thinking any of these dirt bags was gonna be held accountable

And dems won't impeach for multiple obvious offenses bc its "politically risky" when dude could win 2020 either win

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1109481687367536641

----------

IG @h_n_z

As they try to claim moral high ground after the Mueller report filing

I would never (c) Lyin' Ted

SD actually voted to impeach over the prisoner swap for Berghdal

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efforts_to_impeach_Barack_Obama

From bitherism to same sex bathrooms

Impeachment was suggested

Just some perspective as the narrative shifts

The DOJ is not a political party.

and dude might pull off another election because of it.

A four-page document by an AG with motivation to spin =/= the Mueller Report.

The Report at best could have embarrassing details, but who doesn't know trump is embarrassing?

Collusion with Russia tho? It was all duck tales. Maddow and Colbert were screaming about collusion for two years. Turns out they got nothing.

What a sad letter that was. Those jackasses Trump and hannity probably moonwalking right now.

Hopefully obstruction of justice can get proven, or the state cases can bear fruit, but it's clear now these politicians and leftist pundits should have been talking about a jobs plan or college for all Americans instead of this Russia collusion bag.

Also an interesting take...

https://twitter.com/sarahkendzior/status/1109908197257691139?s=21

He's gonna cook off this for years. And it's gonna pay dividends for him

.

this is from late January:
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/427077-pelosi-after-stone-indictment-what-does-putin-have-on-the-president
She been selling that same bullshit for years too

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/11/house-speaker-nancy-pelosi-says-im-not-for-impeachment-of-trump.html

she new something was amiss .

she gets no credit for halfway getting off the bullshit train 45 days before it was proven to be a lie.

did you read the letter? it's very carefully worded, and written by a guy who works for Trump. this is far from over.

sight, yet sooo much was put into this fantasy that the
FBI and his own AG would come out and say “the sitting
POTUS is a criminal/traitor/whatever”

From his blatant racism/sexism to the tax scam to the
travel ban to putting kids in cages to the walk to
him letting North Korea publicly fuck him to his
cabinet turnover to....you could go on and on.

All in plain sight. And now when they pivot back to
all that horrifying shit, it’s not going to look sincere.

We. Are. Fucked.

https://thumbs.gfycat.com/HonestOptimisticGoldfinch-small.gif

fbi/doj source:
https://twitter.com/page88/status/1109908926215176192

.

from israel to lavrov and kislyak when they visited the oval office.

which turned out to be true and later 'broke' on washington post.

im not sure if its the same source or not.

but either way...plenty of non-mainstream journalists/pundits have friends in rank and file positions within the various agencies. govt information passes through several hands.

I can't believe people are having such a hard time believing that Trump's own AG would sugarcoat the findings of the report then try and bury it. I believe 100% that's what's happening and the rest of the repugs will continue to fall in line.

Doesn't mean we're not absolutely fucked, in fact it further proves it. But folks throwing up their hands on some "I knew this was all bullshit" is really strange.

It's far from over. The climb is just steeper uphill than we imagined. And we may never get there. But today's halfassed, bizarre letter proves *nothing* in terms of how guilty 45* and his cronies are.

If they move to bury the report and try not to release it to Congress and the public IN FULL we're in full on constitutional crisis mode IMO. If he were truly exonerated like they are pretending he is then they'd have no problem letting everyone see every word of that report and would (and should) dance on our graves in celebration. Frankly the relatively subdued reaction by 45* today (as well as his Twitter silence all weekend) tells me there's a lot more to this story. Any continued attempts to bury this thing by 45*/repugs/Barr should alarm everyone cause it would clearly show that it's more damning than 45*-guy Barr wants us to know. If the report exonerates him/them, fucking prove it.

lol

including making the final decision on whether the presidents behavior rose to the standard of provable criminality on a key tenet of the investigation.

what would make you think he might not be completely forthcoming with his summary? lol.

This is bullshit.

a subpoena fight could go all the way up to the supreme court. and i dont have much faith in them.

https://twitter.com/NoahShachtman/status/1110003397724377088

Maybe we’ll all get to keep our gumshoe magnifying glasses.

I was at a town hall for my district's rep on Saturday, not a single person asked about the report (the congresswoman did bring it up though ha).
I'm sure some of the hardcore Maddow fans are in arms about this stuff, but it's so silly to present this "exoneration" (obv the report needs to come out unredacted) as a bombshell for 2020, as so many serious journos seem like it's their duty to do. Trump and his buddies (with Graham in the lead) are gonna try to make a big deal about it naturally, but they'll go right back to their agenda asap, which is what the election is really gonna hinge on. In a way it might even be good that this is playing out so early?

especially Greenwald, that dude swears he ain't gleeful, but cmon dog... he is walking people down like it's an OKS agenda

he even shouted out Jimmy "Dum-Dum" Dore, which... basically confirms it's a party.

I agree with the Taibbi take btw.
I also believe that while Russiagate wasn't the "end of Trump" as it was sold, it's part of the puzzle, and Squad 45* will find a way to keep it down for the last year or so.

This has unfortunately put a battery in the back of Cult 45. and New York Times, with that BIG ASS HEADLINE doesn't help.

he used to do solid work at the Guardian back in the day but he's been living in the Matrix for too long now. You'd think the arrival of Trump-wannabe Bolsonaro would have calmed him but he's putting all his chips down

>he used to do solid work at the Guardian back in the day but
>he's been living in the Matrix for too long now. You'd think
>the arrival of Trump-wannabe Bolsonaro would have calmed him
>but he's putting all his chips down

(i.e. don't search OKP threads for my name)

but on the real, he does good reporting about punk-ass Bolsonaro, probably one of the FEW to do so. that's why he has a parking permit

b/w Chomsky

We can't allow Israel to interfere in our politics.

For all of our political interference in other countries, including Russia

This was predictable

The indignation by US citizens is what I find laughable

that people (read: Democrats) put WAY too many eggs in this basket, and the line of cable news not named Fox following their assertion that this was "the thing that would sink Trump" also implying that this is the reason why Hillary failed... was 100% bullshit.

what sunk Hillary:

1. white supremacy
2. GOP-lead states that cheat
3. Andy Reid-type strategy on the part of the Democrats
4. Hillary

basically - EVERYTHING we've seen since Obama faced her in the primary (she sucks when she has a populist going up against her), and during Obama's presidency (white people are SALLLLLLLLTY when Dems win, and don't let the winning Dem NOT be white)

it's the level of partying he's doing that I'm laughing at.

...

America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

its amazing to see the entire press fall for the Barr headfake.

They've clearly learned nothing over these last few years and seem to have only the tiniest understanding of legal maneuvering.

The report is not the end all be all on Trump. his crimes extend far beyond "collusion"...he has directly sold out American interests to a foreign power, which has further reaching consequences than any election..he has participated directly in money laundering, run afoul of campaign finance laws (Stormy Daniels) and a whole host of other crimes

people falling for this "oh he's cleared now" are dumb as hell.

d

they sure manipulated this story to their benefit.

that summary was garbage. it might not matter in the over all public opinion what is actually in the report. at least not anytime soon. :/

the story is not over but for many people it might be.

... because it was so predictable. We were talking about Barr protecting 45* the day he became AG. There was maybe some underlying, unrealistic hope that he'd be objective but that shouldn't have been anyone's expectation at all.

He applied for the fucking job with his letter questioning Mueller last year or whenever it was. He got the job for that reason. Then he acted accordingly.

Now Dems just have more work to do to make sure the report gets released, and the ongoing investigations continue uninhibited.


>its amazing to see the entire press fall for the Barr
>headfake.
>
>They've clearly learned nothing over these last few years and
>seem to have only the tiniest understanding of legal
>maneuvering.
>
>The report is not the end all be all on Trump. his crimes
>extend far beyond "collusion"...he has directly sold out
>American interests to a foreign power, which has further
>reaching consequences than any election..he has participated
>directly in money laundering, run afoul of campaign finance
>laws (Stormy Daniels) and a whole host of other crimes
>
>people falling for this "oh he's cleared now" are dumb as
>hell.
>
>d

Barr's BS letter is very carefully worded. This is far from over.

Some are speculating because he didn't trust Barr or the rest of 45*'s cronies to do the right thing.

The narrative was Trump was horrible and Mueller was going to take him down. That is a very over-simplified version, but that was it.

Mueller was/is a hero who will save the country so to speak.

And we/the left/etc put so much stock into "Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election" and/or "Russia owns Trump" that we forgot to talk about all the other horrible stuff he has done in plain sight as President.

We had this fantasy that there would be a watergate-like situation where Trump had to leave in shame- we focused on this unlikely situation rather than putting the right amount of energy into everything from the Muslim ban to the wall to the tax scam.



We have to stop expecting institutions, republicans (even Mueller), and rich white people to do the "right" thing.

So this idea that Mueller handed stuff off to other institutions to save us just sounds like wishful thinking that ignores the past 3 years or whatever. No institution has stopped him to this point.


I mean, if there is some really terrible stuff in this report that Barr is hiding or that Mueller felt he couldn't trust him with, why didn't the hero Mueller give it to Congress himself? Or leak that shit?

I was told he was some expert investigator who loved his country, hated Russia, etc. But he is going to continue to let a Russia asset be POTUS because of norms or something?

Even if the above questions are silly because of legal reasons, you know Trumpsters will be saying something similar.


Yeah, the investigations in congress should continue, etc. But we need to stop focusing on it so much and Dems need to talk about shit that will help win the election.

Headlines everywhere today basically say "Trump Innocent" and there is no going back from that, man.

It sucks. It isn't fair.

Running around telling everyone "oh there's more to this story, just wait" isn't the play man. "We" will sound like we are screaming "fake news" or whatever.

Nothing is going to happen to Trump in a legal sense, man.

I've believed for a while that a "Trump is a bad man" campaign will get Democrats nowhere. Every knows/knew he is a bad man in 2016. It doesn't matter at all.

They should take this moment to pivot away and focus on what can really put them in position to win.

>I've believed for a while that a "Trump is a bad man"
>campaign will get Democrats nowhere. Every knows/knew he is a
>bad man in 2016. It doesn't matter at all.
>
>They should take this moment to pivot away and focus on what
>can really put them in position to win.

There's tons of action in Congress re: voter suppression and gerrrymandering. A lot of democrats are focused on 2020 and policy/strategy moving forward.

And some continue to focus on Trump's corruption and how to stop it. Both can and should and NEED to be done.

>The narrative was Trump was horrible and Mueller was going to
>take him down. That is a very over-simplified version, but
>that was it.
>
>Mueller was/is a hero who will save the country so to speak.

Besides, like, LABeathustla and Maddow/MSNBC, where exactly was this narrative you speak of ? If anything, outside of Maddow, I feel like the MSM mostly ignored this entire story except to provide updates here and there when 45*'s people said "THE REPORT IS COMING". *They* controlled the narrative, and I don't think there was anyone in MSM (besides the aforementioned) or any prominent or relevant democrats in Washington depending on Mueller to be the savior. I think that's a made up narrative, largely.

Obviously tons of us were hopeful that a Watergate-like scenario would play out but I don't think many *expected* it to play out that way.


>And we/the left/etc put so much stock into "Trump colluded
>with Russia to steal the election" and/or "Russia owns Trump"
>that we forgot to talk about all the other horrible stuff he
>has done in plain sight as President.

Again I just don't think this is true. We put a lot of stock in both. At least I personally did and do. I think there was a fascination with this investigation (and continues to be) because there's a lot of unprecedented stuff there. I don't think this was some fool's errand. If it were why would the repugs be working so hard to conceal the findings ?


>We had this fantasy that there would be a watergate-like
>situation where Trump had to leave in shame- we focused on
>this unlikely situation rather than putting the right amount
>of energy into everything from the Muslim ban to the wall to
>the tax scam.
>
>
>
>We have to stop expecting institutions, republicans (even
>Mueller), and rich white people to do the "right" thing.
>
>So this idea that Mueller handed stuff off to other
>institutions to save us just sounds like wishful thinking that
>ignores the past 3 years or whatever. No institution has
>stopped him to this point.

So is the solution to just give up ? Investigations into outright corruption aren't worth it ? A lot of the investigations I speak of involve the "horrible stuff Trump has done right in front of our faces" that you speak of. So of course they're relevant and important.

I also think there's been plenty of attention paid to the Muslim ban, the wall (ESPECIALLY) and the tax scam. Just because he's corrupt all over doesn't mean we can only focus on a few areas of his corruption. It's all-encompassing and that's why it's so difficult to stop. Well, that and the fact that repugs never act in good faith ever.


>I mean, if there is some really terrible stuff in this report
>that Barr is hiding or that Mueller felt he couldn't trust him
>with, why didn't the hero Mueller give it to Congress himself?
> Or leak that shit?

Because he has no authority to do that and it would be viewed as partisan, maybe. Who knows. We're 3 days into this thing.


>I was told he was some expert investigator who loved his
>country, hated Russia, etc. But he is going to continue to
>let a Russia asset be POTUS because of norms or something?

Who told you that ? LABeathustla ?


>Even if the above questions are silly because of legal
>reasons, you know Trumpsters will be saying something
>similar.
>
>
>Yeah, the investigations in congress should continue, etc.
>But we need to stop focusing on it so much and Dems need to
>talk about shit that will help win the election.

They can and should do both.


>Headlines everywhere today basically say "Trump Innocent" and
>there is no going back from that, man.

Those headlines are starting to change now that the hysteria has dissolved a bit.


>It sucks. It isn't fair.
>
>Running around telling everyone "oh there's more to this
>story, just wait" isn't the play man. "We" will sound like
>we are screaming "fake news" or whatever.

Who's running around ? I'm just bringing the info I'm seeing to a message board. It's an ongoing, fluid discussion. I have no control over the narrative. That's the media's job.


>Nothing is going to happen to Trump in a legal sense, man.

Maybe not. Doesn't mean his all-encompassing corruption shouldn't be pursued. You can both investigate his corruption, and focus on 2020 at the same time. In fact, at some point they may intersect. One may assist with the other.

>>The narrative was Trump was horrible and Mueller was going
>to
>>take him down. That is a very over-simplified version, but
>>that was it.
>>
>>Mueller was/is a hero who will save the country so to speak.
>
>Besides, like, LABeathustla and Maddow/MSNBC, where exactly
>was this narrative you speak of ? If anything, outside of
>Maddow, I feel like the MSM mostly ignored this entire story
>except to provide updates here and there when 45*'s people
>said "THE REPORT IS COMING". *They* controlled the narrative,
>and I don't think there was anyone in MSM (besides the
>aforementioned) or any prominent or relevant democrats in
>Washington depending on Mueller to be the savior. I think
>that's a made up narrative, largely.

Hustla was the most exaggerated version of it, yes. But it has been a big deal on everything from social media to the late night shows to here.

Thin line between faith and delusion.

>
>Obviously tons of us were hopeful that a Watergate-like
>scenario would play out but I don't think many *expected* it
>to play out that way.

Be honest, you really thought it would go like this? Maybe you didn't expect Trump to be taken away in bracelets, but did you really think the headlines would be "Trump Innocent" basically?

And if you honestly thought this is how it would go, then why do you expect anything to happen to him ever?

I'm not trying to be an asshole here. I just think you are setting yourself up for disappointment if you think anything is going to happen to him.

>
>
>>And we/the left/etc put so much stock into "Trump colluded
>>with Russia to steal the election" and/or "Russia owns
>Trump"
>>that we forgot to talk about all the other horrible stuff he
>>has done in plain sight as President.
>
>Again I just don't think this is true. We put a lot of stock
>in both. At least I personally did and do. I think there was a
>fascination with this investigation (and continues to be)
>because there's a lot of unprecedented stuff there. I don't
>think this was some fool's errand. If it were why would the
>repugs be working so hard to conceal the findings ?

Don't confuse me saying "nothing is going to happen" with "they didn't do anything wrong."

It isn't/wasn't a fools errand, but yesterday sure gave a gift wrapped present to Trump and his followers. It was a mistake to put so much stock into the Mueller investigation.

And I disagree strongly that the left has put as much energy into other issues as this in the past 6-12 months.

Here alone, every Friday was basically Mueller day. This very thread started with daydreaming that Kush or Jr was getting indicted.



>
>
>>We had this fantasy that there would be a watergate-like
>>situation where Trump had to leave in shame- we focused on
>>this unlikely situation rather than putting the right amount
>>of energy into everything from the Muslim ban to the wall to
>>the tax scam.
>>
>>
>>
>>We have to stop expecting institutions, republicans (even
>>Mueller), and rich white people to do the "right" thing.
>>
>>So this idea that Mueller handed stuff off to other
>>institutions to save us just sounds like wishful thinking
>that
>>ignores the past 3 years or whatever. No institution has
>>stopped him to this point.
>
>So is the solution to just give up ? Investigations into
>outright corruption aren't worth it ? A lot of the
>investigations I speak of involve the "horrible stuff Trump
>has done right in front of our faces" that you speak of. So of
>course they're relevant and important.

At every step in this we have said Trump is going down. He won't be nominated, he won't win, moderate republicans won't vote for him, women won't vote for him, the electoral college will step in (lol), the GOP will tire of him, Mueller comin, etc, etc.

Now its "Mueller handed stuff off to other groups"- it is sounding like Q anon or whatever that shit is. Just seems like the goalpost keeps moving to keep the fantasy alive.

My point is that folks need to be careful to not sound like Trumpsters who were convinced the feds were going to take Hillary down for a child porn ring or whatever.

>
>I also think there's been plenty of attention paid to the
>Muslim ban, the wall (ESPECIALLY) and the tax scam. Just
>because he's corrupt all over doesn't mean we can only focus
>on a few areas of his corruption. It's all-encompassing and
>that's why it's so difficult to stop. Well, that and the fact
>that repugs never act in good faith ever.

So if you know the GOP won't act in good faith, what do you expect to come out of these investigations?

You think he'll go to prison after his term? Nothing happened to the W administration, and their lies literally cost American lives.

And again, I disagree. In the last 6 months especially, the focus has been on Russia. A lot of that is on the media, but a lot of folks on the left fell for it too.

(I take back the wall- you're right there. But I haven't heard a peep about the other stuff. Kids STILL haven't been reunited with their fams, man.)

>
>
>>I mean, if there is some really terrible stuff in this
>report
>>that Barr is hiding or that Mueller felt he couldn't trust
>him
>>with, why didn't the hero Mueller give it to Congress
>himself?
>> Or leak that shit?
>
>Because he has no authority to do that and it would be viewed
>as partisan, maybe. Who knows. We're 3 days into this thing.

But Brew, this is the issue. We aren't 3 days. We are are what, almost 2 years into this thing?

We are 3 days into the report being handed in, but people have been hearing that Mueller was coming for Trump for two years. And now they are hearing that he is innocent.

Think about the average Amerikkkan who isn't obsessed with every detail about this. What is their take going to be when "we" say "there is more to the story/Mueller probs handed stuff off to other organizations/but wait for the whole report/the media is wrong"

What does that sound like?

And to my Mueller point. So we can't expect Mueller to act against norms. We can't expect Barr to not be terrible. We can't expect the GOP to not be awful.

So....what is going to happen then? The investigations in congress uncover some shit...and? THAT is when the GOP will do the right thing?

Nothing is going to happen to him man.



>
>
>>I was told he was some expert investigator who loved his
>>country, hated Russia, etc. But he is going to continue to
>>let a Russia asset be POTUS because of norms or something?
>
>Who told you that ? LABeathustla ?

haha fair. Yeah, him. And a lot of pro-Mueller stuff on Twitter. I have found it very odd that people on the LEFT were suddenly such huge FBI fans.

They fucked the left as recently as October 2016.


>
>
>>Even if the above questions are silly because of legal
>>reasons, you know Trumpsters will be saying something
>>similar.
>>
>>
>>Yeah, the investigations in congress should continue, etc.
>>But we need to stop focusing on it so much and Dems need to
>>talk about shit that will help win the election.
>
>They can and should do both.

I worry that Dems will go on a rant about making the report public, more to the story, etc- and use up all of their capital, etc. And voters will get tired of them or even worse, they do get the full report and there is no smoking gun.


>
>
>>Headlines everywhere today basically say "Trump Innocent"
>and
>>there is no going back from that, man.
>
>Those headlines are starting to change now that the hysteria
>has dissolved a bit.

Cmon Brew. This is America. We don't do nuance or corrections. This was a huge L for Dems.

>
>
>>It sucks. It isn't fair.
>>
>>Running around telling everyone "oh there's more to this
>>story, just wait" isn't the play man. "We" will sound like
>>we are screaming "fake news" or whatever.
>
>Who's running around ? I'm just bringing the info I'm seeing
>to a message board. It's an ongoing, fluid discussion. I have
>no control over the narrative. That's the media's job.

I didn't mean just you. I've seen similar stuff on twitter,some Dems, etc.

Aren't some Dem candidates pushing petitions to make the report public?

What if there isn't much there?

>
>
>>Nothing is going to happen to Trump in a legal sense, man.
>
>Maybe not. Doesn't mean his all-encompassing corruption
>shouldn't be pursued. You can both investigate his corruption,
>and focus on 2020 at the same time. In fact, at some point
>they may intersect. One may assist with the other.

Sure, but I think if Dems continue to pound this Russia thing it will backfire. If Dems/the left/libs/left-leaning media etc, continue to say shit like "there is more to this story" or whatever, voters will check out at best.

I'm also worried that you and a few others are just delaying your inevitable disappointment.

Repugs are always acting in bad faith. And it takes monumental, historic efforts to overcome their shenanigans. I've never once claimed that this investigation would result in Trump and his family in jail. In fact I've laughed at people who have said that on this very board.

All I'm saying is that this situation is wholly unprecedented and can't just be "let go" in its entirety because Barr did exactly what we knew he was going to do 2 months ago. Repugs did their best to control the narrative and they're doing just that. There's still more to come IMO and the focus on 2020 should include Russia and every single other instance of corruption that's out there.

I mean the narrative is already shifting, even on Fox News !! This is just one piece of a way larger puzzle, all hopefully leading to a 2020 win.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/mueller-did-not-exonerate-trump-barr-acted-as-judge-and-jury-now-congress-needs-to-do-its-job

As cynical as I am, even I didn't think it would be this soft.

I thought there would either be some damaging stuff that the GOP refused to act on, OR Barr would just put it in a drawer and it would look more obvious that he was protecting Trump.

So when I say "cmon, you expected more" I'm not insulting- because I did too.

And I know you weren't one of the "he going to jail" ones.

But

This playing the media like Sega knocked some sense into me. In order for anything to ever to happen to Trump, the GOP needs to play fair. They never will. AND they are much, much, much better at controlling the media.

So evil GOP + terrible media + dems aren't good at the media game and are far more married to norms than GOP = nothing will happen to Trump.


sucks.


I also don't want "us" to sound like "them" on some "fake news!" shit.

>
>As cynical as I am, even I didn't think it would be this
>soft.
>
>I thought there would either be some damaging stuff that the
>GOP refused to act on, OR Barr would just put it in a drawer
>and it would look more obvious that he was protecting Trump.

... doesn't mean Mueller's report doesn't contain a ton of damaging information. Again, it can't be stressed enough that Barr is doing what he was hired to do, and the fact that they continue to try and bury this report is further evidence that there's damaging stuff within it. Yesterday changes nothing IMO, despite the hysteria in the media.


>So when I say "cmon, you expected more" I'm not insulting-
>because I did too.
>
>And I know you weren't one of the "he going to jail" ones.

Oh I know. No worries mang.


>But
>
>This playing the media like Sega knocked some sense into me.
>In order for anything to ever to happen to Trump, the GOP
>needs to play fair. They never will. AND they are much,
>much, much better at controlling the media.

I don't think this is true necessarily. I think that all it takes is public pressure to MAKE them act right. You're right they won't do the right thing on their own, ever. But in the past they've been swayed by their constituents and that's why getting the gritty details of the report is so important, so the public will be swayed enough to put that pressure on them.

I mean I get what you're saying I just don't think it's necessarily that hopeless.


>So evil GOP + terrible media + dems aren't good at the media
>game and are far more married to norms than GOP = nothing will
>happen to Trump.
>
>
>sucks.
>
>
>I also don't want "us" to sound like "them" on some "fake
>news!" shit.

Haha no doubt.

but I’m not holding my breath for even a second thinking it will happen

That's how I've felt the entire time, though admittedly I've hit some rollercoaster ups and downs from time to time.

like this (with a good bit of 'dems in disarray' narrative thrown in)
https://twitter.com/edokeefe/status/1110181138604195840

our media is broken with no signs they even wanna be fixed.

the few clips ive watched of networks news about this is confusing. you do have some people being clear that the summary is not the report and that it is misleading. then right after you have someone else speaking very loudly that this report has completely cleared and vindicated trump. no one pushes back. im not going to keep watching that.

hopefully we do get the actual report to congress very soon.

If it lets them open after every ad with the "Breaking News OMFG Watch!" graphic then that's what they do. HBO shouldn't be the only channel making money from Game of Thrones.

Then if it lets them play against type by owning some libs, all the better.

It all reminds me of how we got into Iraq.

= Trumpsters still win.

So many headlines are saying shit like "Mueller Finds no Collusion", "No Evidence Found" etc etc.

And I've heard a few people who are uninformed/not political/etc say "So, Trump didn't do anything?"

No coming back from that IMO.

I get that we haven't seen the whole report, and I get that there are other investigations.


But we/the left/Dems/libs whoever need to focus on winning 2020. That is the only way Trump loses.


"We" can yell all we want about getting the whole report, the media is terrible, Barr is playing interference, etc...but it gets dangerously close to sounding like "fake news!"


"We" can't do the the Dem thing where we complain about the rules of the game so much we forget to win.


Sure let the other investigations proceed and try to get that whole report, but we can't keep kidding ourselves/each other that Trump is going down any other way than the election

from when he started out reporting on the fed workforce in the washington post

America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

“The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

Unless Barr is just making up words, the main claim against Trump in regards to this investigation was shown not to be there

>“The investigation did not establish that members of the
>Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian
>government in its election interference activities.”
>
>Unless Barr is just making up words, the main claim against
>Trump in regards to this investigation was shown not to be
>there
>


What's being quoted here has never been the claim. That quote deals with the IRA and GRU ties with the Trump campaign.

Trumps ties with Russia have always been through intermediaries. (Kilimnik and Deripaska, etc.).

I'm just commenting on what I heard on talk radio this morning and this weekend. Commentators were describing the summary as if it was the report and running with their own interpretations for hours on end. It was the epitome of basing your opinion on the headline and not the article.

America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

ME!

You locked my post where I told you MUELLER WILL NOT SAVE YOU

LOL @ expecting rich white men to put other rich white men in jail

Everyone got amnesia that Mueller is A REGISTERED REPUBLICAN and for all we know probably voted for 45

FOH

He's really the only person here that your above post applies to. The rest of us were hopeful but not expectant that this would go well.

i think it was only LAbeats and one other person who were certain Trump is going to jail

I think most of us did expect more, but at most expected a scathing report, followed by Trump being shielded by repbublicans against any consequences.

Starting to look that way...

Russia if you're out there
Trump tower meeting
Paulie passing off polling data

=No collusion...?

Doesn't make sense, unless there's more in the report beyond Russia government ops

Only hope now is the ongoing investigations into criminal conduct

if he pushes harder on collusion, he becomes the target. enemy #1 for the right. the face of the deep state, constant attacks on his rep, his character.. pretty much forever.

Dems are disappointed and their will be small movement on the left saying he's just a repulbican, and an even smaller group saying he's dirty, but for the most part there will be no effort to go out and try to destroy him.

he probably figures its better to just map out his findings and push it off to someone else.

It’s not about what we want... it’s about what we NEED to hear.

...collusion.

The first thing the probe was supposed to investigate was whether the Russian government manipulated public sentiment to help elect Trump. They established that beyond any reasonable doubt, and it should be a major fucking scandal and should make everyone inherently skeptical of his legitimacy in office, to this day.

The question of whether Trump *asked* them to do that was always sketchy. People were throwing around the phrase "useful idiot" from the beginning, and that always seemed like the most plausible scenario. (The plans for Trump Tower Moscow only strengthen this view.)

But by repeating "no collusion" over and over and over and over, in such a sketchy way, he goaded the press into thinking collusion was the story.

I'm not saying it's an act of strategic genius. It's actually pretty standard crisis management. When you're accused of something serious, change the subject to something where you don't think they'll find anything. Then claim victory after everyone's forgotten the original accusation. The press seems to fall for it every time.

Russia interfered with the election.

As a country, this should be the point going forward

Being that that was the mandate.

On point. And a bunch of people fell for it.

It was about Russia in connection with Trump.

From Mueller's appointment document:
The Special Counsel is authorized to conduct the investigation confinned by then-FBI
Director James 8. Corney in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence on March 20, 2017, including:

(i) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals
associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump;

Look at the top paragraph.

"...to ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian Government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, I hereby order as follows."

Also note the word "including" that leads into your quoted point (b)(i).

Yeah, it would be a big fucking deal if the campaign coordinated directly with the Kremlin. That's why this point was specifically stated. But that was just one aspect of the investigation.

If the investigation was JUST about coordination with the Trump campaign, it would seem quite a miscarriage of justice that Mueller was able to bring charges against 34 different people, 26 of them Russians, and three Russian companies. These charges against Russian nationals and companies are NOT for perjury or obstruction, they are for interference in the election. And apparently he could not establish that they were coordinated with the Trump campaign.

The Russian indictments are related to the "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation.

The Justice Department was/is looking at Russia's interference in the election. A special counsel was appointed for this specific part due to Sessions' unique role in the campaign

Who got super indignant when Gail asked him about holding women against their will. That was the point he felt confident to put on a show for.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson

"what's a leader if he isn't reluctant"

Damn

This is totally unrelated to Mueller (or even Trump and Stormy Daniels). Just putting it here because this is today's thread for political calamities that Trump will exploit the entire fuck out of.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-25/michael-avenatti-is-charged-with-trying-to-extort-nike-nke

Who would have thought our side would find a lawyer even dumber than Guiliani AND maybe even shadier than Cohen?

EDIT: And now, embezzlement and bank fraud. Story still developing, I guess...

https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/charmed/images/f/ff/Deflection2.gif/revision/latest/top-crop/width/360/height/450?cb=20111116011554

If this nigga escapes...

I will actually believe he can fly

She believes that, because Kellz, was handing over teenage victims to the establishment, that he will get off.

I immediately thought of her assertion when I read that Avenatti just got got.

like - we need an attack dog to challenge Trump!

We live in a really stupid era.

and thought he actually had a shot with the dem base.

preceded Avenatti getting involved with Trump and Stormy Daniels since I never heard of him taking Nike on until today.

I think I read about Stormy Daniels officially distancing herself from Avenatti some months ago; if she did, it appears she is quite wise.

LOL @ trying to extort Nike.

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1110213957170749440

"Tmrw at 11 am ET, we will be holding a press conference to disclose a major high school/college basketball scandal perpetrated by @Nike that we have uncovered. This criminal conduct reaches the highest levels of Nike and involves some of the biggest names in college basketball."

>EDIT: And now, embezzlement and bank fraud. Story still
>developing, I guess...

but this right here in terms of him allegedly committing fraud seems worse to me since that I'm assuming is much more cut and dry and shouldn't take much work to prove or disprove. Interesting timing and all though. Interesting for such a public lawyer to try and play games with legal matters, assuming there's merit to the charges brought against him today.

alleged co-conspirator. you cant write this shit any better for trump supporters.

He tried to extort Nike over the fact that Deandre Ayton's family was getting paid? LOL, this isn't even a secret, ESPN reported this last year. And he wanted HOW much money to keep this "secret?"

And a lot of people clinging to narratives. EXONERATED! vs. CONSPIRACY!!!

I'm tiring of this era of news coverage. The balance between investigation/journalism and editorial content has been so skewed in the last 30 years that the American public is having a hard time differentiating. We need to see the full report, but who knows if that day will come. The game is rigged.

So basically Russia helped (weird that we focus on Russia sometimes, when any number of countries are probably doing similar things). We just can't prove Trizzy personally asked them to, based on some pretty specific legal standards? The people evaluating those standards may favor Trump? OK... Flynn, Manafort, and Cohen all guilty. Roger Stone in the crosshairs... There's corruption in Trump's immediate orbit and he lies about it at every turn.

It feels like we should probably also pay attention to the heaping shit pile of other atrocities that this administration is perpetuating. Maybe look at some election reform, so everyone can vote. Are we over the fact that ICE is unaccountable and continues to imprison children and separate families based on racist whims?

Mostly just... FUCK.

Yeah. I can't do another 4 years of this shit. It's too depressing and demoralizing. If he's reelected it's pretty much a wrap on this country.

its almost unfair at this point lol


I'm over pouting

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

while bullying dems into taking their L and letting this go.

>I'm over pouting

I had a shit stressful ass week last week but was so busy I ignored all things political/news related. i think the upside is I had no idea or anticipation this was gonna drop, so when it did I had zero emotional reaction to it. I'm not encouraging not paying attention but damn if it doesn't make shit easier to swallow.

Not saying I’m a doom and gloom lee type dude but when it comes to the President or Congress I don’t put much faith into things working in our favor when it comes to Trump.

I feel for folks who actually think the news is going to be good for “us”

That’s not how news works.

but every time I take a decent break from it, I'm reminded that it doesn't matter, well, not so much that it doesn't matter, but with these national stories, all this shit is gonna happen how it happens whether I feel personally invested or not.

At most from this case I expected that even if Mueller dropped a ton of goods on Trump, this was never gonna break like Watergate. He was gonna skate on it one way or another. This way is probably less messy.

The only thing that will ever rescue us from Trump will be fast food.

There was a guest on Chris Hayes podcast last week talking bout polling.. but could be applied to much more

He said the Republicans only concern is changing the temperature whereas the democrats' concern is checking the temperature..

When I started doing a deeper dive into linguistics and came across George Lakoff I also came across a ton of round table discussions with Frank Luntz.. Luntz imo is largely responsible for the way in which the right has such a strong control on messaging..

Also they are mostly lemmings

.

how the cases brought up by the Southern District of NY and Letitia James will be affected by this news environment. I'm also assuming Trump is in no danger of getting impeached by the rulings from either of the cases since the rulings won't get brought to Congress, correct?

Congress.

From Barr's brief statement:

This report does not exonerate Trump.

It's too early to pop bottles guys. Those state indictments cannot be pardoned away with executive power..... This is still ongoing and anyone that refuses a push for a definitive conclusion is implicit in the downfall of American democracy.

to misconstrue muellers findings, protect the prez, etc.

uh his reputation is him advising prez bush (1st) to pardon everyone in the iran-contra scandal to prevent any information being revealed to implicate bush. effectively blowing up the entire investigation.

nobody in the media mentions any of this.

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1110266463506567168

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1110266463506567168.html


(THREAD) The already-infamous "Barr Letter" is a deeply dishonest and misleading document that richly deserves methodical public evisceration by committed journalists. So I hope you'll read on and retweet this "live" dismantling of the Trump-Russia probe's worst political hitjob.

1/ Barr begins by conceding that, in accordance with DOJ regulations, the report he has received from Mueller only summarizes "prosecution or declination" decisions—meaning that it may well not include much of the raw evidence Mueller compiled, and be sparsely conclusory in form.

2/ Though Mueller may not have included raw evidence in his report—which mainly summarizes who he charged or didn't and why—Barr observes that "the report explains that his staff thoroughly investigated" the allegations, thus confusing the raw evidence and what Mueller told Barr.

3/ This means that we have not 2 but 3 data-points to work with:

(1) Mueller's case file.
(2) Mueller's summary of prosecution and declination decisions.
(3) Barr's summary of Mueller's summary.

Barr writes his letter in a way that quickly conflates #1 and #2—and it *matters*.

4/ So let's say Data-point #1 (Mueller's case file) establishes 80% proof of a crime being committed; Data-point #2 (Mueller's summary of prosecution and declination decisions) might simply say, "not enough to indict." Barr's letter (Data-point #3) can then *imply* "no evidence."

5/ As we've seen—and will see in this thread—that's exactly what Barr does: he carefully chooses his words in describing Mueller's "declination" decisions in a way that obscures how much evidence there may have been, leaving the impression—instead—there may have been none at all.

6/ Barr had a choice here: he could summarize the evidence or summarize the *summary* of the evidence. The decision he made was to summarize the summary, knowing that him doing so would feed into Team Trump's false narrative that criminal evidence exists in an all-or-none binary.

7/ But by *leading off* his "summary of the summary" by referencing the raw evidence—"the Special Counsel and his staff thoroughly investigated..."—it sounds like he's working from the raw evidence, not a summary of the evidence. This is a pretty basic legalistic bait-and-switch.

8/ The next thing Barr does is outrageously mischaracterize the scope of Mueller's investigation—wildly misquoting the public appointment letter that led to the 22-month Mueller probe. Why mischaracterize a public document like this (especially such a famous one)? Let's find out.

9/ Here's the DOJ document that authorized and set the scope for Mueller's investigation. Note, first, that it tasked Mueller with investigating "coordination" between Team Trump and the Russian government; it pointedly did *not* use the word "conspiracy." justice.gov/opa/press-rele…

10/ "Coordination" is far broader than "conspiracy," as a) it comes from counterintelligence—and thus includes far more conduct than the criminal system would recognize as problematic, and b) it has a broad lay meaning on par with "collusion"—not a narrow statute like Conspiracy.

11/ But note too that Mueller's appointment letter tasked him with fully investigating "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation"—for instance if Mueller found insufficient evidence to charge Conspiracy but found evidence of Bribery, he could pursue it.

12/ Conspiracy requires an *agreement* of some kind—a "meeting of the minds"—with an illegal purpose, then an *act in furtherance* of the agreement to achieve an illegal end. The end needn't be achieved, but some agreement—here, with "the Russian government"—*would* be necessary.

13/ Here's the key point on this: As Mueller began his work, *no one in America was accusing Trump of engaging in a covert illegal agreement with a Russian government entity*. Not the IRA, not the GRU, not the FSB. *Nor had Trump done that*. Which is why he immediately denied it.

14/ Trump found the one type of collusion he *hadn't* engaged in—a covert, before-the-fact agreement (Conspiracy) with the IRA or GRU to (respectively) use psy-ops on or hack America—and denied it. Unfortunately, that was a small part of the "coordination" Mueller was looking at.

15/ What Trump *was* being accused of—and which he couldn't deny, because, as we already know from public evidence, *he definitely did it*—was allowing his foreign policy on Russian sanctions to be the product of Bribery (one of two enumerated impeachable offenses, with Treason).

16/ The Trump Tower Moscow-for-sanctions relief quid pro quo Trump was accused of was *never* chargeable as Conspiracy—it would be Bribery or maybe Aiding and Abetting (After the Fact) Russian interference by agreeing to unilaterally pay Putin trillions, and thus encouraging him.

17/ So with all that in mind, now look at how Barr mischaracterizes Mueller's investigation (having already set himself up to *only* be producing a "summary of a summary," not any underlying evidence Mueller might have developed on Bribery, Aiding and Abetting, or anything else):
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2h9vADWkAkje8M.png

18/ Wow—that's wrong on multiple counts, as you can see. Not only does it limit Mueller's evidence to Conspiracy—though we can't know yet if Mueller unnecessarily so limited himself or if Barr dishonestly limited his summary that way—but he makes another major inexplicable error.

19/ Barr summarizes the collusion evidence as being (a) *only* a matter of the narrow criminal statute of Conspiracy *and* (b) *only* Conspiracy with the Russian government "in its efforts to interfere in the election." Wow—that's totally not what Mueller's appointment was about.

20/ What Barr has done is *adopt wholesale* Trump's definition of "collusion": the narrowest possible definition, which involves *only* a single type of crime (Conspiracy) with *only* a single entity (the Russian government) and *only* on a single topic ("election interference").

21/ The problem is that that definition *in no way fit* the collusion Trump was *actually* being accused of—which involved (a) Bribery, (b) by Russian agents, affiliates, or cutouts, (c) on the subject of trading U.S. sanctions policy for loans or deals with Trump and his family.

22/ So when Barr then boasts about how many resources Mueller devoted to his work, he does so amidst a massive confusion he himself created and hasn't resolved—did Mueller commit all those resources to an insanely narrow collusion probe? Or is Barr mischaracterizing the evidence?

23/ So here's where Barr goes off the rails: he says the only collusive crime Mueller looked at was whether Americans "joined the Russian conspiracies" to influence the election—the IRA and GRU conspiracies—which would be a federal crime (Conspiracy). But that's 100% wrong.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2h_4UKXQAAmmAH.png

24/ It's wrong because that's far narrower than Mueller's appointed task—so either Mueller self-limited himself because he knew as many as 20 other federal/state investigations were in a position to look at broader collusion *or* Mueller did his job and Barr is hiding it from us.

25/ What's bizarre is that when Barr says Mueller "did not find"—then says Mueller "did not establish"—the crime of Conspiracy, he *switches* to the language of Mueller's appointment ("coordinated") though "coordination" goes *far* beyond the issue of Conspiracy. Total confusion.

26/ What this looks like to me as a lawyer—combining this evidence with Barr's prior false framing—is that Barr wants to imply Mueller found no collusive criminality *of any kind* when it's entirely possible (even likely) that Mueller only looked at a *narrow* form of Conspiracy.

27/ It gets worse. You'll notice that MUELLER used the language "did not establish"—meaning *simply*, "did not have the evidence to prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt," which could still mean 80% proof of criminality—but BARR switched to "did not find" (suggesting 0% proof).

28/ Barr is well aware—he certainly was when he wrote his wildly irresponsible advisory memos to Trump, which served as his audition for the job of Attorney General—that Team Trump has been equating "less-than-beyond-a-reasonable-doubt proof" with *no evidence*. So he helped out.

29/ There's nothing academic about this: the GOP *jumped* on *Barr's* language—not *Mueller's*—for the premise that Mueller found *no* evidence of *any* collusion, rather than—as Mueller said—something less than beyond-a-reasonable-doubt evidence of a *narrow* type of Conspiracy.

30/ Barr next confirms that he's only summarizing findings as to Conspiracy (the statute) with two entities—the IRA and GRU. Again—no one ever accused Trump of signing a secret agreement with either of these entities. Barr keeps sticking to his misleading "did not find" language.

31/ Because we know the language Mueller used is "did not establish ," Barr's "weasel-words" (as we colloquially call them in the law) reveal something *damaging* to Trump: there may be *some* evidence of something we thought there was *no* evidence of.

32/ The *reason* no Democrats accused Trump of signing a secret agreement with the IRA or GRU—and, we assumed, the reason Trump *only* specifically denied that sort of conduct—is, we thought, because there was *no* evidence of it. Mueller is allowing there *may* be some—or a lot.

33/ So halfway through Barr's letter, his political motives have been revealed through *multiple* misleading framings/characterizations—but moreover, these framings and mischaracterizations inadvertently reveal that things could be *worse* for Trump on collusion than we thought.

34/ Meanwhile, Barr's misleading framings/characterizations reveal that the type of collusion Trump was *actually accused of* either (a) was never looked at by Mueller, or (b) was looked at but *Barr has decided* they lie outside Mueller's purview, even though we know they don't.

35/ The Daily Beast reported, shortly after Barr released his letter, that Mueller wanted *Congress*—not DOJ—to decide what his evidence meant, so the point I've just made is even more problematic: did Barr make a *political* judgment on *collusion* that Mueller actively opposed?

36/ Meanwhile, we have a situation in which, just before Barr released his letter, Donald Trump and Donald Trump Jr. and Rudy Giuliani were *all* saying that America should see what I've called "Data-point #1"—the Mueller case file—in *full*. Now they're backtracking *hard*—why?

37/ Barr then switches to the Obstruction question, revealing that Mueller made no judgment on the issue of whether a crime—and impeachable offense—had occurred, but wanted Congress to decide, instead. He also reveals something else that I think many people may miss—but it's key.

38/ Barr reveals that most of Mueller's evidence on Obstruction was taken from the public sphere—which reveals that Mueller spent most of the 22 months his team of 40 people was working looking at collusion. It makes how Barr handled and discussed that issue even more suspicious.

39/ Given that Rod Rosenstein is a *witness* in the Obstruction case, and therefore can't speak to it—and given that Barr already issued a *judgment* on Obstruction pre-evidence (via his memos) and therefore has an unambiguous need to recuse himself—what he says next is amazing.

40/ What Barr reveals is 2 ineligible arbiters of Obstruction—he and Rosenstein—made the final call on Obstruction though Mueller seems to have believed the issue was properly for Congress (either constitutionally or because the evidence was public and they're the people's reps).

41/ What Barr says next—that you can't commit Obstruction if there's no underlying crime—is, well, *crazy*. You can't find a serious attorney anywhere in America who says that's the law, as it simply isn't and never has been and no one knows where Barr came up with this doctrine.

42/ With that dramatic suspense generated, I'll now say that there's *one* group of people who've argued, counter to anything in American law, that you can't commit Obstruction if there's "no underlying crime "...

...Donald Trump's legal team.

Yikes.

43/ So a guy (Rosenstein) who'd have to go on TV and testify against Trump in an impeachment trial in the Senate if he says there's Obstruction, and a guy (Barr) who auditioned for Trump's legal team—which has a crazy Obstruction doctrine Barr shares—making a call on Obstruction.

44/ Barr then falsely says grand jury material "cannot be made public," when in *fact* he means it *can* be made public if the AG requests that from a judge, but Barr is refusing to do so either across the board or in almost all cases. What's he afraid of? His letter suggests it:

45/ Barr's letter says *almost all* the Obstruction evidence is public, so the evidence Barr is trying to *hide* by not asking a judge to allow it to be revealed to Congress is almost entirely—all together now—*collusion evidence*. The same collusion he misleads on in his letter.

46/ But wait! you say. What evidence do we have that Barr's insanely narrow definition of Obstruction—which we've already shown is matched by an insanely narrow definition of collusion—means that what he wants to hide is a) collusion evidence that's b) more broadly defined? This:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D2iLD_ZXQAIWne7.png

47/ That's right: Barr is acknowledging, when his letter is taken in *full*, that the evidence he wants to keep from Congress is collusion evidence—which he's already mischaracterized—which is currently part of *ongoing federal criminal investigations * elsewhere.

48/ Many, me included, have taken from Barr's words that Mueller interpreted his brief on collusion narrowly and farmed out to other jurisdictions—the 20 pending Trump-related probes I mentioned—the collusion allegations Democrats were *actually* making. This seems to confirm it.

49/ Barr's "hide-the-ball" on collusion is therefore just what we'd expect, given his behavior on other fronts: an attempt to keep from Congress and the public any information on the *collusion allegations that were actually made against Trump*—not the *ones Trump was okay with*.

50/ All this explains why Trump's calls for Mueller's report to be made public—already fake, given that he knew his Congressional allies and Barr would fight full disclosure tooth and nail—have now been backtracked. And why yesterday *wasn't* the victory he pretended it was. /end

The inability of U.S. journalists to understand three key legal terms—PROOF, INDICTMENT, and CONVICTION—is making discussion of the Barr Letter and the entire Trump-Russia investigation *impossible*. I'll try to remedy the problem here. I hope you'll read on and retweet.

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1110543428495069185

^^^read this thread

Zero.
NONE.
Trump can honestly say there was fake news for two years that was out to get him.

Not only trump tho...how many movements got called bots or russian?
Google deindexed alternet, black agenda report, copwatch and a ton of other long standing leftist sites, cuz russia!!!
ADOS was bots
BLM was bots
Sanders supporters was bots
Jill Stein was a russian "asset" cuz she went to a press dinner.

Dems some bitches
Media some hoes
Maddow is a fuckin clown
Mufuckas playin connect the dot with literally nothing.

American corporate media is not to be trusted or listened to.

This shit is tremendously fucked up and problematic. This is a HUGE black eye for the mainstream media. Might not be able to recover from it

So much news is rumors and gossip.

Especially cable news.

all that is known is Barr says that Mueller says they dont have (enough) evidence to prove the campaign team worked with the russian govt to hack the election.


there was still proven meetings with russian non-govt employees to share "dirt on the clintons", still random hacks and info sent to wikileaks, still russian bots created/unleashed on FB and twitter to wreak havoc, still campaign and polling data offered to non-USA groups, still backdoor deals wit erik prince+saudis+turkey+flynn+ukraine+any other criminal org, still trump on evening news saying he fired comey because of the whole russia thing


all of that has been pretty much admitted to by the trump team themselves. folk thought there would be a trump perp walk and since it didnt happen, trump was right all along? come on


>NONE.
>Trump can honestly say there was fake news for two years that
>was out to get him.
>
he can, but he'd by lying

>American corporate media is not to be trusted or listened to.
>
mission accomplished for him
>
>

Barr to misstate the case, then?
Why would they do that?

Who knows. I saw yesterday that CNN was reporting Mueller was back in his office working. So who knows what's coming.

I think they said as much in the 'summary'

Rosenstein appointed Mueller...?

I think we need to stop caping for dude

We got what we got.

Maybe the spinoffs bare fruit...

>We got what we got.

... with a documented history of covering up repugnantcan transgressions.
https://www.npr.org/2019/01/14/684553791/william-barr-supported-pardons-in-an-earlier-d-c-witch-hunt-iran-contra

Otherwise, we have no idea what we got. Because none of us have seen it.

IMO, I would move on

Holding out for the 'report' feels futile

I don't think anything more comes from the report in itself, other than what we got to date

The Mueller report is going to be like the 22 pages from the 911 commission

Maybe 10 years from now you'll see it.

evidence, for one

Seeing as how Mueller has been one step ahead in his handling of the investigation, when it was clear the appointment of Barr would lead to a misrepresentation at best or a totally dismantling at worst of the investigation, it became clear they would need to hand off the finer points of the criminal investigation to a group that was not beholden to the DoJ.

That's one possibility.

Another is that Mueller in fact wants Congress to push for the entire report to be made public, which will be a war fought tooth and nail.

This dude's looking for Mueller, who hasn't spoken to the media in maybe his entire life, to be on every cable news station screaming "IT'S A CONSPIRACY" the last 3 days. Cause *that's* always a solid, proven strategy against repugs/this admin.


>RE: well there was that mad rush to provide the SDNY with loads of
>evidence, for one
>
>Seeing as how Mueller has been one step ahead in his handling
>of the investigation, when it was clear the appointment of
>Barr would lead to a misrepresentation at best or a totally
>dismantling at worst of the investigation, it became clear
>they would need to hand off the finer points of the criminal
>investigation to a group that was not beholden to the DoJ.
>
>That's one possibility.
>
>Another is that Mueller in fact wants Congress to push for the
>entire report to be made public, which will be a war fought
>tooth and nail.

If Mueller is sitting on info that is counter to the Barr letter there is absolutely NO reason for him to not let that be known.
Mueller had the power to ask for indictments.
He didn't.
Now its Barr hiding shit?

Y'all funny

In other words he may not have had enough to indict just yet, but was still investigating different leads but Barr closed up shop before the investigation was complete.

Either that, or Mueller was leaving it up to Congress to decide whether or not to indict based on what he had (shut down early or not) and Barr took it upon himself to protect his boss.

then we can stop speculating and know what was actually found.

not 100% positive, but I think so.

We're just going to forget all the work he did to ferret out multiple bad actors in the Trump administration?

People were already saying that the Mueller Report would act more as a road map for future investigations, rather than a presidency destroying bomb that many people wanted it to be.

Most people foresaw this before Barr, but definitely after Barr.

this case has branched out into different areas, areas where Trump has no pardon power. I'm guessing that Mueller knew that Barr would cover for Trump, so the Dems and Republicans will be fighting over getting this information out to the public for the foreseeable future. the other thing that a lot of people aren't seeing is that Mueller has partially told the story through his indictments. People who are saying there is absolutely no connection obviously haven't been reading the indictments. Proving "collusion" beyond a reasonable doubt is not easy, that doesn't mean that Trump has been "exonerated." We will never see the entire report, but hopefully we get to see enough that tells us what happened.

but then saying- oh wow it really musta been a witch hunt

from the report:
"While this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him"


the whole country watched the obstruction interview realtime, lol.
whether they thought they had enough to charge him with it, or charge him with anything while serving the role of the president, apparently not

that dont make it 'fake news'

mostly being stupid and not at all ready to be in govt positions or understanding disclosure rules and regs.
Trump is a idiot huckster with a team of idiot hucksters around him.
None of this is treasonous

If you want to yell "THE MEDIA SAID FOR YEARS THAT TRUMP WAS COLLUDING WITH RUSSIA! FAKE NEWS!" then you can do that. Fox News would probably give you a platform for it. It wouldn't be true, of course, because the media *did not* say Trump colluded with Russia. The mainstream media said the issue was under investigation, which it was. It also mentioned that some amount of collusion (apparently not prosecutable) was already known: the "Russia, if you're listening" comments, which aren't very convincing, or the Trump Tower meeting, which was very serious but apparently not found to be part of an ongoing effort, or the ongoing plans for Trump Tower Moscow, which may also be quite serious, also involving the emoluments clause, and which are still under investigation by the Southern District of New York.

The media also said that obstruction of justice was occuring in plain view. That is also true, though apparently Barr and Rosenstein didn't think the justice department could or should make the case on that. We still don't know what further evidence for obstruction the Mueller report lays out, but there clearly was some, or else the report would have recommended against prosecuting for obstruction just as it did for conspiracy.

But you're not even making THOSE dumb arguments. You're making the argument so dumb that even the White House is smart enough to stay away from it. You're acting like the whole Russia story was invented. That's what Trump is personally trying to make people think, by empty innuendo, but it bears no relation to reality. From William Barr's OWN memo, which nobody takes to be impartial:

"The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency (IRA), to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election."

Next paragraph:

"The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election. The Special Counsel found that Russian government actors successfully hacked into computers and obtained emails from persons affiliated with the Clinton campaign and Democratic Party organizations, and publicly disseminated those materials through various intermediaries, including WikiLeaks. Based on these activities, the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers in the United States for purposes of influencing the election."

He then states, in both of these cases, that the investigation did not find evidence that the Trump campaign was working with these Russian entities, but that's an entirely separate question.

Russia DID interfere in the US election, specifically sowing social discord among conservatives AND progressives through social media and trolling. The Internet Research Agency had more people on staff than the entire Trump campaign. They also broke into the Democratic party (electronically). That is the same underlying crime as what started the Watergate scandal, and in this case, the break-in was far more consequential to the eventual election.

By pretending Russia didn't interfere in the election you're not being a left-wing radical or a free thinker, you're being a shill for our idiot right-wing authoritarian.

well done

recognizing the goofiness of almost 3 years of media fuckery doesn't make me a "trump apologist"
Fuck trump
It makes me a skeptic of a narrative that has expanded to include all kinds of dumb ass shit including Russia controlling power grids, interrupting C-Span, using a random woman as a sex spy, the shitty Steele Dossier/pee tape fuckshit, and calling every one to the left of Clinton/Pelosi/Shumer an "asset".

There is no evidence of Trump meeting with or trading info with Russia.

There *is* however a grillion post pt 1 of this thread that y'all should re-read and be fuckin embarrassed about.

All kinds of truly fucked up policies have gone completely unreported cuz the media went full retard on Cold War 2.
This shit has given Trump an incredible amount of credibility among his base, and has made mainstream media look even stupider than it already did.
Meanwhile, there's a rise in labor strikes, an ongoing housing crisis, Flint still fucked up, Black people still getting murdered, etc, etc, etc.

But y'all keep on reading between the lines of a damn statement of exoneration tho, lol

>This shit has given Trump an incredible amount of credibility
>among his base

You want 4 more years, or nah?
The smug shit got the Dems in this spot to begin with.
Fuckin Donald Trump is president of the US.
Instead of recruiting new voters, engaging young folks, expanding the base, doing intense voter education, moving towards any kind of popular policy positions (left or right)...
It's been a stupid ass Red Scare.
This shit is a DISASTER for the media and the dems, and if you're remotely anti-trump, there is NO way you can spin this as a win.

Keep doubling down tho

The blue fuck are you talking about right now.

>Zero.
>NONE.
>Trump can honestly say there was fake news for two years that
>was out to get him.
>
>Not only trump tho...how many movements got called bots or
>russian?
>Google deindexed alternet, black agenda report, copwatch and a
>ton of other long standing leftist sites, cuz russia!!!
>ADOS was bots
>BLM was bots
>Sanders supporters was bots
>Jill Stein was a russian "asset" cuz she went to a press
>dinner.
>
>Dems some bitches
>Media some hoes
>Maddow is a fuckin clown
>Mufuckas playin connect the dot with literally nothing.
>
>American corporate media is not to be trusted or listened to.
>
>
>This shit is tremendously fucked up and problematic. This is a
>HUGE black eye for the mainstream media. Might not be able to
>recover from it
>

...The "liberal" media like CNN & MSNBC dont give any more of a fuck about you, than Evil FOX NEWS

...oh, besides Trumps hand pick clown

...or until congress gets a chance to read it and tells us what's in the report.

these people camped out in front of hillary clintons house and literally ran a countdown clock waiting for her response about harvey weinstein.

we dont even know the simple page count of the real mueller report and the press is like 'cool we will take barrs word for it...lets move on'.

they put more effort into unearthing confidential celebrity divorce agreements than they do for one of the most pivotal documents in american history.

I understand there are other issues to focus on (fake national emergency, ACA, the evil ass budget, etc.) ... but they should be simultaneously FLIPPING THE FUCK OUT to get that report made public and in front of congress, at every opportunity.

As we think though?

What if Dems make this huge public push to get it
released, and there isn’t much new there?

At this point, anything short of “the campaign
colluded and Trump knew” would be another
L for Dems.

Yeah it should be public, but I’d rather not risk
losing 2020.

Win 2020, make it public then.

otherwise, the republicans would want it out. the indictments that are already public are damning, Barr is clearly covering for Trump.

The Dems can point to other things we already know. Things that are already public- from the indictments, to how soft he is on Russia, to his taxes, to other issues like his wall and ACA.

There is plenty out in the open they can attack him for.


But to keep pushing for a report that *might* be damning AND they control what comes out?

When nothing will happen to him anyway?


What is the benefit?


Like I said below, they probably release a friendly/redacted version and take more victory laps- and everyone who fought for its release will look silly.


And again, nothing is going to happen to Trump. Whatever is in that report wasn't enough to make his cronies turn on him, so what is the point?

The GOP won't turn on him- ever.


Pelosi was downplaying impeachment before this went down.


So what is the benefit of pushing for this report, when everyone can focus on shit he has done in front of everyone's faces?

I get you guys want the truth, so do I.


But can't we wait 2 years and try to win 2020?

(Even then I don't think anything happens to Trump, btw. If it is a Dem admin in 2020, I don't see them prosecuting/investigating a former president because Dems love norms. The Obama admin let Bush officials off in the name of unity, and they started a literal war based on lies. But thats beside the point)

if it's damning, then yeah, obviously.

if it's not damning, it helps put an end to the 'Russia, Russia, Russia..' narrative. And maybe that helps the 'Meuller Time!' crowd move on to more important stuff.

Many Americans clearly don't trust Barr's assessment without seeing the facts that lead up to it. Transparency only helps in this situation.

I don't take McConnell fighting it to mean one thing or another really. In a normal time, i'd say they were obviously hiding something, but he's a massive dick, who would kick his own grandmother in the face to hand democrats an L.

And we can all move on as we should. The more they try and hide it, the more dems should be pushing for it. Cause that is pretty suspicious if it's as clean as they want us to believe it is.


>RE: What if the report isn’t as damning
>As we think though?
>
>What if Dems make this huge public push to get it
>released, and there isn’t much new there?

*shrugs* then we're pretty much in the same place we are now.


>At this point, anything short of “the campaign
>colluded and Trump knew” would be another
>L for Dems.

That's not the push I'm talking about. There's a politically responsible way to go about it. i.e. "It would be great if the report showed that there was no collusion and no obstruction, we'd love to know that we are safe - but until we see the full report we don't know that." or some shit. Doesn't have to be hysteria, just needs to be aggressive.


>Yeah it should be public, but I’d rather not risk
>losing 2020.
>
>Win 2020, make it public then.

Dogg we're losing 2020 as it is. Might as well go out guns blazing and hopefully something comes from it. The Barr Report has given those treasonous fucks new life and they're emboldened and have spent all week tearing apart the ACA, education funding, and funding for special needs kids, etc. It's not gonna stop. It's desperation time.

>And we can all move on as we should. The more they try and
>hide it, the more dems should be pushing for it. Cause that is
>pretty suspicious if it's as clean as they want us to believe
>it is.
>
>
>>RE: What if the report isn’t as damning
>>As we think though?
>>
>>What if Dems make this huge public push to get it
>>released, and there isn’t much new there?
>
>*shrugs* then we're pretty much in the same place we are now.

Except he/they can take another victory lap. I'm tired dogg. Tired of taking Ls, basically.



>
>
>>At this point, anything short of “the campaign
>>colluded and Trump knew” would be another
>>L for Dems.
>
>That's not the push I'm talking about. There's a politically
>responsible way to go about it. i.e. "It would be great if the
>report showed that there was no collusion and no obstruction,
>we'd love to know that we are safe - but until we see the full
>report we don't know that." or some shit. Doesn't have to be
>hysteria, just needs to be aggressive.

Ah. I guess I should have asked exactly what you meant by "push more"...because it seems to me like they are pushing.


Yeah they should do whatever they can legally, but do their best to change the subject in the media in my opinion.



>
>
>>Yeah it should be public, but I’d rather not risk
>>losing 2020.
>>
>>Win 2020, make it public then.
>
>Dogg we're losing 2020 as it is. Might as well go out guns
>blazing and hopefully something comes from it.

Okay now I get it- we are cynical about different things lol


I still think there is a *chance* for 2020. I'm scared as hell- especially if he is able to claim a good economy.

But, I still think there is a chance.

The problem is, I think talking so much about Russia- especially now- hurts those chances greatly.

I don't think the issue speaks to anyone who doesn't already have their mind made up, basically.

We are mad either way.

They will never turn on him.


If there are those mythical people in the middle? I think we have a better shot of getting those votes if we make big deals about other issues- like healthcare, kids in cages, etc.


My cynicism comes in with anything happening to Trump ever. So because I don't think anything will ever happen to him, I don't think we should focus so much on this and risk the election. High risk low/no reward.

The Barr Report
>has given those treasonous fucks new life and they're
>emboldened and have spent all week tearing apart the ACA,
>education funding, and funding for special needs kids, etc.
>It's not gonna stop. It's desperation time.

That's my point though.

Those treasonous fucks will probably release an edited/redacted version of the report, man. And then take another victory lap.

Shit, they probably have it ready to go and just want to hear the dems/media beg for it.

Then they drop another...lets call it a controlled version of the report, take more laps, make everyone look silly again, fire up their base, demoralize the left, and gain some of those middle votes who are growing tired of hearing about it.

And while everyone is distracted and the media is falling for it, do shit like gut the ACA.


Basically I don't see the real benefit of "pushing harder" for this because I don't think anything will come out of it no matter what.

And they could make us look silly as shit, potentially.

>Except he/they can take another victory lap. I'm tired dogg.
>Tired of taking Ls, basically.
>Ah. I guess I should have asked exactly what you meant by
>"push more"...because it seems to me like they are pushing.

Yea they are, just not loud enough IMO but ...


>Yeah they should do whatever they can legally, but do their
>best to change the subject in the media in my opinion.

This is fair and maybe that's exactly what they're doing. Hopefully. Because I think it's hugely important that Congress and the public doesn't just rely on this bullshit 4 page letter, and whatever dogg shit "summary" Barr decides is sufficient over the next few weeks. Congress has a right to the full report, so does the public.

But yea - you may be right that they are making their push but keeping it out of the media, in which case maybe they find that to be the best approach. I don't know whether it is tho. I think whipping up some public fervor about their suspicions would only help their cause. But what the fuck do I know.


>Okay now I get it- we are cynical about different things lol
>
>
>I still think there is a *chance* for 2020. I'm scared as
>hell- especially if he is able to claim a good economy.
>
>But, I still think there is a chance.

Oh there's definitely a chance - I haven't given up hope at all (hence my fixation on the report being made public, in addition to a host of other things) I'm just saying - it's not like we're in great shape right now because America is stupid and racist and doesn't care about corruption ... but that doesn't mean it's not worth fighting tooth and nail for the things that *may* help swing the pendulum.


>The problem is, I think talking so much about Russia-
>especially now- hurts those chances greatly.
>
>I don't think the issue speaks to anyone who doesn't already
>have their mind made up, basically.
>
>We are mad either way.
>
>They will never turn on him.

See this is where we split - I agree that his *base* isn't changing their minds anytime soon, but they never were. There's a gang of folks somewhere in the middle tho, IMO, who can still be swung if Dems continue to beat into their heads that there's a ton of shady shit going on here. And the messaging shouldn't be Russia only ... it needs to include *all* the fucked up shit they're doing. Repugs are masters at messaging. Dems suck at it. That's the biggest problem. They need to find an effective way to package Russia in with the plethora of other corruption and serve it to those who need to hear it to swing the momentum. How they do that I dunno, and like we agreed on above, they may already be working on that strategically rather than LOUDLY like I want lol. Just saying it can be and needs to be done. On top of a ton of other work. For 2020.


>If there are those mythical people in the middle? I think we
>have a better shot of getting those votes if we make big deals
>about other issues- like healthcare, kids in cages, etc.

Yea that's what I'm saying above - package it all together. My thing is tho, if we just leave Russia alone, then we're focusing on stuff we BEEN focusing on, and clearly that hasn't been working.


>My cynicism comes in with anything happening to Trump ever.
>So because I don't think anything will ever happen to him, I
>don't think we should focus so much on this and risk the
>election. High risk low/no reward.

Is there high risk tho ? We're already losing. Nothing else has worked to this point. Packaging Russia in on top of everything else can be a rallying cry.


>That's my point though.
>
>Those treasonous fucks will probably release an
>edited/redacted version of the report, man. And then take
>another victory lap.

Right - which is exactly why Dems need to be SCREAMING about how insufficient that is. I think the shift in the media has kinda already started.


>Shit, they probably have it ready to go and just want to hear
>the dems/media beg for it.
>
>Then they drop another...lets call it a controlled version of
>the report, take more laps, make everyone look silly again,
>fire up their base, demoralize the left, and gain some of
>those middle votes who are growing tired of hearing about it.
>
>And while everyone is distracted and the media is falling for
>it, do shit like gut the ACA.

They're doing that anyway.


>Basically I don't see the real benefit of "pushing harder" for
>this because I don't think anything will come out of it no
>matter what.
>
>And they could make us look silly as shit, potentially.

....this is 100x worse and they aint doing shit

Or don't because you can't.

I don't care if it is not the full report.
How many years have we been doing this shit? Oh, just wait this......oh, just wait that.

There is not one person who can truly take Trump and his base to task. The Republican party has become the Treason Party. Democrats the Spineless Coward Party. Cable news are content hoes spewing gossip, misinformation, and weak ass journalism. It's just total fuckery.

I am so fucking sick of this. Got a corrupt doofus doing all types of shit in the open and just chillin'.

Now, is he chillin' because he didn't do shit or is it because he rigged the game? And if he rigged the game, what makes people so sure that justice will eventually come? He rigged the fuckin' game. Checks and balances have been dismantled. He's like a mafia boss. He's got all the judges/etc. on the take and fires/replaces anyone who gets in his way. You cannot talk a person like Trump to justice. You gotta bring war. Who is stepping up to do that?

I'm tired. I need sleep.

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1113587484204699648

the person i quoted earlier in the post is taking a(nother) victory lap lol.
http://board.okayplayer.com/okp.php?az=show_topic&forum=4&topic_id=13318132&mesg_id=13318132&listing_type=search#13321950
https://twitter.com/page88/status/1113583391973236737

among the key points in this new story...the mueller team had already drawn up multiple summaries of their work intended to be sent to congress. barr obviously nixed em and opted for his own summary.

i hope the media...after completely taking the bait from barr and getting shit on by trump...has some degree of pride and self-preservation and really digs into this. they should *wanna* throw this back in trumps face...at the very least to save their reputation.

This made me laugh:

"Thoughful of the NYT to publish "Oh You Know What On Second Thought Truman Defeats Dewey" 12 days later."

trump aint gotta do much to delegitimize a press corp that works overtime delegitimizing themselves.

https://twitter.com/PhilipRucker/status/1113647316186083329

already pre-scrubbed for public disclosure with a mindfulness towards sensitive info.

https://twitter.com/renato_mariotti/status/1113651445818064896

yeah the mueller team saw trump/barr coming from a mile away. they put these summaries into record precisely so they could be subpoenaed by congressional committees and made public even in the event of an attempted cover-up.

seriously...imagine how all of this would have played out if dems lost in the midterms and both houses of congress were still controlled by republicans.

Also, the fact that a lot of Mueller’s team has left the Justice Department means Barr can’t stop them from testifying.

Something like "one day (if it hasn't happened already) Bill Barr will wake up and regret that he ruined his reputation" and I'm thinking ... motherfucker this *IS* his reputation, if you're paying attention, ever heard of Iran/Contra ?!

I hate earth man. There's gotta be planets out there with better living things inhabiting them.

some people unfollowed because they couldn't take it anymore. for me, this is the funniest shit I have ever seen on social media.

the one with the best take (as usual) is my dude Michael Brooks. check him out.

dude has become exactly what he supposedly is against.

how do you mindlessly parrot a government official put in place by a president to cover up and spin valuable information?

the fact that greenwald isnt going hard to pry loose the full unredacted treasure trove of investigative materials in the mueller report shows how much of a farce his career is right now.

dude is so thirsty for a win that hes willing to be a mouthpiece for the government to get it.

>dude is so thirsty for a win that hes willing to be a
>mouthpiece for the government to get it.

the dude went on FOX NEWS.
and everyone knows FOX NEWS, even if they possibly could get it right, is actually propaganda. it was purposely crafted for that.

the dancing over the end of "Russiagate" is silly, even if he is right about Russiagate (and more importantly, its coverage), there are still a gang of crimes that FOX NEWS WILL NOT REPORT, likely in the report.

now, in the current state of Congress and the GOP, there is no way I think Trump will be held accountable while in office.

however, the knowledge of these things would be very useful for any states (like New York) pursuing legal action against him afterward.

I get some of their points about the media being extra, and it's cool they feel there should be focus on the historical domestic issues that have led to Trump being elected, but the way they dismissed Russia having any impact was stupid (at one point they even hint the troll farms may be made up, based on a single anecdote)

also fuck Taibbi for both-sideings the media in his new book

he made some fair points, but at times it felt like an outright dismissal of the report which is strange, given we still have no idea what is in it. We just have Barr's summary.

Basically we still need to see the report.

he's been a skeptic of the left putting all their eggs in Russiagate from the early on, and I appreaciated him being one of the first to call out some the overzealous MSM for treating people like Louise Mensch and Claude taylor as legitimate info sources on Russia, but now he just seems so dug in on being able to say I told you so, that he's lalalalalacoveringmyears to anything else.

It's sad to see what Twitter addiction has done to his brain. Just garbage all the time now.

https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1113646147560558593?s=21

Trump: I can't release my tax returns I'm still under audit

AOC: We didn't ask you.

While I fully endorse Trump's tax information getting seen publicly, I hope this done correctly and not leaked as result of Congress being over-zealous and/or spitefully sloppy.

I do wonder if this effort will drag out for a long duration as I'm certain there are many many skeletons in Trump's tax return closets.

Even if they are shown to the public, I think it's going to be a big dud. And I hope folks (I'm looking at you Rachel Maddow) don't work themselves up expecting this to be the bombshell.

Tax returns do not detail individual items. They aggregate numbers. So let's say he did get a $1 billion dollar loan from Vladimir Putin, the source of the loan would not appear on the forms. Just the interest paid on it (aggregated together with all the other interest paid)

Is there going to be illegal activity illustrated in these documents that he had to file with the IRS? Doubt it.

I think all we'll see is that he used the tax code to his advantage to pay as little tax as possible. Big surprise.

presented himself as a masterclass businessman yet purposefully hides his tax return information coupled with the fact the dude lies so brazenly and openly about any and everything to present himself in a positive light is enough to make me want to see what he is hiding. Even moreso since it's possible he could be beholden to any number of private entities he has to preside and exercise objective judgement over. My focus isn't strictly pertaining to Russia.

>Even moreso since it's
>possible he could be beholden to any number of private
>entities he has to preside and exercise objective judgement
>over.

depending on which would serve his interest

inflate, to get a loan
deflate, to pay less taxes

I'm not a lawyer and don't know exactly the legality

but I would assume lying about your assets in either case would fall under some criminal code

?

Tax returns just show income. Not assets, liabilities, or wealth

>depending on which would serve his interest
>
>inflate, to get a loan
>deflate, to pay less taxes
>
>I'm not a lawyer and don't know exactly the legality
>
>but I would assume lying about your assets in either case
>would fall under some criminal code
>
>?

The main thing that might come out would be an indication that he's not as rich as he says he is, and/or that his company was not doing well before he was elected. But I don't think anyone ever REALLY believed he was a 10-billion-aire, or that if he were it would constitute a special command on economics.

I think a lot of us have failed to understand that Trump's supporters like him BECAUSE he's a huckster, not in spite of it. They like him because he gets away with shit that he shouldn't get away with, and that they wouldn't get away with. They live vicariously through him like they always have. A tax scandal would only feed into that further.

https://www.newsweek.com/so-many-conflicts-so-little-time-1396435


This much is known: On Barr’s public financial disclosure report, he admits to working for a law firm that represented Russia’s Alfa Bank and for a company whose co-founders allegedly have long-standing business ties to Russia. What’s more, he received dividends from Vector Group, a holding company with deep financial ties to Russia.

These facts didn’t get much attention during Barr’s confirmation hearing, as Congress was hyperfocused on an unsolicited memo Barr wrote prior to his nomination, which criticized the special counsel’s investigation—and whether he would release an unredacted Mueller report to Congress. Much of the information is public, but it has so far been unreported in relation to Barr.

Still, Barr’s potential conflicts could face further scrutiny as Democrats in Congress fight to have the Mueller report released to the public.

By the time you read this, the report may indeed be in the hands of Congress. But legal battles are expected over how much of the document will be redacted to protect grand jury material and other information. And no matter what appears in Barr’s color-coded version of the report, his motives will continue to be questioned.

“All of this raises the need for further inquiry from an independent review, not a Department of Justice investigation,” Michael Frisch, ethics counsel for Georgetown University’s law school and an expert in professional ethics, tells Newsweek . Scott Amey, general counsel at the Project for Government Oversight, says that Barr is probably playing within the rules. But that doesn’t mean he shouldn’t recuse himself.

“He’s not doing anything illegal. is it good practice, given that he might have been involved with these entities in private practice? Probably not,” Amey added.

The Department of Justice did not respond to multiple requests for comment. Nonetheless, here’s a pocket guide to Barr’s Russian connections.

Vector Group
On his financial disclosure report, Barr notes that he earned anywhere from $5,001 to $15,000 in dividends from the Vector Group.

The company’s president, Howard Lorber, brought Trump to Moscow in the 1990s to seek investment projects there. The trip is widely seen as the first of many attempts to establish a Trump Tower in Moscow.

The problem, says Shugerman, “is the appearance of bias.”

He added that Donald Trump Jr. “allegedly called Lorber as he was setting up the Trump Tower meeting with a Russian . Lorber has extensive ties to Russia and was allegedly assisting with Trump Tower Moscow plans. On top of Barr’s other choices, which reflect partisan bias, it is bad judgment…to have any financial ties to a person so directly entangled with Trump, Don Jr. and the core of events and questions of the Russia investigation.”

Alfa Bank
Barr’s former law firm Kirkland & Ellis LLP, where he was counsel from March 2017 until he was confirmed as attorney general in February 2019, represented Russia’s Alfa Bank. (Barr earned more than $1 million at Kirkland.)

Barr also supervises, at Justice, another Kirkland & Ellis alumnus with Alfa ties. Early last year, Trump nominated Kirkland & Ellis partner Brian Benczkowski to the Justice Department’s criminal division. In his role with the law firm, Benczkowski had represented Alfa Bank and supervised an investigation into suspicious online communications between the bank and servers belonging to the Trump Organization.

Investigators found no evidence that the Trump Organization had communicated with Alfa. Still, the bank is partially owned by Russian oligarch German Khan, whose son-in-law, the London-based lawyer Alexander van der Zwaan, was indicted by special counsel Robert Mueller for lying to investigators about a report his firm had written for Trump’s former campaign manager Paul Manafort.

Benczkowski was confirmed last July as assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s criminal division.

“In terms of a lawyer’s professional codes, it’s definitely legally significant if is in counsel position,” Frisch tells Newsweek . “If he is counsel to the company and he isn’t personally working on a matter but the company is, the company’s conflicts are imputed to him.”



America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

Apparently congressional staff already have the report and are reviewing it to prepare their communications onslaught

America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

No other possible way to look at it. (Unless Congress *did* get that and I'm misunderstanding).

Republicans are trash.

I want to see Mueller's people leak their own report so we can see what Trump and them redacted

America has imported more warlord theocracy from Afghanistan than it has exported democracy.

... several times since Barr prematurely shut them down. There's some political risk involved with doing something like that but if the situation is as dire as it appears to be there may be no other choice.

Trump will take a second Mueller victory lap.

Congressional Dems will then pivot to investigating the redactions

look bad. But nothing that will be construed as impeachable.

HE CAN'T KEEP GETTING AWAY WITH THIS!

(Narrator: but he did)

Tomorrow will be another animal style nothingburger, and the consolidation of the autocracy will continue

wtf

you mean subpoenas for the release of the full report to a closed bipartisan committee which will probably go to the supreme court after justice refuses

also barr & mueller will be called to testify

Barr has been working tirelessly for a month to complete the cover-up. He's already briefed the WH and they have their "rebuttals" ready. The narrative is set.

I'm not sure how this story will end but tomorrow is just another step in the cover-up process. I haven't even been anticipating it at all because it's clear what is happening. Only if the full report is released (to Congress) will I actually look forward to it with some glimmer of hope.

This whole storyline is driven by "but wait until we see...." moments.

>
>Only if the full report is released (to Congress) will I
>actually look forward to it with some glimmer of hope.
>

and the press continues to act like barr is anything but a political operative.

barr pushed bush to pardon several folks in the iran-contra investigation and blow up various prosecutions that would have lead directly to bush.

in 89 barr issued a summary of an olc legal memo that complete hid or mischaracterized the true contents of the memo (revealed to congress after barr left office).
https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1117816855593476098

he sent a letter to trump stating his hostility to the mueller investigation and trump immediately hired him after firing the guy who faithfully executed his agenda in every single way except when he rightfully recused himself from the mueller investigation.

and he just got outted by the mueller team for issuing a summary that misrepresents their findings...and opting not to include the pre-redacted summaries that the mueller team had already drawn up to detail their own work.

and people in the press continue to treat this guy like an institutionalist with a stellar apolitical reputation. its maddening.

He's a political operative with the credibility of a ... political operative. LOL. I mean the motherfucker literally briefed the white house on the report so they could preemptively prepare rebuttals !

Corrupt as fuck.

https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1118313104687996928

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1118313104687996928.html


Media misreporting of the Mueller Report in the lead-up to its release has reached a fevered pitch—and could change the course of U.S. history by misstating the Report's significance. Please retweet widely this explanation of the five gravest errors U.S. media is making.

1/ ERROR: The media says the Obstruction part of the Report is what really matters, and the part Trump and his allies are most worried about.

REALITY: The part of the Report on Obstruction is of limited significance; the focus of media attention should be the rest of the Report.

2/ EXPLANATION: We already know the Obstruction portion of the Report is largely based on *public records and events*—meaning, most Americans who care about the Report at all are already familiar with the broad strokes of the Obstruction case. But the problem is bigger than that.

3/ Most attorneys of repute have said that even the public evidence of Obstruction would be enough to lead to the prosecution and conviction of a non-president—so while the Report could add even more damning evidence to an already damning stock of material, we're already "there."

4/ The Obstruction issue—which Mueller has passed on to Congress for consideration for impeachment, and which two irrelevant parties (for these purposes), Barr and Rosenstein, have opined on to no consequence whatsoever—was always going to be a political calculation by Democrats.

5/ Democrats must decide if they want to abide by the rule of law—which says Obstruction is an impeachable offense, that Trump committed it, and that impeachment is merely an indictment on the Obstruction issue, so that it can be litigated in the Senate—*or* the rule of politics.

6/ By wrongly stating that the focus of coverage for the Mueller Report should be the Obstruction issue, media has given Trump and his team a chance to prepare in advance for coverage of the Report—as they and we already know, more or less, what the Report will say on that issue.

7/ It's for this reason that we're getting all these articles saying that Trump's team is merely worried about being "embarrassed" by additional information in the Report on Obstruction—they don't have to prepare for anything devastating because the media is focusing on old news.

8/ By comparison, as *no one in the media ever accused Trump of executing a pre-hacking or pre-propaganda agreement—a conspiracy—with Russian military intelligence (GRU) or the Internet Research Agency, respectively, the idea that Mueller found *any* evidence of that is stunning.

9/ If AG Barr had said Mueller found "no evidence," or "only a scintilla of evidence," or even "probable cause but no more" on the possibility Trump conspired with the IRA or GRU—that'd be one thing. Instead, he said Mueller simply couldn't establish it beyond a reasonable doubt.

10/ So now you have Barr saying Mueller couldn't establish beyond a reasonable doubt a narrow and unlikely form of collusion that—in fact—neither the media nor average Americans ever really thought occurred. That means the real surprises may well come in that part of the Report.

11/ ERROR: Media is telling us that it's what's in the Report that matters.

REALITY: It's absolutely—and without question—what's *not* in the report that's going to matter. Almost nothing Americans really want or need to hear about is going to actually be *in* the Report itself.

12/ EXPLANATION: As I've noted, the Obstruction part of the Report will be largely public records and events plus—maybe—some surprises that make an already slam-dunk case on Obstruction (which Democrats will bring or not *for political reasons only*) even stronger. That's a yawn.

13/ Meanwhile, the Conspiracy part of the Report will—per Barr—deal with a narrow and unlikely investigative thread that is not only the barest portion of the collusion issue but *not* the thread anyone in media has followed or invested in. Any news there is just a cherry on top.

14/ Here's what reporters haven't told you: the nation can, does, and indeed must have a *very* different standard for impeachment than just whether a crime was committed. Impeaching a president for a felony—which we already know, per the SDNY, Trump committed—is the *easy* case.

15/ *Far more importantly*—and far more relevant to our present situation, as Democrats have already indicated that *even though we know Trump committed felonies*, they won't move to impeach him for it—is the fact that a president can be impeached *for national security reasons*.

16/ If there's a real possibility a president has been compromised by a foreign power—whether you set the possibility at a 25% likelihood, 51% likelihood, or 70% likelihood—that president *must* be impeached, for the nation's safety. That's *not* a criminal law standard of proof.

17/ We *know* that the FBI and CIA have been conducting counterintelligence investigations into the question of whether Trump has been compromised by Russia, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Israel, Egypt, or others—and may well still be engaged in those counterintelligence investigations.

18/ If the result of those investigations is a real possibility Trump has been compromised—by blackmail, disloyalty, tradecraft, venality, or by some other means—the Democrats must move to protect the nation. But Barr is keeping all counterintelligence intel from us and Congress.

19/ By the same token, there are *twenty* pending federal and state criminal investigations looking into various felonies that would be impeachable offenses—many of them undergirded by "collusive" acts. And Barr has removed from the Report *any* evidence from these ongoing cases.

20/ So media tells us to focus on the SCO Report, when the sizzle is in the SDNY, EDNY, EDVA, CDCA, NYAG, NJAG, DCAG, MDAG, FBI, CIA, SSCI, NYCDA, and House committees (Ways/Means, Financial Services, Oversight, Judiciary, Intelligence). Some of these have multiple pending cases.

21/ ERROR: Media is treating Thursday's report as the end of Mueller's portion of the Trump-Russia story.

REALITY: The publication of a (heavily redacted) Mueller Report is the *beginning* of perhaps the longest stage of all in the two year-plus saga of the Trump-Russia scandal.

22/ EXPLANATION: The Special Counsel's Office (SCO) *isn't even done with its work yet*. It has sent its staff to other offices to prosecute certain cases or oversee its witnesses' participation in other cases, like the Roger Stone case this fall or the Bijan Kian case this July.

23/ But even beyond that, the SCO just told a federal judge that its grand jury was *still seated* and was doing "robust" work—a statement that's never been explained, but would seem to suggest that, Report notwithstanding, the SCO *may* not be done issuing indictments after all.

24/ Not only can a sitting grand jury hear new witnesses and issue new indictments, and not only can pending cases lead to surprising revelations, but *new cooperating witnesses* could emerge from such cases or grand jury queries that would change *dramatically* the SCO's Report.

25/ Then there's the fact that *Mueller's evidence* is fueling many of the twenty pending federal and state investigations of Trump, his family, his aides, his allies, his advisers and his associates—meaning that the *lawyer's names* have changed but *not* the legal work-product.

26/ Beyond this, there's the fact that Congress will go to court *almost immediately after the release of the Mueller Report* to make sure that it gets the full, unredacted version of it—meaning the bare-bones copy we get Thursday is just an opening sally in months of litigation.

27/ And once Congress gets the full, unredacted Mueller Report, *it* will then use the evidence that Mueller found to determine if there are *new investigative leads* that it needs to follow up on with new subpoenas for testimony and documents. And you can bet that *will* happen.

28/ On top of all that, members of Congress will, beginning Thursday, seek to access the *entire Mueller case file*—which is rumored to be over a *million pages*—to determine if there's any investigative thread that *Mueller* said was beyond his purview but *isn't* beyond theirs.

29/ Lest you think that's some sort of partisan act on Congress's part, realize that it was in fact anticipated from the jump: Mueller had a certain brief; he accumulated some evidence outside his brief; Congress's oversight role was always going to fill in and pursue those gaps.

30/ So in fact there's not a single element of the Trump-Russia timeline or investigative history that's going to end on Thursday—as all existing elements will either transform, be expanded upon, be the site of new litigation, or in some other way blossom into new event horizons.

31/ ERROR: By the way they're writing stories about the release of the Mueller Report—including inside-the-beltway puff pieces on how White House staffers are handling the pressure of its impending release—media tells you to care about internal White House drama.

REALITY: Don't.

32/ EXPLANATION: The White House—low-level staffers, mid-/upper-tier officials, Trump's legal team, members of Trump's inner circle inside the building and out—know this is a long-haul fight, but want you to believe, falsely, that they see this as a climactic moment. They don't.

33/ In fact, many Trump insiders likely believe the Democratic leadership is going to shoot for getting not one but *two* bites at the apple in terms of kicking Trump to the curb: first, an election; second, impeachment—with likely a better Senate—if Trump somehow gets reelected.

34/ In other words, people in the know on *both* sides of the aisle are treating Thursday as one of many, *many* milestones. It's only the *media* who seek to get *you*, the American voter, to see this as a major event. And that's because they want your eyeballs on their screens.

35/ Will Thursday be exciting? Sure. But there's little evidence that it will move the ball much in the larger Trump-Russia narrative—see everything I've said so far—and every reason to think that it's merely another in a long parade of *somewhat* consequential inflection-points.

36/ ERROR: Media frames the issue that imperils Trump's presidency as "Russian interference in the election"—and whether Trump was involved in it at all.

REALITY: We already know most of what we're going to know about Russian election interference—that's *not* the issue anymore.

37/ EXPLANATION: The question—frankly, since January 2017, when our intelligence agencies published a long report on what the Russians did and why and when—has been whether Trump sold U.S. foreign policy toward Russia and other nations for personal profit and election assistance.

38/ No one has accused Trump of knowing of Russian hacking or propaganda *in advance of* them being initiated—though of course it's a possibility. The question is if he induced continued crimes in part because he knew he was receiving election aid and in part due to his venality.

39/ The sorts of crimes that *those* accusations would show up as do *not* seem to be part of the Mueller Report, even though—and here's where American media *really* confuses us—*some* of the evidence Mueller compiled would also be *relevant* to those very different accusations.

40/ There are men—like Elliott Broidy, George Nader, Joel Zamel, Tom Barrack, "MBS", Dmitry Rybolovlev, "MBZ", George Birnbaum, Benjamin Netanyahu and Abdel Fattah el-Sisi—who are *critical* to the collusive acts that could bring Trump down but who may not be in Mueller's report.

CONCLUSION/ Thursday will be exciting—but it is decidedly unclear whether it'll be consequential. Do *not* let the media's excitement over higher ratings—or simply its own confusion about whether Thursday matters, and if so, why—to cause *you* to overestimate its importance. /end

NOTE/ AG Barr is a *political* actor; he appears to be synchronizing his rhetoric, terminology, and document production with Trump and his legal team. So there remains a possibility he has *misled us* about what Mueller will focus on in his report. I acknowledge that possibility.

>17/ We *know* that the FBI and CIA have been conducting >counterintelligence investigations into the question of whether >Trump has been compromised by Russia, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Israel, >Egypt, or others—and may well still be engaged in those >counterintelligence investigations.

The House & Senate both have Intelligence Committees. When an investigation of the president is ongoing, why wouldn't these committees get full, unredacted versions of the report? Are their security clearances not high enough?

pages gonna be FULL OF black lines.

________________________________(redacted)_______________________________________NO____________________(redacted)________________________________________________________COLLUSION_______________________________


Signed,

Robert Mueller

are gonna spin it. It's obvious there was too much scare tactics and hyperbole about trump being a Russian asset and his sons going to jail. In the centrist and left media, stuff like climate change, substantive jobs for Americans and combating neo nazi redicalization should have been the A story and this shit the B story. Instead, every day was this stuff.

The same way fox news going on about AOC is great for their money and their fanbase, the same way treating trump like Skeletor has done wonders for centrist media and their ratings. I hope you guys will see that after tomorrow or whenever this slightly redacted Report drops.

>are gonna spin it. It's obvious there was too much scare
>tactics and hyperbole about trump being a Russian asset and
>his sons going to jail. In the centrist and left media, stuff
>like climate change, substantive jobs for Americans and
>combating neo nazi redicalization should have been the A story
>and this shit the B story. Instead, every day was this stuff.

If the left and centrist media was really doing what you say they're doing they'd be covering Barr as what he is: an Individual 1-operative doing Individual 1's bidding, nothing more, nothing less. Instead, like we are discussing above, they're covering him as if he's a reputable, credible man of the law just doing his job.

shady ties to Russia. I don't know why people act like it's all made up.

Russia. Like WAY WAY WAY too fucking soft.

It has been established that American banks wouldn't lend to him so he went to the Russians who like to use real estate to launder money. Cool, I get that part.

But the narrative that they came to him and his sons and said we'll for sure get you elected if you lower sanctions and give us favours just hasn't been proven, and the news and comedians on TV were acting like it was fact. I mean even that lady don jr. met with in trump tower was a lawyer for a senator, and the news commentators were saying she had links to the Kremlin, and that the Mueller report was gonna show this.

I just think they shouldn't have pushed this narrative so hard, especially when this administration has been doing other things to destroy America without the help of foreign governments.

How do know how much it will be redacted? Why do you trust William Barr?

But yeah, mentally preparing to be dissapointed OR starting hearing some gun shots in the distance

righteous integrity that some of the special counsel's office did during Watergate, when a few young investigators took it upon themselves to stand in the way of Nixon's white house covering the whole thing up. There was an actual standoff between the SC office and some feds who'd been sent by Nixon to actually raid the office and suppress the smoking gun tapes.

So even if there's not necessarily that blatant a smoking gun in the Mueller Report, I hope they're already planning something extreme if tomorrow's Barr Report compromises the integrity and honest conclusions of all the work they did.

for the next 2 years.

like 30k emails or bleachbit with clinton.

thats why dems should ignore the dc cocktail class who say they have to tread lightly investigating the prez or they might 'overplay their hand' (favorite dc press trope for dems). nobody in the press ever says repubs are overplaying their hand.

2016 should be the blueprint for dems. clinton was cleared of all criminal wrongdoing. yet details of the investigation and baseless speculation surrounding those details were used to batter her up until the last day of the campaign. theres most likely a lot more smear material here for dems to use if they dig and they should take full advantage of it.

Because that's likely the best case scenario. I have to imagine that none of them are of the opinion that they're gonna be able to impeach him before 2020 at this point.


>for the next 2 years.
>
>like 30k emails or bleachbit with clinton.
>
>thats why dems should ignore the dc cocktail class who say
>they have to tread lightly investigating the prez or they
>might 'overplay their hand' (favorite dc press trope for
>dems). nobody in the press ever says repubs are overplaying
>their hand.
>
>2016 should be the blueprint for dems. clinton was cleared of
>all criminal wrongdoing. yet details of the investigation and
>baseless speculation surrounding those details were used to
>batter her up until the last day of the campaign. theres most
>likely a lot more smear material here for dems to use if they
>dig and they should take full advantage of it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/17/us/politics/trump-mueller-report.amp.html

Did he?

the presidents defense is basically gonna be 'this thing that is full of nothing but lies totally exonerates me' and the media is pretty much gonna pretend thats logically solid.

https://twitter.com/RepJerryNadler/status/1118639594692644864

https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1118651904903602176

its something lol. lets see how organized and prepared they are to set the media narrative.

Nothing will.

On some reclamation shit

Mueller report: Justice Department releases special counsel report

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/mueller-report-released-barr-releases-full-400-page-report-redactions-today-live-updates-2019-04-18/



Here is a faster loading version from the Washington Post:
https://games-cdn.washingtonpost.com/notes/prod/default/documents/f5fe536c-81bb-45be-86e5-a9fee9794664/note/a8d336ef-e98d-4a08-987d-b4c154b22700.pdf

I know Barr said it, but Mueller couldn't have possibly spun it that way. That's terrifying if so.

mueller explicitly stated that the prez engaged in behavior that wouldnt allow mueller to clear him of illegal wrongdoing.

Which makes Barr's behavior even more deplorable. Mueller was forced to close up shop early so (from what I'm seeing at least) he left all the evidence open for Congress to determine what to make of it from a legal and impeachment perspective.

But Individual 1's defense attorney wasn't bout to let that happen !

>Mueller was forced to close up shop early

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_nbG4HORig

Not shocking. Some are saying Barr’s people leaked this.

https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1123363379903705088?s=21

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1123413823849926656?s=21

https://twitter.com/speakerpelosi/status/1123409781446856704?s=21

https://twitter.com/erinbanco/status/1123392500406870016?s=21

Had it been revealed by the House committee in a hearing it would've been a lot more potent.

Good news is, sting or no sting, this letter catches Barr in a couple of lies under oath during the April 9th hearing so hopefully they can impeach.

Republicans are trash.

granted it's not that important in the grand scheme of things, more sad than anything, but him, GG et al have latched on to their narrow view of 0 collusion proven (guess obstruction isn't important?) and will defend it till eternity.

If anyone ever had any doubt about Barr covering for Trump, they shouldn't anymore.

... and concerned, and finger wag ........ and do nothing.

Props to Schiff and E-Dubs et al carrying the impeachment torch even if they don't really have the power to do what needs to be done.

I get it though. obstruction and collusion are 2 different things.

and they are both BAD.

Glenn is kind of Cuban B-ing the former in favor of dunking on people pushing the Russia narrative: giving much cover to the neoliberal centrist elite that run the Democratic party and ignore what REALLY happened to get Dolt 45 elected. I know that's Taibbi's take as well.

a lot of the people going at him, Michael Tracey, and Aaron Mate, the 3-headed Russiagate Dunk Show are kind of keeping it going, too.

really, the obstruction alone is IMPEACHMENT WORTHY if we are going by the Bill Clinton standard

(and that case was a JOKE.)

its very obvious dude has lied under oath. its clear he is working to protect trump at any cost.

or reaching his principle conclusions (like his determination on obstruction).

every dem on every appearance on every show needs to be re-stating that point obsessively. any time anything having to do with barr comes up.
from now until he is out of office. its the most damning thing to be said so far.

'barr didnt review the evidence'. simple. no need to extrapolate and over-explain. speak in bumper stickers like repubs. that should be all he is known for from here on out. an attorney general who makes decisions without actually using the evidence. dude already had a pre-determined outcome in mind.

also...thank god for kamala harris. some of these old crusty dems should be barred from asking questions in hearings (no pun). somehow repubs sound more convincing telling lies than those dems sound stumbling and mealymouthing their way through the truth. its embarrassing and wastes everyones time.

this is one of the issues i thought about with impeachment hearings. even assuming all truth and evidence are on dems side...i have very little faith in their ability to prosecute the case in front of an audience. hopefully they would just hand it over to actual prosecutors (staff lawyers) to handle. i believe they did that for watergate and the house seems to be trying to do that too (which is giving barr cold feet).

Kamala is good at questioning, her grilling of Sessions was great.

Barr - Why do these people RUIN their reputations, and possibly risk freedom for Donald Trump. Someone help me understand this.


Anti-gentrification, cheap alcohol & trying to look pretty in our twilight posting years (c) Big Reg
http://Tupreme.com

When the Republicans ran both the House and the senate, he signed off on any horrible idea that the wanted to advance. Barr gets live out his dreams of rolling back federal civil rights protections and ending whatever investigations don't fit his agenda. Why wouldn't they back him up? He's fine with them running the asylum. And they probably think he'll pardon them if they do get busted.

now Rosenstein (did y'all read his weird-ass resignation letter?), that's another story

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1123686529744896000

LOL. Adorable tweet, Nance.

At least some Dems are trying to make moves (Schiff, Swalwell, Omar, etc). May be too late. Cause while the Dems consistently waste time tweeting the internet equivalent of shaking their heads in displeasure, #republicansaretrash continue to ruin the world.

https://apple.news/AqIln54fHSOKhMvfXrfX3RA

You can't make this shit up.

Barr didn't show, so Rep. Cohen called him chicken.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/barr-skips-house-hearing-mueller-report/h_a6255f96ad28f7b26331f52370f44609

"Chicken Barr should have showed up today," he said. "It's a sad day in America."

Fucking joke these people are.

he could say a lot or he could say nothing.

Maybe he'll surprise us. Probably not. Still works for DOJ so I expect nothing.

we'll find out soon. maybe he is resigning? either way, I hope he testifies.

>RE: i hear you but, why say anything at all if it's not significant?
>we'll find out soon. maybe he is resigning? either way, I
>hope he testifies.

I dunno - maybe he's being pressured to make some kind of public statement, literally anything, and just feels obligated. Who knows.

But yea - hopefully he's resigning and planning to set the world on fire. I just doubt it.

i have very little faith in the system and these supposed 'institutionalists'.

>RE: i wouldnt be surprised if he called his own investigation a witch hunt.
>i have very little faith in the system and these supposed
>'institutionalists'.

That would be kinda hysterical actually.

He's not going to put any more out there than he already gave in his report

Less than nothing

"let Congress do what it wants" or some shit. Nancy Pelosi will come up with another reason why impeachment is playing right into Trump's hands or something.

>RE: A sternly worded statement, followed by him saying
>"let Congress do what it wants" or some shit. Nancy Pelosi
>will come up with another reason why impeachment is playing
>right into Trump's hands or something.

smh

smh.

i have no idea why he doesnt wanna publicly testify about this but had no problem doing it over 50 times in the past.

without actually saying it, he was pretty clear that Trump committed crimes and that he wasn't charged because of DOJ policy. I can't really be mad at him for not saying more.

>I can't really be mad at him for not saying more.

I certainly fucking can.

You can't ?

I posted in wrong place. should have been under mak.

impeachment, and impeachment is the first and most appropriate method to go after him (debatable - but Mueller seems to buy into that, so it's a moot point), so impeach him."

I get the impression Mueller wants to be left out of it. This was him saying don't ask me anything if and when y'all impeach him, it's all there in the report.

The mealy-mouthed messaging has been the issue the entire time. Everyone with half a brain understands how damning and damaging that report is, the problem is that very few are willing to come out and say it out loud for the public. The problem with the report, and now the statement, is that there's *still* room left for interpretation for those who are looking for it.

The man himself stating it in no uncertain terms would've been the most effective way to get this fucking thing moving for once.

He could do that and *still* be left out of it if he really wanted to be.


>impeachment, and impeachment is the first and most
>appropriate method to go after him (debatable - but Mueller
>seems to buy into that, so it's a moot point), so impeach
>him."
>
>I get the impression Mueller wants to be left out of it. This
>was him saying don't ask me anything if and when y'all impeach
>him, it's all there in the report.

a criminal justice one.

.. just about anything else ? The man who wrote the report stating out loud publicly that it's the only way forward.

that (it's unfair for a criminal justice officer to allege criminal activity of a president because the president can't have his day in a criminal court.) Even if/when they subpoena Mueller he's *not* going to say anything outside of what's in the report. He just said that.

People need to stop expecting Mueller to do Pelosi's job for her.

>RE: Bullshit. She's the SOTH. He gave his reasoning for why he won't do
>that (it's unfair for a criminal justice officer to allege
>criminal activity of a president because the president can't
>have his day in a criminal court.) Even if/when they subpoena
>Mueller he's *not* going to say anything outside of what's in
>the report. He just said that.
>
>People need to stop expecting Mueller to do Pelosi's job for
>her.

This is a national security issue. Many of them, in fact. At some point people need to stop saying, effectively, "welp, my hands are tied" and fucking demand that something be done. If Pelosi isn't doing her job then who better than Mueller, who knows more than anyone how dire this is, to say in no uncertain terms "I am of the opinion that based on the information contained within the report, the Congress would be derelict in *their* duties to not begin impeachment proceedings." That is unequivocal. He's clearly *of* that opinion but the media and repugs can both spin his report and today's worthless statement in any way they please to control the narrative.

It would be bold and courageous but not at all overstepping his role in the process.

t-shirts and shit.


It is extremely fucking odd to see people on the left twist themselves into a pretzel to defend a rich, white, Republican FBI agent.....

I guess they can't let go of this image of him being a fucking hero or some shit...they don't want to throw away those doodles they made of him wearing a cape, so they keep copping fucking pleas.

This isn't hard. He is resigning for christ's sake, so there is no career risk.


"Yeah I couldn't charge him, but Trump obstructed. I'd be happy to testify for the good of the country" or whatever.


Then you got dudes in here in a tizzy "that would be inappropriate!" and "that would make him a hypocrite!"

LOL LOL


Thats the fucking problem man. Yeah the GOP is evil, and Trump is Trump.


But Democrats and their stupid (yeah I said it- fuck it) ass followers constantly calling for what is "appropriate" might be more to blame at this point.



That being said, Mueller could have said "dude obstructed" and Nancy and her followers would still want to wait for more information.


Fuck the Dems and their blind followers, man. Kids in cages. White supremacy on the rise. All that shit. And dudes are in here defending this dude and his soft ass message because...because...norms?

Even if all the evidence was clearly against Trump, he wouldn't be able to indict. It is not constitutional (and it would be improper to directly allege a crime took place).

But on the flip side, if Trump could be clearly be cleared of crimes, Mueller would flat out say that in the report.

So he's just saying this is a political issue for Congress to handle before the Justice system can get involved

>Even if all the evidence was clearly against Trump, he
>wouldn't be able to indict. It is not constitutional (and it
>would be improper to directly allege a crime took place).
>
>But on the flip side, if Trump could be clearly be cleared of
>crimes, Mueller would flat out say that in the report.
>
>So he's just saying this is a political issue for Congress to
>handle before the Justice system can get involved

That's what it seemed like to me.
He's resigning from the position and this is his one and only public statement on the issue

Cause the statement was pointless.


>That's what it seemed like to me.
>He's resigning from the position and this is his one and only
>public statement on the issue

him, he's not going to say anything outside of what's in the report, so "don't try it" (c) Obi Wan Kenobi

He wrote a big ass report on this already.

The only thing I really want is for him to talk about the report on camera because ain't nobody reading that thing. Video clips are necessary

>RE: What else can he say?
>He wrote a big ass report on this already.
>
>The only thing I really want is for him to talk about the
>report on camera because ain't nobody reading that thing.
>Video clips are necessary

^^^ that's what else he could've said. In no uncertain terms. Video clips ARE necessary, and today was a great opportunity for one.

these carefully worded statements that can still be cynically (mis)interpreted by anyone looking to spin them are unacceptable at this point. it leaves the spirit of his words largely up to the media to translate and make sense of them to people who arent in the political weeds.

nothing in the statement was headline worthy. and in the way the public consumes information nowadays...that in itself is a failure.

his work does speak for itself, it's not his job to impeach the president. he made it clear that the only reason Trump wasn't charged is because he is the president. He explicitly says that if here were confident the president did not commit a crime, he would say so. I know that is frustrating considering all that is happening, and I wish he could say more, but I also can't be mad at him.

let the media cherry pick statements?


Cmon man.


He's resigning. Fuck DOJ policy or norms or whatever.


He can and should say it from his chest.


If not, why hold this bullshit press conference?

I get it that charging trump wasn't an option for him, but why is he stopping so short of just explicitly saying "We believe what the president did DOES amount to obstruction of justice, but..."

instead of this kind of coy "well if he DIDN'T commit a crime, we would have said that" thing he did

he seems to just want to say enough so that he doesn't look bad, and gets to dip away from all this shit he clearly wants no further part of


>without actually saying it, he was pretty clear that Trump
>committed crimes and that he wasn't charged because of DOJ
>policy. I can't really be mad at him for not saying more.

>RE: Same, but why is he backing into his words?
>I get it that charging trump wasn't an option for him, but
>why is he stopping so short of just explicitly saying "We
>believe what the president did DOES amount to obstruction of
>justice, but..."
>
>instead of this kind of coy "well if he DIDN'T do anything
>wrong, we would have said that" thing he did
>
>he seems to just want to say enough so that he doesn't look
>bad, and gets to dip away from all this shit he clearly wants
>no further part of

Saying "I can't formally charge a sitting president, but I'm going explicitly verbally charge him anyway." That would be hypocritical.

Doing that would do more harm than good.

He cant legally flat out say it?

Because hes still communicating it but not just clearly saying it

It's not quite pleading 'no contest', but it's far from saying 'not guilty' either. If he can't formally charge a sitting president he can't say much more without getting further into a legal quagmire that isn't his place to adjudicate.

Stop it.

He is resigning. And this mixed message bullshit does more harm than good- no matter how much you (oddly) want to convince yourself otherwise.

He would have been better off just quietly quitting.

Or he could, you know, testify publicly like he has before.


The media is already cherry picking what he said. This was worse. Stop it.

Mueller wrote a log ass report. The evidence is all there. He said what he said.

... Mueller said. LOL.

Maybe its his uncle or some shit.


Does he really think he is making a point by telling us (us of all people) to "blame Nancy" ? LOL


The left building Mueller into a hero never sat right with me for a variety of reasons. I honestly didn't think the stannery would continue after he basically cleared Trump, though.

.

now I know why Lindsay Graham and Barr keep saying that nonsense.

The point is you are all up in here defending Mueller's little press conference, because of norms or not wanting to see him be a hypocrite (??)...and we are trying to tell you to snap the fuck out of it.


Like others have said, he should have just quietly quit and disappeared.


This press conference will make things worse for a variety of reasons. The media cherry picking statements. Individual 1 cherry picking statements.

And the Dems now are going to do their own, where they say again they aren't quite there.

Nothing good came out of this press conference, and its okay to say it.


Its also okay to say "you know what, things are very fucked up right now and I'd like to see Mueller say it from his chest, especially since he's quitting anyway. I don't put 'norms' above what's right. And I don't really mind this rich white dude looking like a hypocrite..."

If you aren't going to actually engage and talk about what Mueller said and how pointless (at best) or damaging it was, then why are you even in here?

Nancy should impeach. That's not what this is about.


The debate here is why in the fuck Mueller called this fucking press conference that he had to know would muddy the waters.

Actually, I take that back. The real question is why dudes on the internet are so motivated to defend him. Shit is weird as fuck.

subpoena'd. I said that further up. This was his way of driving the point to Congress that he's not going to say anything outside of what's in the report if they subpoena him. He had to dress that up a bit so as not to come off too curt, but that was what was new here, hence, that had to be the point.

>RE: He called the press conference because he doesn't want to be
>subpoena'd. I said that further up. This was his way of
>driving the point to Congress that he's not going to say
>anything outside of what's in the report if they subpoena him.
>He had to dress that up a bit so as not to come off too curt,
>but that was what was new here, hence, that had to be the
>point.

also mueller: i dont intend to testify to congress about my findings

imagine an investigator not being called as a witness in a legal proceeding about his own investigation.

how does that even sound logical/reasonable?

one, because it's a sitting president, it's different (for the reasons I've mentioned here).

He just implied that if he was called to testify, nothing new would come out. He would basically read the report

https://www.npr.org/2019/05/29/727889232/read-special-counsel-robert-muellers-full-statement
-----------
Now, I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak to you in this manner.
...

And the report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress.
...

So, beyond what I've said here today and what is contained in our written work, I do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the Justice Department or Congress.
------------

he said in no uncertain terms that he hopes/expects not to ever speak about the investigation again. those are his intentions.

but he doesnt get to decide that. he has to testify when legally required to do so. so he said if that if that happens...then it would basically just be a rehashing of the written report (aka a waste of time).

he doesnt wanna testify to congress. period. he even called it 'inappropriate'.

an investigator that expects not to come into congress and speak about their *completed* investigation is an inexplicable position. there are oversight committees in congress that exist specifically for that exact function and that have been requiring that testimony since forever. he should know. hes done it over 50 times. theres no logical reason for him to be acting brand new.

>Nancy should impeach. That's not what this is about.

but that clearly hasnt been the case.

people need to hear straight from the messenger in a format that is the most digestible.

anyone still content with mundane status quo motions clearly doesnt comprehend the gravity/abnormality of our present circumstance (and the danger it puts our country in).

its also peculiar that republicans like ken starr and james comey had no problem finding some rationale to break decorum and doj protocol to publicly damage a democratic president or candidate (comey did it *twice* including a week before the election!) but mueller is still playing the straight laced role when it comes to a clearly corrupt republican president/candidate.

dont forget doj/fbi also hid the existence of an investigation into the trump campaign during the election but people like comey and mccabe had zero problem going to the press about clinton.

Democrats: *crickets*

people wanted Pelosi as Speaker of the House

Amash is doing more than her.


https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/1133756898518470656


https://thehill.com/homenews/house/445862-amash-gets-standing-ovation-at-first-town-hall-after-calling-for-trumps

Their entire platform for 2020 is "Not Trump". If he's not sitting across from them then they may have to actually like do something.

>Their entire platform for 2020 is "Not Trump". If he's not
>sitting across from them then they may have to actually like
>do something.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1133759237136494592

'no collusion' is now 'insufficient evidence'.

maybe its harder to make claims when people contradict you publicly in video form.

word salad word salad follow the facts word salad constitution word salad nobody is above the law word salad not yet at impeachment word salad word salad.

seriously dont make a public appearance if you arent ready to announce some significant action.

and please dont hold the fucking piece of paper up to your head as you read it.

fuck these clowns

>RE: jerry nadler announces a 2pm press conference. *fart noise*
>word salad word salad follow the facts word salad
>constitution word salad nobody is above the law word salad not
>yet at impeachment word salad word salad.
>
>seriously dont make a public appearance if you arent ready to
>announce some significant action.
>
>and please dont hold the fucking piece of paper up to your
>head as you read it.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1133776366061727744

damn near the same script i wrote lol.

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1133781128064720898

*the wettest fart noise*

>*the wettest fart noise*

Pelosi should know that the senate will never pass HR1. Cut the bullshit and begin the impeachment!

You cats who are saying that it was empty or hollow or that he's a coward seem to be missing the importance of the procedural aspect of this stuff. Certain procedural missteps can screw up or even nullify an entire investigation.

Mueller has considered his words very carefully. Remember, as a part of the DOJ, he can't charge the president. But he's laid out the results of his investigation as plainly & clearly as he can. It's like Vanna White turning all of the letters around on a word but 1.

Now it's up to Congress (because, again, the DOJ can't charge 45 criminally), specificaly the House, because they have impeachment power.

There are still a few investigations going. I get the impression that Pelosi wants to wait to see what else comes up.

I disagree with the idea that Mueller didn't do his job. I think he did it to the best of his ability considering the evidence he was able to collect. He set the table, now it's up to Congress to serve the meal...when it's ready.

>RE: I just re-read the transcript of Mueller's speech today...
>
> You cats who are saying that it was empty or hollow or that
>he's a coward seem to be missing the importance of the
>procedural aspect of this stuff. Certain procedural missteps
>can screw up or even nullify an entire investigation.
>
> Mueller has considered his words very carefully. Remember, as
>a part of the DOJ, he can't charge the president. But he's
>laid out the results of his investigation as plainly & clearly
>as he can. It's like Vanna White turning all of the letters
>around on a word but 1.
>
> Now it's up to Congress (because, again, the DOJ can't charge
>45 criminally), specificaly the House, because they have
>impeachment power.
>
> There are still a few investigations going. I get the
>impression that Pelosi wants to wait to see what else comes
>up.
>
> I disagree with the idea that Mueller didn't do his job. I
>think he did it to the best of his ability considering the
>evidence he was able to collect. He set the table, now it's up
>to Congress to serve the meal...when it's ready.

Because all of the above is stuff that we were all already aware of. And the folks who were *not* already aware of all of the above, weren't made anymore aware of all of the above via today's statement.

So what was the point.

>So what was the point.

That was the 1st time I've heard Mueller's voice.

Other than announcing the closing of the Special Counsel's office and his retirement, I think he wanted to reinforce what he (and the report) did and/or did not say. And he reiterated that he couldn't clear the president on his way out the door.

Barr got to put his spin on it and I get the impression that Mueller wanted to clarify where he left things.

It may have been useless to you, which is fine. You didn't learn anything you didn't already know. But I don't think it was a complete waste.

Basically it was a...before I go...

Dems are some bitches for not doing shit since the report was made public

He plainly stated...insufficient evidence to charge criminally

and he explained why that is somebody else's job

11 instances of obstruction of justice = impeach

...drops mic.

Why not say it from his chest?

Didn't Kenn Starr recommend impeachment?

Robert Mueller was not.

Mueller was an employee of the Justice Department, and bound by its regulations.

Mueller is also aware that his report is viewed as non-partisan (which it currently is, generally), only so long as he is seen as non-partisan.

Clinton's impeachment, in the end, was deeply undermined by the fact that Ken Starr was openly partisan.

that they're guaranteed to lose, and that would likely cost them the house majority and the 2020 presidential election.

I also think they should impeach, just because it's the right thing to do. But if they did, there wouldn't even be a trial. Mitch McConnell has already said they wouldn't even take it up. And if there's one thing we can count on in US government, it's Mitch McConnell's willingness to ignore any sense of constitutional responsibility for partisan ends.


The only tool we have to block any part of the Trump agenda is the house majority. But we won the house by winning a huge number of races in swing districts, where impeachment is extremely unpopular. Those races will all be run again in 2020.


I think even Nancy is moving toward impeachment. But the only way it doesn't hurt the Democrats is if they were dragged toward it by unavoidable political circumstances OUTSIDE their base.

History will not include the proper context to absolve Dems of doing absolutely nothing

Rs gained seats...and then the yt house...after the Clinton impeachment

The vanity plea cops don't really hold contrasted with facts

Clinton impeachment proceedings started 3 months after the Starr report was produced

...tick tock...

You think not starting impeachment proceedings in the house is a W for Dems in 2020?

is there a statute of limitations on potential charges for trump?

Is a)getting old in general and b) sounding more
and more like fear mongering to excuse acting like
spineless weasels.

And if they really believed it, the investigations would
stop too- since you can apply the same ‘logic’

Not only that, if Dems refuse to impeach they look
like they are just harassing the president with no
plan of holding him accountable.

Strange that the investigation itself was supposed to
hurt Dems politically.

Or the shutdown. Or the BART hearings.

Also strange that impeaching Clinton- who was
more popular- helped Rs politically. Even helped
them take the whitehouse.

Just because Nancy hints at something doesn’t
make it true.


And has far as missed shot Bob, he’s resigning. He
should have just come out and said it.

So far the right wing spin as included everything from
why didn’t he act, why didn’t he recommend inpeachment,
if he felt the pres committed crimes he has a moral
obligation to say so, etc.

He should have known that would happen.

The other side does not hesitate to spin and be very
clear in their message. Bob should have known or
cared.

And the Dems need to act like they believe what they
are saying.

“Americans should read the report” is sounding more
and more like “check her website”

Dems are awful at messaging and not getting better.

Mueller C L E A R L Y outlined the state of things and these trump assholes are still screaming about every fucking irrelevant point. "No collusion, no obstruction, waste of money...."

If Dems don't start impeachment proceedings before 2020

I expect this to be the R rallying cry.

Estimates are at $25M

it brought in more money than it cost due to $40+ mil in asset seizure from paul manafort.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/17/mueller-probe-could-turn-a-profit-thanks-to-manafort-assets.html

He was convicted of financial crimes

Do you know how much money he stole?

This is a pretty good breakdown of what Mueller was doing with his statement yesterday.

https://twitter.com/neal_katyal/status/1133886591846572032?s=21

Also, this happened yesterday.

https://twitter.com/jkbjournalist/status/1133870783770628096?s=12

And Steve Bannon said the Trump organization is a criminal enterprise.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/may/28/bannon-trump-organization-criminal-enterprise-comments-michael-wolff-book

i think i got through like 30 pages and there was so much stuff. once it got into specifics examples of the russian disinformation i started skimming then 5 pm hit and i never went back to it.

i should finish it at some point.

whats sad is i dont know how many members in congress have read it, republican or democrat. based on just the pages i did read there was plenty to warrant some action against trump and strengthening our elections.

so they can say later "oh, I didn't know that." either way, it's a disgrace. reporters should ask every single member of congress if they read the whole thing.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1134066371510378501

Seriously though, I don't know why I'm hysterically laughing at the fact that a sitting President just admitted that a foreign country helped get him elected. Complete madness.

Could be interesting.

https://amp.delawareonline.com/amp/3719744002

https://twitter.com/carolleonnig/status/1134558170729332738?s=21

and working to influence sentencing in favor of the *defendant*.

jesus christ these people are (blatantly) corrupt as shit.

clearly those flynn transcripts with kislyak are damning and prolly show that there is a lot more smoke in the unredacted 'collusion' part of the mueller probe than barr and others let on.

I wonder how the judge will respond, this is crazy.

That in itself is an impeachable offense, as far as I'm concerned.

https://mobile.twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1134570905621925888

because the fox news primetime block went into full freakout/smear mode and bill barr had to be trotted out for a press defensive on cbs news.

this is why dems need to stage more live mid-day or primetime events to break through the right wing media bubble. not only are you delivering critical info straight to their flock without a pre-filter...but the straight news team covering these events for fox news are people like chris wallace and shep smith who summarize it in a much more balanced/realistic way than people like carlson and hannity.

this quote from a trump supporter after a justin amash townhall sums it up:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D71RaSyUcAAq-Vm.png

most of these people have no idea whats going in real life until their routine media diet is disrupted.

-_-

that was after only one townhall with a few short answers on the mueller report. so prolly not enough to completely sway opinion either way.

she didnt even know *anything* negative was in the mueller report at all until that point.

things could conceivably be more impactful with a coordinated consistent roll out of televised hearings, press conferences, the resulting news cycles, etc.

the amount of people who support impeaching trump is already polling at mid-30s to mid-40s. nixon was only at 19% at this point (ended up at almost 60%).

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-us-impeach-nancy-pelosi-tells-jimmy/story?id=63393875


Professor who has correctly predicted 9 presidential elections says Trump will win in 2020 unless Democrats impeach

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/446136-professor-who-has-correctly-predicted-nine-presidential-elections-says

...rights being axed, etc. etc. etc.

My coworker is white and liberal as hell

He doesn’t think there is anyway Trump wins re-election

Damn shame how delusional folks can be when it comes to the average American voter.

the in-laws were talking about immigrants. they seemed very much pro deportation. theyre all mexican. i dont know if theyre all pro trump but i would think they at minimum would skip on voting.

but the type of mexicans who talk shit about illegal immigration (nowhere near a majority, but far from rare), have always felt this way. There's no shift going on in either direction. Trump isn't moving the needle other than people might talk about it more.

>the in-laws were talking about immigrants. they seemed very
>much pro deportation. theyre all mexican. i dont know if
>theyre all pro trump but i would think they at minimum would
>skip on voting.

>There's no shift going on in either
>direction. Trump isn't moving the needle other than people
>might talk about it more.
>

i would have hoped seeing his policies in action would have pushed some people away from him.

one of the comments i over heard was basically saying the wall (their words) was really helping. it was giving them enough time to move and capture the immigrants.

same dude was cheering so hard when ruiz became the first mexican heavy weight champion though.

but i watched too many people, mexican and otherwise, react to it by saying well, Obama had the exact same policy (he didn't, but..), so their only real take away from seeing kids in dog kennels it is that it's unfair to Trump.

>same dude was cheering so hard when ruiz became the first
>mexican heavy weight champion though.

lol yuup

It’s not like he was just clever with his wording initially, he just straight up lied.


https://twitter.com/mrbromwich/status/1134467841330229248?s=21

https://twitter.com/rebeccaballhaus/status/1135629056613834753?s=21

https://www.npr.org/2020/03/17/817215010/citing-security-feds-drop-case-against-russians-linked-to-election-interference