March 24, 2019

"Attorney General William P. Barr delivered to Congress on Sunday afternoon the main findings of the inquiry by Robert S. Mueller III, a House Democrat said..."

"Lawmakers received the four-page letter, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said on Twitter."

The NYT reports.

UPDATE: The headline (at the same link) is now updated to: "Mueller Finds No Trump-Russia Conspiracy but Stops Shorts of Exonerating President on Obstruction of Justice" (NYT). From the article:
The investigation led by Robert S. Mueller III found that neither President Trump nor any of his aides conspired or coordinated with the Russian government’s 2016 election interference, according to a summary of the special counsel’s findings made public on Sunday by Attorney General William P. Barr.

The summary also said that the special counsel’s team lacked sufficient evidence to establish that President Trump illegally obstructed justice, but added that Mr. Mueller’s team stopped short of exonerating Mr. Trump.

“While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” Mr. Barr quoted Mr. Mueller as writing.
AND: You can read Barr's summary here. The line "does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him" refers to the obstruction of justice issue. The Mueller report, we're told, says that it looked at the facts relevant to an obstruction of justice charge but only set out the evidence and noted that there were "'difficult issues' of law and fact about whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction." The report "leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct" it describes "constitutes a crime."

Barr writes that he (along with Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein) has concluded that the evidence is "not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense."

333 comments:

1 – 200 of 333   Newer›   Newest»
George Leroy Tirebiter said...

Fox News has been summarizing Barr's summary letter now (12:45pm PST)

Kevin said...

The Dems haven't accepted the results of the 2016 election.

Why would they accept the opinion of one Robert Mueller?

Forward!

Aunty Trump said...

So they can’t prove Trump’s state of mind when he fired Comey, Mueller’s “Brother in Arms” as the Washington Post called the two “protoges of Eric Holder.”

Trump could have fired him for getting mustard on his tie or less. Comey serves at the pleasure of the president, but this is all they will need to natter on endlessly. They are going to say that Trump should have been waterboarded.

Anonymous said...

Cue the shrieking at the sky...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Media sticks "Knowingly" in there.

LOL

Reality - Media knowingly mislead everyone on their assurance that Trump and Russian DID steal the election from its rightful owner - their preferred and chosen candidate(D).

Rob McLean said...

"Trump innocent; Chuck, Freder and Inga hardest hit".

BADuBois said...

Damn, I can hear the wailing all the way over here...

chuck said...

No collusion, but... Must be in the New York Times style guide.

EDH said...

"Stories have been coming out for some time now hinting Mueller’s final report might leave audiences 'disappointed,' as if a President not being a foreign spy could somehow be bad news."

Lawmakers received the four-page letter, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said on Twitter.

Here, exclusively at Althouse, we have actual video of Congressman Nadler's reaction...

"Fuck'n Chuck Norris."

Be sure to watch the whole video.

Dave Begley said...

Exoneration is NOT the job of a federal prosecutor. You either indict someone or not. If indicted and the person is not convicted, that's it.

The fact that he didn't indict Trump or anyone else on this BS means HE HAD NOTHING to take to a jury.

NYT spin, per usual.

cubanbob said...

So Mueller found that the Russians leaked the Clinton-DNC emails to Wikileaks and no one has disputed the authenticity of those emails. We owe Putin a Presidential Medal Of Freedom. The joke is Mueller's investigation was a witch hunt that found no witches. No it's time for the real investigation of the real conspiracy-by the Democrats. Mueller as a prosecutor didn't issue an exculpatory report, prosecutors only issue inculpatory reports. Now it's time for the AG to appoint special counsels to go after the Clintons, Obama and the conspirators in the Obama Administration and holdovers.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

I'm still waiting for someone to explain what "justice" was "obstructed"?

Was it the time Trump shut down the Mueller investigation? oh oops -that never happened.
Or was it the time Trump fired Comey, something that needed to happen and was well within the legal rights of a sitting CIC.

Hari said...

Mueller lacked sufficient evidence to establish that President Trump beat his wife, but stopped short of exonerating Mr. Trump.

Drago said...

The entirety of the lefty/LLR/dem/MSM universe are a collection of the biggest liars and traitors this nation has ever seen.

Their combined efforts are equivalent to Benedict Arnold times INFINITY.

Quayle said...

Yes Mr. Begley, but Muller’s Non-findings apparently failed to meet the Times’ heightened standard of non-evidence.

Rob said...

I'm afraid the conclusion is inescapable: Mueller was part of the Putin-Trump conspiracy all along.

EDH said...

The Mueller report, we're told," says that it looked at the facts relevant to an obstruction of justice charge but only set out the evidence and noted that there were "'difficult issues' of law and fact about whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction." The report "leaves it to the Attorney General to determine whether the conduct" it describes "constitutes a crime."

What we need, then, is a bench mark.

Appoint a special counsel to investigate Clinton-Obama, and then we'll take the convictions and findings of both investigations to do a side-by-side Pepsi Challenge of the respective levels of obstruction involved.

Big Mike said...

Trump asserted that Comey lied to him, to his face. If you cannot fire a subordinate for that, then what grounds are sufficient?

etbass said...

Barr's summary states that he and Rosenstein have made the determination that there is not a case for obstruction of justice since the basic motivation (to avoid conviction of collusion) was not there. Seems to me that this should have been explained by the NYT instead of leaving the obstruction matter out there as if it is an unresolved issue.

Greg Hlatky said...

Chuck, Freder and Inga hardest hit

Also: Ritmo/TTR/PPPT.

virgil xenophon said...

Eat your livers Donkeys, eat your livers!

W.B. Picklesworth said...

I read Barr's letter. I'm not a lawyer so maybe I'm missing something, but it sounds like he slaps down Mueller, albeit politely. To a layman, "obstructing justice" by not pretending that a witch hunt "investigation" is okay isn't obstructing justice at all. It's calling a spade a spade. If that's all that Mueller has got, and evidently it is, he's got nothing at all.

I'm left wondering if he just couldn't bring himself to do Trump and the country a favor by making it clear. He had to leave a little morsel for the crazies. So now we've got Nadler and hordes of Twitter Lefties who will spout, "Trump isn't exonerated!!" Actually, it sounds like he is.

Greg Hlatky said...

The Clinton Standard: unless proven beyond a shadow of a doubt in a court of law, not only is it proof of stainless innocence but also a damning indictment of the vicious perfidy of the accusers.

This goes well beyond that. Still, impeachment will be pushed.

Fen said...

via Legal Insurrection:

"The report outlines the Russian effort to influence the election and documents crimes committed by persons associated with the Russian government in connection with those efforts. The report further explains that a primary consideration for the Special Counsel’s investigation was whether any Americans – including individuals associated with the Trump campaign – joined the Russian conspiracies to influence the election, which would be a federal crime. The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”1

FN1 – In assessing potential conspiracy charges, the Special Counsel also considered whether members of the Trump campaign “coordinated” with Russian election interference activities. The Special Counsel defined “coordination” as an “agreement-tacit or express-between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference.”

* * *

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. As noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that any U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts, although the Special Counsel brought criminal charges against a number of Russian nationals and entities in connection with these activities.

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. But as noted above, the Special Counsel did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple. offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign."

But this is really sloppy: 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

How did Mueller discount the download/upload rate that had to have come from a download in the room to USB and not a hack over the net? The upload speed was too high for their campaign's network.

Captain BillyBob said...

More winning.
Can we move on now?
Infrastructure, trade, immigration,ya know,issues that really matter to most of the country.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

These are all the other investigations Trump faces. Roger Stone criminal trial, The hush money investigation, Trump’s inauguration funding, Pro-Trump super PAC, Trump Organization insurance policies, Trump Organization real estate deals, The Trump Foundation, Trump’s taxes, Trump’s golf club employing undocumented immigrants, The emoluments lawsuit, Michael Cohen’s legal fees, Summer Zervos defamation suit, House Intelligence Committee, House Judiciary Committee, House Oversight Committee, House Financial Services, House Ways and Means Committee, House Foreign Affairs Committee, Senate Intelligence

Plus Democrats will get Mueller’s words regarding obstruction of Justice and not simply accept a Barr summary/ conclusions. Mueller will undoubtedly be testifying in front of the House.

mockturtle said...

No surprise here. The lingering hopes of the Lefties have been dashed. C'est dommage.

Fen said...

"Trump innocent; Chuck, Freder and Inga hardest hit".

Oh lets give them some rope... Any of you three want to take this opportunity to express your sincere relief that the President of the United States wasn't put into office by Vladimir Putin? You're crying because it's such *good* news, right?

I mean, it's not like you would put partisan spite ahead of AMERICA, right?

Kevin said...

We cannot exonerate him, however:

- There is a presumption of innocence.

- There was no interference in the investigation.

- There was no evidence of the underlying crime for which justice could be obstructed.

Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?

bagoh20 said...

Two damned years and $30 million of investigation for a crime for which there never was any evidence. The investigation had no right to even have been launched against Trump. There is, of course ample evidence, well documented by the same people that suggests that the Democrats and the Clintons did that very same crime and worse. The last two years have dug up a lot of crimes, but some people seem to be above such things as charges and trials. How could Mueller have spent all that time and money and missed the obvious crimes against people who were colluding to bring Trump down? We have emails, testimony, and other evidence all over the place for an attempt to influence an election and then reverse it afterward. Some even admitted as much.

What if there was an email from Trump to his son about Russia saying "we need an insurance policy in case we start losing this thing". That would be a done deal, charges, impeachment, jail. What if Trump paid for a dossier to discredit Hillary? What if Session did not recuse himself, but rather had a secret meeting on the tarmac with Trump Jr. to talk about golf.

How can Mueller ignore the real evidence and crimes? The crimes of Hillary are much more relevant to his investigation than the crimes of Manafort or Michael Cohen.

The way the FBI, DOJ, and Mueller behaved did far more to destroy trust in our system than anything Trump was even accused of. Those are the crimes of corruption that needed a special investigator, not some ridiculous collusion crap that didn't even makes sense and had no evidence.

Yancey Ward said...

Looks like goalposts will be set up on Proxima Centauri b starting tonight.

etbass said...

Seems that the NYT should have made note of the fact that Barr and Rosenstein made a finding that obstruction of justice is not prosecutable because the underlying motivation (Russian collusion) is not there. Instead the Times leaves the impression that obstruction is still an open issue.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

Trump was not exonerated on Obstruction of Justice. Barr and Mueller will be testifying in front of the House. This is the least Americans deserve, no whitewashes will be accepted.

Unknown said...

"Exoneration is NOT the job of a federal prosecutor. You either indict someone or not. If indicted and the person is not convicted, that's it.

The fact that he didn't indict Trump or anyone else on this BS means HE HAD NOTHING to take to a jury.

NYT spin, per usual. "

THIS... F'em....

Now the corrupt NY Justice system ( i guess we will just move down the line of corrupt democrat justice systems ) can take a swing. Then baltimore, then detroit, then la, etc.

Aunty Trump said...

Partisan hit job. Can't prove Trump is not guilty, so onward soldiers to impeachment. Wow. What has happened to America when there's no presumption of innocence. A point Trump won't be able to make, of course.

Cable news can feed on this nonsense for the next two years.

How can you obstruct justice when there's no crime?

Narayanan Subramanian said...

So : Barr is as much a weasel as Comey.

I await calls to fire him.

Lucid-Ideas said...

Evidence?...We don't need no stinkin' evidence! Andale demochachos! Impeachamente vamos!

Tonight Donald will be having three scoops...

Tank said...

Sort of anticlimactic.

How much did this fiasco cost the taxpayers?

It cost most of the media all of the little credibility they had left.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

A fun 2 years of leftwing lecture from leftists who assured us that the Mueller god would fulfill his duty in uncovering the fact that Trump and Russia COLLUDED to trick and steal votes from Hillary and give them to Trump, is now over.
ooops - not.

The lecture to respect the unquestionable integrity of the Mueller will now be quickly flushed down the memory hole.

Hagar said...

"Obstruction of justice" is an opinion thing. In this case, Republicans want to see some actual action in that line; for Democrats it is enough that Trump has made derogatory comments about them and their "investigations."

The Godfather said...

For two years, the Democrats and their MSM allies have used the supposed "collusion" between the Trump campaign and the Russians to deligitimize his Presidency. They have constantly referred to the "Trump-Russia" Special Counsel Investigation, that would spell the doom of this illegitimate President. Now that the Investigation has been completed with NO evidence of collusion between Trump and the Russians (nor of obstruction of justice) they ought to drop the "collusion" charge like a hot intern, but I don't think they are capable of doing so. They are just too invested in the "collusion" narrative. You see that in some of the comments here.

This is yet another reason to think that Trump is going to be re-elected next year.

AMDG said...

They are going to hang their hat on t(e lack of a total vindication of the obstruction charge. Within three days the collusion allegations will be flushed Dow the memory hole. It was always about obstruction.

Russian collusion, meet James Hodgekinson, Syed Farook, and Tasheen Malik.

Original Mike said...

"The summary also said that the special counsel’s team lacked sufficient evidence to establish that President Trump illegally obstructed justice, but added that Mr. Mueller’s team stopped short of exonerating Mr. Trump."

Collusion with Russia to steal the 2016 election would have taken place in secret and the purpose of Mueller's investigation would have been to uncover this behavior (and subsequently to bring charges). But did anything in the "Obstruction of Justice" hypothesis occur in secret? If not, what value does Mueller even bring to that case? For example, I don't need Mueller to tell me whether or not Trump firing Comey was a crime. It was not.

Oso Negro said...

Get your ashes and sackcloth here!

FullMoon said...

(REDACTED) said...
Known Unknown, I may have zero proof that collusion happened, but you also have zero proof that it didn't happen. As I said it's classified info and we are not privy to it. Be patient. Not every thing gets leaked.
5/12/17, 3:29 PM



I may have zero proof (REDACTED) is ridiculous, but you have zero proof that she isn't.

Oh, wait a second, nevermind...

cronus titan said...

What happens next? Nadler and the #Resistance morons will keep doubling down on a fraud going nowhere. Boring. THe playing field is now clear for accountability of FBI, DoJ, CIA and NSA clowns who generated this con. THey have been hiding behind "ongoing investigation" for two years. The wall of fraud has crumbled and there is nothing hampering investigations and prosecutions into them.

When you go after the king, you best get him.

TheDopeFromHope said...

For two years we've heard from Schiff, Pelosi, Waters, Schumer et al. that they were privy to overwhelming evidence that Trump was guilty of treason for colluding and conspiring with the Russians. Did they withhold that evidence from the special counsel?

JPS said...

"While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."

So if you want to believe he's guilty of something horrible, you go right ahead: He hasn't been proven innocent. Keep hope alive!

Anonymous said...

Also important, Barr's letter in introducing the obstruction portion of the report includes the preface "most of which have been reported publicly." So, Congress can pursue an inquiry and even bring impeachment charges. However, they do so with little beyond what we already know - conversations with Comey, firing Comey, considering firing Mueller, tweets about a "witch hunt." If they go down that road they will have the same blowback the Republican Congress had after the Clinton fiasco.

TheDopeFromHope said...

For two years we've heard from Schiff, Pelosi, Waters, Schumer et al. that they were privy to overwhelming evidence that Trump was guilty of treasonous collusion and conspiracy with the Russians. Did they withhold that evidence from the special counsel?

eddie willers said...

Exoneration is NOT the job of a federal prosecutor.

When the Daily Mail first put this up they highlighted DID NOT EXONERATE.

Go to it now and they have changed it to:

Mueller sensationally CLEARS Trump

PS. Althouse. Turn off moderation and let this thing fly. You can always come back and clean it up if need too. This thread should burn.

SDaly said...

How could there even be an evidence of obstruction of justice over a bullshit, DOJ / FBI concocted "collusion" case?

Drago said...

I am going to guess that right about now, Stelter and Lemon and Kristol and Jonah and Allahpundit and Chuck and all the rest of the far left/left/dem/lib/LLR's are about half a tub in to their double fudge ripple ice cream and at least a third of the way into their cheap bottle of scotch.

For Stelter, that would be his third tub of the day.

And Nadler, who is morbidly horrifically obese (this apparently is some issue of significance to the lefties and LLR's on this blog) is literally going off the rails.

Not to worry lefties and LLR's!!!

Maxine Waters has your back!!

Birkel said...

Dave (not David?) Begley:

Almost correct.
Remember what happened when Nifong tried to railroad Duke Lacrosse.
There the state-level investigators specifically found the formerly accused factually innocent.
In cases with prosecutorial abuse, exceptions are sometimes made.

This is such a case.
The AG should say so.

Mattman26 said...

Looks like Mueller sidestepped the question of whether a President firing his FBI director could ever constitute obstruction of justice. To me the answer to that is an easy "no." But even if you were to contemplate the possibility, there would still have to be some bit of "justice" that you were trying to "obstruct."

Since there's no collusion, what is there to obstruct? "I'm going to fire you, so that no one finds out . . . that I didn't break the law?"

Jersey Fled said...

Funny how the obstruction issue ended up the exact opposite of the Comey/Hillary fiasco.

Comey outlined clear proof that Hillary commited a crime, then exonerated her.

Mueller said that there was insufficient evidence that Trump committed a crime, but did not exonerate him.

Weasle. How can a prosecutor find insufficient evidence of a crime and not exonerate the accused. The fact that he brought no charges is an exonerate in and of itself. There is no such thing as guilt by inuendo.

AgiaN, WEASLE!

Mike Bunge said...

I wonder if these people, after having ranted and raved for 2+ years about a nonsensical conspiracy theory that was just shot down in flames, have the actual stones to try and impeach Trump for beyond dubious obstruction of justice allegations. I mean, I'd almost respect them if they tried.

MIke

Mike said...

I like the part where the report says not only was there no Russian collusion by Trump, his campaign and his family, “despite many opportunities.” As Trey Gowdy just said on FNC, that is remarkable considering the several spies that Brennan and the CIA sent out to tempt Trump associates. Exonerated despite many attempts to set them up.

Yancey Ward said...

On the obstruction section of the letter- Mueller was talking about Trump's public statements deriding the Mueller investigation. If you don't believe me, look at the fucking letter- it says so almost explicitly. Mueller was upset that Trump was publicly criticizing the investigation- if that is obstruction, then every defendant who claims he is being framed is guilty of obstruction- the standard is fucking ridiculous, and Barr and Rosenstein agreed that it was ridiculous. Even worse for the Democrats, though, is that Mueller recognized that part of the reason it was ridiculous is that Trump wasn't guilty of any underlying crime. The deal with firing Comey wasn't even part of this section.

This report was basically an exoneration, full and clear. If I were Trump, here is what I do first thing tomorrow morning:

(1) Pardon Michael Flynn and George Papadopoulos completely;
(2) Commute Manafort's sentence to 2 to 3 years, but leave all penalties and fines as is- the man was guilty of tax evasion and deserves to pay a stiff price. I would pardon Manafort for all FARA charges, though, since the Podestas and others were just as guilty, but never prosecuted because they were Democrats.
(3) I would pardon Roger Stone immediately if he wants it (he might want to fight it out in court instead).
(4) I would offer personally reimburse all the out of pocket legal expenses incurred by every US citizen caught up in this ridiculous excuse for a criminal investigation (except, of course, Manafort).
(5) I would repeat this morning's tweets each day for the next month.

Tommy Duncan said...

With this issue we see the full impact of the new moderation policy. There are times when immediacy counts.

YoungHegelian said...

Here is a link to Barr's summary that's not behind a NYT paywall.

FullMoon said...

Jack Posobiec says:
🇺🇸
‏Verified account @JackPosobiec
57m57 minutes ago

I want all you Russiagater freaks to repeat after me

After 2800 subpoenas

500 witnesses

500 search warrants

230 communications records

50 phone traps

13 foreign govt intel requests

Donald J Trump is still your president

tim maguire said...

The president did not conspire with the Russians, but the facts are too murky to determine whether he obstructed the investigation into whether he conspired with Russia.

Occam's Razor may provide guidance.

Gospace said...

There's one thing about obstruction of justice crimes that puzzle me. Especially in this case.

How can justice be obstructed when there is no crime?

Comey was aware of unlawful searches. He did nothing. That's obstruction of justice. Comey came out and said no reasonable prosecutor would prosecute Hillary. There's a huge underlying crime there- and that statement is obstruction of justice. When is he getting charged?

Comey worked hard to get fired. He hasn't yet received his full just rewards. Being prosecuted for the illegal unlawful actions he covered up should be coming soon

Nothing has leaked from Huber. Anyone care to guess what he's up to?

Saw an interesting analysis just a bit earlier. Apparently canary traps are still being set, and the bait taken. Just 2 weeks ago TDS sufferer former CIA Director John Brennan was on television telling everyone Mueller was indicting lots of people. Didn't happen. Who fed him that intelligence? He thinks he's still in the intelligence loop. Someone is putting out false intel and former deep state operatives are convincing themselves it's real and putting it out there before the public.

traditionalguy said...

Trump wins. The Media has been effectively destroyed.

Gk1 said...

"The Dems haven't accepted the results of the 2016 election.
Why would they accept the opinion of one Robert Mueller?" So very true and best describes my lefty Facebook feed at the moment. "Maybe the NYC D.A will win the day!" pretty much sums them up. The reality based progressives have decided plain english doesn't mean what it actually says.

Tommy Duncan said...

If there is no crime to obstruct, there can be no charge of obstruction.

Jim at said...

You'd think some people would use this as an opportunity to admit they were wrong and STFU.

Kevin said...

Chuck Todd is on MSNBC bemoaning the fact Barr's conclusions regarding obstructions are getting ahead of the Democrats and possibly turning the American people off from the idea of further investigations, because the Dems don't have access to the evidence to make their counterclaims.

It's not about what Mueller found, or "wear a wire" Rosenstein concluded, but what the Dems might be able to assert.

That's how this breaks down for journalist Chuck Todd.

madAsHell said...

Insufficient evidence, but we won't exonerate.

What a bunch of weasel words!! If there wasn't any charge, then you CAN'T exonerate.

Mike Bunge said...

Just to make something clear, if you want to challenge Barr's decision on not releasing the full report, you are implicitly accusing both Mueller, his staff, and Rosenstein of covering up Trump's supposed crimes.

I've already seen people in some places where this simple logic escapes them.

Mike

Kevin said...

For two years we've heard from Schiff, Pelosi, Waters, Schumer et al. that they were privy to overwhelming evidence that Trump was guilty of treason for colluding and conspiring with the Russians. Did they withhold that evidence from the special counsel?

Better question: were they subpoenaed? If not, why not?

Oh come on, we know the answer. Even Mueller's team didn't take them seriously.

Darrell said...

Exoneration is NOT the job of a federal prosecutor. You either indict someone or not. If indicted and the person is not convicted, that's it.

It should be a criminal offense for a prosecutor to do otherwise--cast aspersions.

Diogenes of Sinope said...

MSNBC folks are fuming. Not quite as much as when Trump was elected, but certainly at a similar order of magnitude. They're already trying to gaslight everyone. The report from AG Barr doesn't say what we read. And, by the way....AG Barr is lying about what is in the Mueller report.

Drago said...

Shorter dem/left/LLR's: Trump is guilty of non-obstruction of non-collusion in the 37th Degree.

Now the moronic lefties are arguing that a prosecutor is required to prove an exoneration negative!!

Our little fascist maoist lefties and LLR's will now try to fully implement their intended to be Beria-gulag rules of guilt for political enemies.

Its all they have left now.

Drago said...

Go ahead Inga. For 2 years you have been calling Trump and his staff traitors.

Here's your chance to take it back.

Go ahead........

bagoh20 said...

Can everybody just be honest and admit that the whole investigation never had a crime to investigate against Trump and was simply an exercise in find something on Trump - anything. It clearly never had any other purpose.

Other than FOX, the media has made a fortune off this selling a soap opera where everyday for two years they promised that on tomorrow's show there would be the big reveal with Trump going down. It's like tuning in to find out who shot J.R. and now we find out that J.R. was never even shot. What will they do now to get them tuning in every day? The boy cried "wolf" too many times.

FOX did it's own thing by promissing that any day the corrupt apparatchiks in the FBI and DOJ would be brought to justice. There is a lot more evidence for that show paying off with a resolution, and it's not over yet, I hope. I want my country to be better than what these people have done in these once-trusted government agencies, but I don't expect much.

Tommy Duncan said...

Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...

"Trump was not exonerated on Obstruction of Justice."

Schadenfreude.

YoungHegelian said...

Barr's letter doesn't go into any detail as to what acts by Trump might have raised concerns of Obstruction of Justice. Clearly, for the opposition, the firing of James Comey, was such an act. Judging by the language of the report, there were there others. But what they were, the report doesn't say.

I think as a matter of law (based on the law degree I found on the bottom of that box of Cracker Jacks), we the public & everyone else in the Republic have no right to know what's in the Special Prosecutor's report, just like it would be with any other grand jury's report. Individuals no doubt spoke to the SP's office under conditions of anonymity, & many without the full legal protections afforded in a court of law, as in the case in any grand jury investigation.

The legal system owes to the Trump administration rights that any defendant, much less the head of the Executive Branch, would get from a Grand Jury --- a closure of the proceedings unless an indictment is returned. I'll bet dollars to donuts that some bunch of assholes on Mueller's team leaked the proceedings to the state investigators in NY. If such can be proved, I want the whole prosecutorial team in NY publicly executed by flame thrower in Time Square, pour encourager les autres.

I hope Barr resists congressional pressure to release any more to Congress. Why provide bait for a fishing expedition against his own boss? I'd like to see Barr's words to this effect quoted in The NYT: "See ya in front of the SCOTUS, motherfuckers!".

Kevin said...

MSNBC now pointing out how quickly Barr was able to read the report and put out a summary.

Probably a quick job to put out a very pro-Trump spin.

Nothing quotes the Mueller report directly. Forcing the American people to trust Barr's judgement and synopsis.

Need to know exactly how Barr and Rosenstein decided not to indict Trump. Judgement is suspect.

Parsing, parsing, parsing the letter.

In conclusion: DOJ having the information all by itself is bad. Barr quickly putting out a synopsis of the information without taking his time and thoroughly footnoting his conclusions with text from the report, also bad.

Drago said...

Every single piece of crap traitorous democrat and LLR has been carrying Putins water for 2 years by pretending Putin had all this astonishing power and the Trump campaign and Presidency had been colluding.

Exactly what Putin wants.

Exactly.

What an absolute disgrace.

Fen said...

Paraphrasing Barr, as I can't paste from his PDF:

Barr: As I am mindful of the public interest... my intent is to make public as much of the Mueller report as possible

====

Why bother? With the exception of a few Althouses and Greenwalds, no one on the Left is acting in good faith. They don't care about "transparency", the just want something they can quote out of context and spin into a new fantasy narrative. Let them pound sand instead.

Pelosi? The hag who refused to budge an inch to secure and protect America's borders? Give her a summary and tell her to fuck off.

If you think these nutjobs are going to accept the 2016 election because a special counsel cleared Trump after a 2 year multimillion dollar investigation, you haven't been paying attention.

What you should do is SWAT raid everyone associated with Fusion GPS and haul Barak, Hillary and Chelsea to jail. No bail, as their Ukrainian contacts make them a flight risk. Billy Jr can be born in a prison hospital.

Remember to give FOX a heads up so we all see footage of Hillary being tackled and cuffed on the front yard in her bathrobe. Have the K9s foul the yard and rub her face in it. And don't forget to ruin. Chelsea's life - 40 years on Foundation tax fraud - if Hillary refuses to give a blanket confession.

Drago said...

Every single piece of crap traitorous democrat and LLR has been carrying Putins water for 2 years by pretending Putin had all this astonishing power and the Trump campaign and Presidency had been colluding.

Exactly what Putin wants.

Exactly.

What an absolute disgrace.

rehajm said...

The way the FBI, DOJ, and Mueller behaved did far more to destroy trust in our system than anything Trump was even accused of. Those are the crimes of corruption that needed a special investigator, not some ridiculous collusion crap that didn't even makes sense and had no evidence.

Bully!

Aunty Trump said...

So Mueller said that he can’t prove Trump is innocent of something that he isn’t even sure is a crime. It’s still impeachable, just like Trump could fire Comey for any reason whatsoever, they can impeach Trump for whatever reason that they can get the votes to support, beating Hillary is crime enough.

This is one more poison arrow for the press to spin. Good thing Trump seems pretty much immune to their poisons.

Kevin said...

MSNBC: It's good news Mueller found no conspiracy.

Now we need to look at all the evidence he did so we can have confidence in his findings, or raise our own doubts.

Mueller couldn't determine Trump's innocence on obstruction in two years, but Barr did it in 48 hours.

That's too fishy. He didn't take enough time. We need to see all the evidence to make sure we agree with their conclusions.

Aunty Trump said...

It would truly serve America if a special counsel was appointed to investing this mess from the Dossier through the NSC, MI6, etc.

Matt said...

Has the left announced when the next big national temper tantrum, oh, I mean, protest, is scheduled for? Surely, this sort of news requires a big public meltdown by the children.

Quaestor said...

...no whitewashes will be accepted.

Abby Normal's off the lab again Nothing short of a brain transplant will save her.

Mary Beth said...

but Stops Shorts of Exonerating President

Because you can't prove a negative.

Kevin said...

MSNBC: Time to bring in the 2020 Dem candidates. Ask them what they think, beginning with Butigigusguusgggig.

Wants to know how Trump could have gotten to be president in the first place.

Need to look at the system for how someone like this could be elected.

(Here's a hint: free and fair elections.)

Then goes on to talk about how he stands for freedom...

AJ Lynch said...

My brother is a far left, Trump hater. I just spoke with him and he was in a great mood because he just learned he scored #1 on a test for a job with the city. He did not mention the Mueller report. He's been having a lot of trouble finding steady work since he is a 62 year old carpenter. The prospect of steady work seems to have him ebullient. I hope he gets the job and stays ebullient no matter who is president. Making an honest living is so important to a human being. I bet Ben Wikler thinks only big govt can provide that [sorry not sorry Althouse for taking another shot at Ben but I coud not resist].

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Clearly - we need to see the whole damn report. Because hidden deep inside - the real collusion and obstruction of justice sits.

Kevin said...

This is the least Americans deserve, no whitewashes will be accepted.

The whitewash is how this investigation got started in the first place.

The press has been whitewashing that for the last two years.

Jersey Fled said...

Mueller couldn't find enough evidence of the underlying charge of collusion to work up a good "but", yet kept this fiasco going long enough to bankrupt and/or throw in jail a half dozen people on unrelated charges.

I wish there was a way to make him serve their time and pay their fines and legal costs.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Hillary and Bill still managed to pocket millions from secret Russian Uranium deals.
Private Servers come in handy.

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

CWJ said...

"Plus Democrats will get Mueller’s words regarding obstruction of Justice and not simply accept a Barr summary/ conclusions. Mueller will undoubtedly be testifying in front of the House."

When I read Althouse's post, I mentally predicted that the fallback would be that Mueller would have found the collusion if not for Trump's obstruction. And here it comes.

bagoh20 said...

"...John Brennan was on television telling everyone Mueller was indicting lots of people. Didn't happen. Who fed him that intelligence?"

Trump told the Russians to feed him that. They're colluding to keep Trump in office now, becuase the Russians love stuff like Trump strengthening NATO, damaging their energy markets with expanded production, and accepting the Golan Heights as Israeli territory. I bet there is a Russian hooker with a message written in gold on her ass with Trump telling Putin he can be more flexible after the election.

eddie willers said...

Tonight Donald will be having three scoops...

I laughed.

Yancey Ward said...

I do think Mueller was planning to indict Trump for obstruction over Trump's public criticisms of the investigation, and it is likely he had Rosenstein's tacit acquiescence at one point in time, but that point may well have ended the day McCabe leaked the conversation he had with Rosenstein about wearing a wire to entrap the President. The revelation of that conversation may have scared Rosenstein shitless- it put him up to his ears in the coup attempt, so he called off the part he was in control of.

Fen said...

"How can justice be obstructed when there is no crime?"

I don't understand how firing Comey can meet any legal standard for obstruction when the President has the right to fire the FBI Director without cause. Can someone explain that to me?

And isn't assumed the investigation stays with the office not the man? How can you prove motive to deliberately obstruct if it's SOP for the replacement Director to continue where the fired one left off?

And isn't there proof of exctly that happening? Comey's firing had zero effect on what Muller was doing?

Kristian Holvoet said...

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/7c/68/7d/7c687debe61f4b5aca1f1465811bbd05.jpg

Mike said...

Trump was not exonerated on Obstruction of Justice

Uh, yes he was. Mueller found no underlying crimes that Trump or his campaign or his family took part in. Therefore Barr and Rosenstein cleared Trump of obstruction because THERE IS NO CRIME TO OBSTRUCT. Simple. No crime = no corruption or obstruction. We’ve been telling you that for weeks. Of all the entities indicted none were for conspiracy or crimes committed in service of Trump, therefore we KNEW ahead of time the Report would not claim obstruction. One cannot obstruct a non-entity. And conspiracy would have involved more than one person. You all just didn’t want to believe the evidence in front of you. Now you are denying the evidence Mueller laid out for you. When will your witch hunt end?

Lovernios said...

Next Democrat tack: "Mueller was in on it all along!!!!!!!!!"

Christy said...

CBS news keeps interrupting the NCAA tournament focussing on "couldn't exonerate."

exhelodrvr1 said...

No whitewashes, like with Hillary?

Aunty Trump said...

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/03/24/trump-mueller-report-william-barr-summary-reaction-nr-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/why-mueller-cares-about-playlist/

CNN is pretty reasonable on this. Wow. Though Mueller gave the Democrats the fig leaf they needed.

elkh1 said...

No evidence of crime, but not exonerate him?
Not exonerate him from what? From insinuations? From Fake News?

Our Justice System falls hard and fast because Hillary lost.

Drago said...

As mentioned earlier, this entire lefty/LLR farce began as an operation in late 2015 (3.5 years!) by the leadership of the democrat party, Hillary campaign, the obama admin and the leadership of our federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

We will find out soon whether or not Barr is going to truly empower the IG and DOJ to fully investigate what these lefty/LLR morons have been doing for years.

Kevin said...

MSNBC: Obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction...

We have to see everything.

Obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction...

Such a small part of the report.

Obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction...

Don't need an underlying crime.

Obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction...

Watergate, Watergate, Watergate.

Obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction, obstruction...

Guildofcannonballs said...

I hope Bobbins Cock apologizes to me for asking me to waste my (valuable) time explaining why for years I have declaimed "... convicting Trump of Obama's crimes."

That might help his badly in need of help soul.

Aunty Trump said...

There is an ad in Jake Tapper’s twitter feed for a suicide prevention hotline.

No it’s not aimed at me. I stopped getting personalized ads when I changed browsers, search engines, and installed a paid secure VPN.

Fen said...

"If they go down that road they will have the same blowback the Republican Congress had after the Clinton fiasco."

It will be worse. The Left has taught America that a mob banging on Pelosi's house and throwing her out of restaurants and theaters is perfectly okay as a form of protest.

Me? I'm burning 24 hours of Achey Breaky Heart onto a CD.

Aunty Trump said...

Blogger Tommy Duncan said...
If there is no crime to obstruct, there can be no charge of obstruction


Playing the old game of “what if you had to argue” I am going to say that Trump couldn’t have known for certain that nobody close to him had committed a crime.

steve uhr said...

Time to move on. Congress will not get major parts of the report because it contains grand jury matters. Mueller issues 2800 grand jury subpoenas. Is Congress going to spend the resources redoing that investigation? I hope not.

It is disappointing that Mueller punted on the obstruction issue. If he didn't think there was sufficient evidence of obstruction to warrant a charge he should have said so. And since Trump's intent is critical to an obstruction case, Trump should have been the recipient of one of the 2800 subpoenas in my opinion.

Drago said...

This can not be emphasized enough: there is absolutely ZERO evidence of collusion....so how did this entire farce begin if there was ZERO evidence if collusion?

Because the democrats/LLR's are utterly and irretrievably corrupt and if they have their way we will see the end of this republic..

3MartiniLunch said...

The Democrats will investigate the President through Novemer 2020. They will not find anything, but that is not the point. Their strategy/point is to run continous hearings (80 demand letters anyone?) until after the election. This allows them to avoid the impeachment minefield while still hobbling the administration and holding onto their base voters (pun intended).

After election day: if Trump loses, the Hillary standard (he didn't win, leave him alone) should apply, but my guess is he goes home to face the SDNY - because teh Dems play for keeps, and it's all about holding power in perpetuity. If Trump wins, that's when we'll see the attempted impeachment (unless the GOP takes back the house).

The fly in the ointment will be if Speaker Pelosi cannot reign in AOC and the other firebrand freshmen/activists, and they force her hand on impeachment too early. If that happens, the Dems may lose 47 states (NY, CA, & IL are just a bridge too far). As the saying goes, 'all they have to do is not act crazy, but...'

Matthew Sablan said...

Comey admitted to lying to Trump, and he admitted to illegally leaking documents to the press.

It would be impossible to prove an obstruction of justice charge in his firing, especially given *the investigation continued.*

Ken B said...

Bernie Sanders tweeted
“I don’t want a summary of the Mueller report. I want the whole damn report.“

He knows this would be illegal. If he didn’t know it before he knows it from Barr's summary. He is demanding that the Attorney General break the law. To he lol with he law give me that! Because he pretends it's Trump who should not be trusted with power.

Kevin said...

CNN: "Trump-appointed Attorney General is setting the narrative."

#journalism

Matthew Sablan said...

"If there is no crime to obstruct, there can be no charge of obstruction."

-- That is technically not true; an innocent man bribing a juror is obstructing justice as much as a guilty one.

tcrosse said...

How long before this penetrates the SNL writers' room?

stevew said...

This is what you get when you put in place a Special Counsel to investigate an alleged rather than actual crime: a big fat nothingburger. A very expensive one, but a nothingburger just the same.

Jersey Fled said...

Any bets on what Huber and Horowitz do starting tomorrow.

Amadeus 48 said...

It seems pretty clear that Team Mueller was confused and conflicted about what to do given the weirdness of Trump's behavior regarding James Comey's firing, so they did the Pontius Pilate thing and washed their hands of the problem, leaving it up to Barr and Rosenstein to take the heat.

To review the facts:

1. Rosenstein handed Trump (at Trump's request) an analysis of Comey's handling of the Hillary email investigation that clearly demonstrated that Comey had broken DOJ rules in his Hillary press conference. That would have justified firing Comey.
2. Trump fired Comey and then said he did it because Comey wouldn't tell the public that Trump wasn't under investigation.
3. Comey leaked his memos about the Flynn discussion, including Trump's comments about loyalty. He said Trump never took any action to follow up their conversation about Flynn.
4. Trump promptly nominated Christopher Wray to be FBI chief, and Wray was on the job a few weeks later.
5. Mueller was appointed as a result of Comey kerfuffle, and he hired a bunch of red-hot Democrats, including Andrew Weissman and Peter Strzok to investigate whatever they investigated.
6. Trump after a while started hooting and catcalling the Mueller investigation, but the White House produced most things requested, and Trump answered written questions.
7. There was no underlying criminal offense (collusion and cooperation with Russians not committed).
8. The Mueller team had to decide if they could or should recommend prosecution of a dubious process crime (obstruction) against POTUS when they concluded their was no underlying offence and POTUS had the right to fire Comey for any reason or for no reason, but not for a corrupt reason.

This is a big mess, and Mueller clearly had people on his team who don't like Trump and would like to hand him a brick. Therefore, in the finest tradition of bureaucrats, Mueller kicked the decision upstairs.

"Here Bill, you figure it out, and make Rod, who got me into this, step up."

To me, the dispositive fact is that Wray was on the job on August 2 after Comey was fired on May 9, with Andrew McCabe (that's another story) in the chair in the interim. Every thing moved forward and no one was obstructed. The most damning thing was Trump telling Comey he expected loyalty and then firing him. It is pretty clear that Trump and Comey were oil and water, and Trump fired him because he didn't like or trust him. There is no indication of similar friction with Wray.

The Democrats are falling into a trap if they push this too far. There was no collusion and there was no obstruction.

Inga...Allie Oop said...

An underlying crime is NOT required for Obstruction of Justice to have occurred.

Matthew Sablan said...

"How did Mueller discount the download/upload rate that had to have come from a download in the room to USB and not a hack over the net?"

-- Could just be a sloppy use of the word 'hack,' or the fact that Mueller's team didn't care.

Aunty Trump said...

And since Trump's intent is critical to an obstruction case, Trump should have been the recipient of one of the 2800 subpoenas in my opinion.

Well, it seems like he didn’t have enough evidence of obstruction to issue a subpoena, they are not supposed to be for outright fishing expeditions. But I suppose you wouldn’t be happy until he was waterboarded.

Matthew Sablan said...

Man, Schiff shouldn't have put off sending that damning evidence he repeatedly said he saw to Mueller, huh?

Sebastian said...

"so how did this entire farce begin if there was ZERO evidence if collusion?"

And "collusion" is not even a crime.

But if the investigation began without any evidence of any crime being committed, then those who started it themselves broke the law.

Of course, I am not expecting anyone to to be held accountable for the witch hunt.

Aunty Trump said...

Trump was not exonerated on Obstruction of Justice.

In Inga’s America, if accused of a crime, you will have to prove your innocence. Sounds like a great place. A lot like East Germany.

walter said...

Bill Kristol
‏Verified account @BillKristol

Lest we lose sight of the forest for the trees: It seems to me likely Mueller will find there was collusion between Trump associates and Putin operatives; that Trump knew about it; and that Trump sought to cover it up and obstruct its investigation.
What then?
Good question.
4:25 PM - 9 Aug 2018

Bill Kristol
‏Verified account @BillKristol
1h1 hour ago

A good outcome:
1. The investigation was able to proceed lawfully to its conclusion.
2. Our president did not conspire with a hostile power to win his election.
3. The evidence in the report on obstruction by the president while in office will confirm he ought not be re-elected.
667 replies 855 retweets 3,960 likes

Drago said...

stevew: "This is what you get when you put in place a Special Counsel to investigate an alleged rather than actual crime:.."

Thats just it. They didnt do that.

Rosenstein improperly appointed a Special Counsel to oversee a counter-intellligence investigation which was an obvious cover to do several things:
1) protect hillary
2) protect our very own East German-stasi deepstaters
3) frame Donald Trump

Jim at said...

Time to move on.

Nope. We're going to shove this down your throats for the next two years.
You threw your crap at us for two years. Now you get to eat it for two more.

Aunty Trump said...

Blogger Hari said...
Mueller lacked sufficient evidence to establish that President Trump beat his wife, but stopped short of exonerating Mr. Trump.


To be fair, it’s impossible to prove that he doesn’t.

rhhardin said...

Obstruction of harassment. Trump knew there was no collusion so he couldn't be obstructing justice.

tcrosse said...

Somewhere, Hillary is asking herself, "If there was no Russian Collusion, how come I lost? Why was I not 50 points ahead?"

Aunty Trump said...

Top Dem Says AG Barr Must Testify to Congress Because ‘Mueller Did Not Exonerate the President’

See? It was a poison arrow from a partisan hack.

dreams said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Matthew Sablan said...

"When you strike at a king, you must kill him."

They didn't, but I doubt Trump will go as vengeful as the right wants him to. He's not going to use whatever influence he has to have all the FBI agents we learned traded access for sports tickets and the like to be fired. Hell, he may not even use what power he has to have Comey charged for perjury. He's probably just going to let everyone get off free and clear.

Aunty Trump said...

An underlying crime is NOT required for Obstruction of Justice to have occurred

Wow, for two years you have been saying “No one knows what Mueller knows” and yammering on about Russia and now you instantly grasp at the straw that Trump is probably guilty of something for which Mueller had no evidence and which Mueller wasn’t even sure was a crime.

Don’t ever change Inga, you guys will find the crime that justice demands be found, I am sure. But the punchbowl is empty.

Drago said...

Hoax collusion/hoax dossier fangirl: "An underlying crime is NOT required for Obstruction of Justice to have occurred."

The morons have moved on to their next great hope.

They STILL refuse to admit no collusion.

I hope these lefties/LLR's keep it up, for all the obvious political reasons.

Matthew Sablan said...

"In the report, the Special Counsel noted that, in completing his investigation, he employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses."

-- That's... a lot of time and money spent.

Big Mike said...

Well, I'm not a lawyer (nor do I play one on TV), but under the presumption of innocence how can "does not conclude that the president committed a crime" not "exonerate him"?

n.n said...

sufficient evidence to establish that President Trump beat his wife...

To be fair, it’s impossible to prove that he doesn’t.


A persistent, physical assault would leave Her (e.g. "America") blue. Perhaps not all over, but in concentrated patches.

Jersey Fled said...

I think a SNL skit conflating top Dems and Baghdad Bob would be hilarious.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The entire Mueller investigation was a Russian spy crock and everyone in the government, except D's, are all Russian spies. Including Mueller himself. We must install Hillary now.

Matthew Sablan said...

"The report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public."

-- Hey, wait. Remember how we kept being told about the hundreds of thousands of sealed indictments? Were... were we lied to again by the media and Democrats that these were Trump-related?!

What a shock!

Big Mike said...

@Jim, why stop at two? Let 'em up off the mat in January 2025

Bay Area Guy said...

What.a.fucking.fiasco.

Shorter Mueller

1. There's no evidence of Russian collusion, so we are not indicting him.
2. We are also not charging Trump with obstruction of justice.
3. However, we are not exonerating him from obstructing the case of Russian collusion which we couldn't find.

After wiping the eggs off their faces, the Get Trump crowd must turn to Emoluments! as their next legal foray.

Narayanan Subramanian said...

If Grand Jury testimony is supposed to be secret how do details make their way into Mueller Report?

Asking broad question : Who is in charge of GJ records? Judicial branch or Executive?

Clyde said...

If there was no underlying crime, there was no "justice" to "obstruct."

I have to say that watching that sad faces of the talking heads on CNN and MSNBC was the most schadenfreude I've felt since Election Night 2016.

MayBee said...

I want every single 2020 candidate to be asked if they:

1- are willing to have the Trump administration get a FISA warrant on one of their campaign staffers
2- are willing to allow the Trump administration to listen in on their campaign calls
3- will commit to allowing a Special Prosecutor to investigate them without limit for 2 years immediately upon election

Come on. Make this happen, press. Ask them about what they will do if this happens to them. Get them on record.

Aunty Trump said...

The evidence in the report on obstruction by the president while in office will confirm he ought not be re-elected.

Before Scott Adams, Dale Carnegie used to write about persuasion. He said that to be persuaded, you have to appear persuadable. Well Kristol is certainly not that. People become deaf to people who rant on in the face of contrary evidence.

Matthew Sablan said...

Kevin said: "Nothing quotes the Mueller report directly."

Barr's Letter says: "As the report states: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”"

I'm not sure I agree 100 percent with your analysis there Kevin.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Sean Davis of the Federalist tweets,

“Hands up, don’t shoot. Trump’s a Russian spy. Kavanaugh ran a secret gang rape cartel. Covington kids assaulted a vet. Never forget that these lies — and yes, they were outright lies — were deliberately peddled by all the same people for all the same reasons.”


Inga - please NAME the obstruction.

Drago said...

Remember, no one has proven the dossier is fake!! Its just that it remains completely unverified, except the part that Russia is an actual country and Carter Page is an actual person.

By the way, since all 4 fake and illegal FISA warrants were focused on Carter Page and use the made up hoax dossier as the basis, how come Carter Page was NOT EVEN INTERVIEWED by the FBI?

Because they are all traitorous leftues and LLR's, that's why.

CWJ said...

"An underlying crime is NOT required for Obstruction of Justice to have occurred."

As I said at 4:38pm above. Oh BTW (commenter) are you now conceding that no criminal collusion (whatever that is) took place?

Phil 3:14 said...

The investigation is over; let the hearings begin.

n.n said...

After 9 trimesters, the warlock is dead, presumed fictitious. However, there may still be a baby lurking, and while "viable" in 48 states, his life is at risk in Virginia and New York. In fact, we already have knowledge of the latter's choice and what is planned.

CWJ said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jersey Fled said...

The dictionary definition of "butt hurt" includes a picture of Bill Kristol.

Narayanan Subramanian said...

Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
An underlying crime is NOT required for Obstruction of Justice to have occurred.

Spilling coffee on agent to delay proceedings is enough.

Aunty Trump said...

Glenn Greenwald is on fire!

steve uhr said...

Jim at ... I meant time for the dems to move on. I didn't for one second think that Trump and his supporters would move on.

Aunty Trump said...

Persuasive! Not persuaded. I have to remember to use preview with this new moderation format!

Browndog said...

Blogger Annie C said..."I may not have many supporters of this opinion here, but I need to say that I am finding the comment moderation has led to a very boring Althouse and a great loss to breaking news here."

I second the motion.


Third.

eddie willers said...

Trump was not exonerated on Obstruction of Justice

Uh, yes he was.


You misunderstand. Inga meant Obstruction of Social Justice.

Gunner said...

Is SNL going to do a sketch where DeNiros arrogant Robert Mueller poops his pants and admits defeat?

Michael K said...


Blogger Inga...Allie Oop said...
An underlying crime is NOT required for Obstruction of Justice to have occurred.


And here I thought Ann was the law professor. Will wonders never cease !

etbass said...

Agree with Annie. Moderation has slowed down the interaction on hot issues, for sure. Seems like a big penalty just to shut up the ones who obviously need to be shut up. Why not hang a few commenters, even if only for a period of time, and others will get the message?

narciso said...

into the company and bureau machinations that got us here, by all means,

rhhardin said...

"If there is no crime to obstruct, there can be no charge of obstruction."

-- That is technically not true; an innocent man bribing a juror is obstructing justice as much as a guilty one.


A juror who works for him as a juror wouldn't be on the jury.

M Jordan said...

Complete exoneration.

Bay Area Guy said...

The Russians must have hacked the Mueller Report!

Narayanan Subramanian said...

Wikipedia tells me:
If the indictment is not proven to the satisfaction of the grand jury, the word "ignoramus" [8] or "not a true bill" is written upon it by the grand jury, or by their foreman and then said to be ignored, and the accusation is dismissed as unfounded. (The potential defendant is said to have been "no-billed" by the grand jury.)

Hasn't Trump been
no-billed?

StephenFearby said...

It cannot be emphasized enough that the Mueller report is really a verdict on the veracity of the Steele Dossier.

A verdict contradicting the FBI submissions to the FISA Court that used the false information in the Steele Dossier to obtain multiple warrants on Carter Page.

(A still cogent matter that is the subject of Inspector General Michael Horowitz's forthcoming report on same.)

cronus titan said...

Short Democrat media complex position: THere has to be a pony underneath all this shit.

Browndog said...

From men dying in Benghazi, gun running for Mexican cartels, to Lois Lerner, to Bleachbit, to countless others too many to even remember..

At some point some democrat somewhere HAS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. By accountable I mean getting fired or indictments. None of this "I accept total responsibility" then off to another fundraiser.

Move on?

You may call it revenge. I call it justice. The old one. Not the new one that democrats created for themselves without our permission.

Matthew Sablan said...

"At some point some democrat somewhere HAS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE."

-- They admitted to taking hammers to subpoenaed devices. They're not going to ever be held accountable.

Aunty Trump said...

I didn't for one second think that Trump and his supporters would move on.

Why should we, we have the WaPo, New York Times, CNN, MSNBC, the whole kid and kaboodle dead to rights on pushing fake news, not to mention Clapper and Brennen.

You guys are still nattering on about a private conversation with Billy Bush ten years prior to the election when Trump was a private citizen. A conversation about how women like famous, rich, people, which everybody knows is the God’s honest truth.

Tommy Duncan said...

Judging from what I've seen on CNN and PMSNBC the new narrative will be "obstruction, obstruction". The evidence for obstruction will be the same as was used for "collusion": No evidence required.

FullMoon said...


Blogger (REDACTED)...Allie Oop said...

Trump was not exonerated on Obstruction of Justice. Barr and Mueller will be testifying in front of the House. This is the least Americans deserve, no whitewashes will be accepted.


Vladimir Putin agrees with his puppet. Dance,little puppet, dance !

Aunty Trump said...

I don’t think there is even enough bullshit left to hide a pony, but they will be making more soon.

Bob Boyd said...

So Trump doesn't weigh the same as a duck.

Aunty Trump said...

They admitted to taking hammers to subpoenaed devices. They're not going to ever be held accountable.

Once they found out that the messages were still on them failures started showing up in some incredibly convenient places. And Lois Lerner imagined that she would snag a job at the Clinton Foundation for her work helping the Democrats in the deep state.

narciso said...

some have been left to clean up the broken crockery:

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2019/03/19/a-minister-a-general-militias-libyas-shifting-balance-of-power/

the general asisi in this play,

walter said...

Can we get some comforting Bible verses from Comey?

M Jordan said...

Madam,

We have concluded our inquiry into whether or not your daughter is a witch. We have found she is, in fact, not a witch. The reason for this finding is that there is no evidence that she is a witch.

However, she could be a witch.

Sincerely
The Witch-Hunters

Drago said...

steve uhr: "Jim at ... I meant time for the dems to move on. I didn't for one second think that Trump and his supporters would move on."

What an absolutely perfect example of lefty dishonesty.

For 3 years everyday the lefties scream and scream all the republicans are treasonous traitors. Then, literally within 4 hours or so of that astonishing long-running all democrat-wide lie being completely debunked and exposed, Steve Uhr goes full Hey-lets not quibble any longer about who killed who...and lets all hust drop this and move on.

Have you even taken a moment to admit you were completely full of crap?

narciso said...

they stalled past the statute of limitations, that was the model for the Clinton emails,

Kevin said...

I'm not sure I agree 100 percent with your analysis there Kevin.

Not my analysis. Just taking notes from the talking heads.

Rajkumar Raosinhji said...

To Everyone:

DJT will not be re-elected. The next POTUS is going to be Warren with VP (Kamala H. or Gina, RI Gov).

From now to election day, the media will go for the blood - GOP's, Trump's, etc.

It is over. There is nothing you can do. DJT is finished.

Regards,
Raj

Rory said...

"......so how did this entire farce begin if there was ZERO evidence if collusion?"

I believe this is from Labor Day, 2016. Hillarylariously, it's preserved because she went into a coughing fit while trying to dispel the charge that she is subject to coughing fits. But what is she talking about?


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UhZJBHrX-T8

Aunty Trump said...

“What difference does it make at this point?"

Steven said...

It was already established by the Democrats, on February 12, 1999, that indisputable proof of obstruction of justice in the absence of an underlying criminal offense is not sufficient grounds for impeachment.

wholelottasplainin' said...

Matthew Sablan said...
"If there is no crime to obstruct, there can be no charge of obstruction."

-- That is technically not true; an innocent man bribing a juror is obstructing justice as much as a guilty one.
*********************************
An person who bribes a juror commits the crimes of bribery and jury tampering, straight up.

A person who bribes a judge or **prosecutor** commits obstruction of justice as well as the crime of bribery.

There's more than a nuance at work here. O of J occurs when a person attempts to thwart, influence, deceive or otherwise interfere with a public official or, e.g., a grand jury. (cf Bill Clinton) in the course of their authorized duties.

Here Mueller punted to Barr, who found as a matter of FACT thatTrump committed no crime wrt either "Russian collusion" or Mueller or his investigation, thus as a matter of LAW that there was no O of J.



Bay Area Guy said...

Is there any reason to listen to Adam Schiff, Eric Swallwell or Richard Blumenthal ever again?

These stooges are Russian Collusion Truthers!

Aunty Trump said...

If you get all of your news from MSNBC, you should seriously do a little soul searching.

narciso said...

from mccabes potted plant:


https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/republicans-and-democrats-brace-for-renewed-battles-over-mueller-report/2019/03/23/56d9f214-4db3-11e9-b79a-961983b7e0cd_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-high_leadall-845am-duplicate%3Ahomepage%2Fstory-ans

«Oldest ‹Older   1 – 200 of 333   Newer› Newest»