215

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/02/democrats-william-barr-1299590

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/03/politics/trump-putin-phone-call-mueller-report/index.html?cid=web-alerts&nsid=67843467

376/ This is *exactly* what Steele said about Page. This Report vindicates the *hell* out of Steele.

377/ My plan—not that you’ll necessarily find it interesting or need-to-know—I’m going to eat dinner, then finish the last 30 pages of Vol. I (the “conspiracy” volume). I’ll leave it to others to unpack obstruction of justice—which for various reasons interests me less right now.

380/ Moreover, whereas Mueller had a “forgiving” charge, in obstruction—i.e. you don’t have to successfully obstruct, merely intend to, so it’s easier to prove—he *hamstrung* himself by investigating conspiracy when he should have been looking for bribery and aiding and abetting

365/ We now know that not only did Mueller seize Prince’s computers/phones, he interviewed him. And that interview must have revealed that Prince lied to Congress—repeatedly. And Mueller did not indict him. This—with Simes—is the greatest mystery of the Report thus far. By *far*.

366/ Wow… Mueller reveals that *Prince and Bannon told him diametrically opposed stories*, meaning either Prince was committing a crime in lying to law enforcement or Trump’s campaign CEO was. How is this not *front-page news* across America right now? These are *known crimes*.

381/ If Mueller investigates bribery and aiding and abetting, not conspiracy—and if the witnesses in that case preserve evidence and don’t lie to the feds—it’s clear the story they would’ve told would have been a “prima facie” case of impeachable bribery and aiding and abetting

This is a point also made by James Clapper-that this is a clear case of aiding and abetting

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/james-clapper-trump-campaign-was-essentially-aiding-and-abetting-the-russians

382/ So now you ask, “Why did the witnesses in the obstruction case preserve evidence and tell the truth?” The answer: they were either (a) law enforcement witnesses, *or* (b) people who knew that, even if he were caught obstructing, the Senate would *never* impeach Trump for it.

383/ By comparison, everyone *knew* that the Senate would *have* to impeach Trump for any *collusive* crime—conspiracy, bribery, money laundering, aiding and abetting, you name it—so *those* witnesses, who were the very *worst* characters in all this, lied and destroyed evidence.

384/ But here’s the rub: they didn’t get away with it. They didn’t get away with it because the Senate *must* impeach Trump if there’s substantial enough evidence Trump is compromised to create a *national security threat*. And we *do* have that evidence. In spades. From Mueller.

385/ So this is where I reveal that I don’t give a damn about Vol. 2 of the Mueller Report. Why? It’s a red herring. *Everyone knows* Trump obstructed justice. We knew it *a year ago*. And *everyone knows the Senate will ignore any and all evidence of obstruction*. We *all* know.

386/ So now you tell me why, during dinner, I turned on CNN and I didn’t hear Vol. 1 (conspiracy) discussed *one time*. *Everything* was about Vol. 2 (obstruction). Even though it’s Vol. 1 that *doesn’t require proof beyond a reasonable doubt*, for national security reasons. See?

387/ Vol. 1 *is* the ballgame. It establishes that Trump’s crew told so many lies and destroyed so much evidence and has so many ties to Russia they refuse to explain that Trump’s foreign policy is compromised *at the level of proof required for a national security impeachment*.

388/ And *still* media won’t discuss Vol. 1 in detail. And here we come to the hard truth: it was uber-nerdy folks like me who spent two years *learning* all the ins and outs of the collusion question so that we could bring the hard news to people. The media *never* did the work.

Here here for the uber-nerds!

448/ The evidence explaining why Sessions wasn’t charged is weak—many, *many* attorneys (including many prosecutors) would argue the other way on the basis of Sessions lying in *successive Congressional testimonies he prepared extensively for*—not just one time. Mueller demurred.

Some very prescient MSM criticism:

389/ Sure, there was *great* investigative reporting from the NYT or Post on individual topics—but *anyone* who tried to draw the whole picture together got drawn and quartered as a conspiracy theorist. Even as everything we wrote about—often in books—has now been proven correct.

390/ So the case that Trump is a national security threat has been made—amply—at the level needed for impeachment. But Barr has managed to keep even more evidence from us; and the media doesn’t know how to discuss it; and America hasn’t been *prepared* for this topic. Not at all.

391/ So instead we’ll spend today, tomorrow, and the next day discussing an *obstruction* case we all knew existed a year ago—and you or I would (I *promise* you, as I know from trial practice) already be in jail for—even as media coverage of Vol. 1 (conspiracy) is *weak sauce*.

392/ And here I am—making an ass of myself with a 400-TWEET THREAD so that someone will NOTICE and wake up and realize that the standard for impeachment on the only thing that was ever going to lead to impeachment has been met. And it’s *not* obstruction—it’s a compromised POTUS.

Believe me Seth we are so grateful that you are doing it. Sort of like I’m writing a 2000 page book!

393/ Now you understand why I wrote PROOF OF COLLUSION—and will publish PROOF OF CONSPIRACY in August. Now you see why I barely focused on obstruction in my books and much of my tweeting—this was *always* a national security case underwritten by *bribery and aiding and abetting*.

394/ There’s a reason the counterintelligence cases against Trump are ongoing. There’s a reason Barr wouldn’t let us see so much of what we need to see because of “GRAND JURY” or “INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUE” redaction—*he* knows that that’s the danger to Trump here, not obstruction.

395/ Every time Trump lied; every time his family or aides covered for him by lying about what he knew; every time he created—willfully—a pressure point for Russia to press upon; every secret meeting his team set up and tried to hide; *all* of this provided Putin with blackmail.

396/ What I establish in PROOF OF CONSPIRACY is that it isn’t *some* of Trump’s foreign policy that’s compromised by his lies and secret deals—it’s *all* of it. His Israel policy. His Middle East policy. His Russia policy. Even his policy toward NATO and the EU. It’s compromised.

If anyone in the Democratic Congress will figure this out it will be Adam Schiff.

 

411/ Mueller says McFarland was with Trump when Flynn asked for guidance—not from McFarland, his deputy—on dealing with Kislyak. Mueller says he couldn’t establish Trump provided guidance—maybe because the witnesses (Flynn, McFarland, etc.) have *lied* to him. He’s admitted that.

412/ This is the key point: on conspiracy, *all* the witnesses are liars. And they were often rewarded for it. McFarland, for instance, got rewarded for lying by being (ultimately unsuccessfully) nominated to be ambassador to Singapore. She has lied *repeatedly*. No consequences.

 

 

418/ K.T. McFarland admits to asking *everyone* who was at Mar-a-Lago for advice on a *huge* issue for the campaign—what to do about Obama’s new sanctions on Russia. Mystically, magically, improbably, most likely perjuriously…she says she never asked the man actually in charge.

 

428/ Wow—I’m going to *love* hearing prosecutors defend the Special Counsel’s finding that you can basically “smoke if you got ’em” when it comes to receiving and distributing stolen electronic materials because, hey, what federal statute could *possibly* apply there? I mean wow.

 

332/ You can believe the Trump-Russia timeline includes more than a thousand “coincidences” regarding Trump and Russia or you can be an adult.347/ I’ll say this many times in the coming months, I’m sure: the Trump-Russia story *is* the Trump-Saudi, Trump-Emirati, Trump-Israeli, and Trump-Egyptian stories. It’s *one story* of collusion—and, yes, conspiracy. But the Mueller Report appears to tackle it only *glancingly*.

349/ This is… bigger than Mueller may realize. That Putin’s employee asked Nader to act on his behalf *during the election*… this is going to matter. A lot.

373/ A member of Putin’s inner circle used *the guy who helped write Trump’s foreign policy* as his cutout to get to Trump. That’s how… *ridiculous*… this all is. *All* this poses a national security threat. *All* this is impeachable. The Kremlin wrote Trump’s foreign policy.

374/ That’s right—it’s going to come down to the Mayflower Hotel, as I first wrote more than two years ago. Simes, Burt, Kushner, Manafort, Kislyak, Sessions, and the Center for the National Interest. The names keep coming back again and again—particularly Simes—like a bad penny

 

Put this in MSM chapter:

 

 

361/ I’m speechless… Prince was *directly conveying messages from the transition to a Kremlin agent* on foreign policy—Libya—while Trump *wasn’t in office*. So much illegality on the part of so many people here. And Prince lied about *every* *single* *piece of it*.

Indict him.

 

334/ Whoa… Manafort lied to the feds about whether he discussed *election targeting* with the Kremlin. Apparently he did.

There is *zero* fuzz on the question of why he lied. This goes directly to collusion broadly writ.

 

Ken Starr lawyer to prove Dems have no case?

293/ It sometimes seems like this Report was created piecemeal by people who weren’t talking to one another about their research. It’s blindingly obvious that Simes was helping run Trump’s Russia policy, and trying to put Sessions and Kushner with the Russians whenever possible.

298/ Simes will end up before Congress—mark my word. He’s emerged as one of the “stars” of the Mueller Report.

299/ So far I’ve identified Mueller’s gravest error: he didn’t realize Simes was a Kremlin agent. Read the Simes pages—pp. 100-110—with that in mind, and your head’ll pop off. And feel free to check me on Simes’ background—you’ll find exactly what my many hours of research found.

308/ So all three Trump kids knew the campaign was getting Clinton dirt; Trump’s campaign manager knew; his communications director knew; his son-in-law knew; his lawyer says *Trump* knew…

…but the report concludes there’s *insufficient evidence* that Trump himself was told.

309/ Mind you, all this despite the fact that, *on the day Don Jr. told everyone*, his father went out and made a public statement saying he’d {*checks notes*} shortly be giving a “very interesting” speech on Clinton dirt. Yep, this all checks out. Nothing to see here, America.

310/ So the idea is that Donald J. Trump went out and gave a public statement saying he’d shortly be giving a huge and interesting speech on Clinton dirt but no one anywhere ever told him he would be receiving any such information from any source and he was just riffing—*got it*.

311/ Oh, and Don Jr. refused to be interviewed by the SCO about the meeting—which would have included the opportunity for him to commit a crime by lying about whether he told his dad about the meeting beforehand (as Cohen alleged *under oath* happened).

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/29/mueller-report-jared-kushner-dmitri-simes-russia-1291392

When HuffPost asked moderate Democrat Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.) about impeachment on Thursday, he said the things his constituents were worried about were tax policy, the environment and infrastructure.

That isn’t necessarily a universal experience for Democrats. House Budget Committee Chairman John Yarmuth (D-Ky.) told reporters Thursday that impeachment was absolutely at the forefront of his constituents’ minds.

“In my district, I haven’t had anybody talk to me about pocketbook issues,” he said. “The only thing I get is people saying, ‘We got to get rid of him.’”

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/william-barrs-theory-would-create-a-tyrannical-presidency

 

 

286/ The section on Simes—CNI chief and a Putin “friend”—is very problematic, too. Mueller says he “did not identify evidence” that Kushner or Sessions—who had contact with Simes—passed info to the Kremlin. But they discussed Russia. And Simes is Putin’s friend. See the problem?

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/05/02/white-house-lawyer-mueller-report-1299251

 

 

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/pee-tape-trump-mueller-report-823755/

242/ I’m going to continue on, but a lot of people who caused me a great deal of pain are invisibly getting the finger from me now. I’m sorry I had the full story more than you did—and published it in a book—and you “found implausible” what I *thoroughly* researched. I was right.

By all means take your victory lap Seth

260/ Ah yes—good old George. Mueller says he told *both the Australian and Greek governments* about the Kremlin having Clinton emails but *not the Trump campaign*. And yet, what’s this? He—er—vaguely recalls *maybe* telling Clovis. And Mashburn says he told him. Jesus, Mueller…

And Jason Wilson….

 

233/ The time between Kremlin agent Mifsud’s operation (LCILP) hiring Papadopoulos and Clovis gobbling him up and telling him “Russia” would be his primary job? Like *two weeks*. Just one of a million-plus coincidences in the Russia case, or something more—well—obvious than that?

234/ Mueller credulously implies that—though Trump’s campaign negged Papadopoulos previously—his job with the obscure LCILP and fact that Trump was being criticized for not having a foreign policy team explains Israel expert Papadopoulos being hired to deal with… Russia issues?

235/ And within *days* of Papadopoulos (who worked for Kremlin agent Mifsud’s outfit, LCILP) being hired by Clovis to deal with “Russia,” who pops up and says, “Oh, good! Now I have a contact with the Trump campaign on Russia!” Joseph Mifsud. It’s like a terrible, terrible play.

237/ God… Mueller established connections between Mifsud and the IRA *and* the GRU.

238/ It’s amazing to read Papadopoulos’ painfully yearning emails to the campaign as soon as makes contact with a Kremlin agent—*begging* to be taken seriously and *seen*—but somehow we’re supposed to feel that when Mifsud gave Papadopoulos the best intel *ever* he kept it quiet.

241/ I’m sorry, but this footnote about video kompromat collected during Trump’s November 2013 trip to Moscow vindicates this feed. I can’t tell you how much grief I took about simply re-reporting what the BBC, Guardian, Telegraph (UK) and others had said on the issue. Wow—*wow*.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/pee-tape-trump-mueller-report-823755/

What about the fact that Mifsud was what lead to Papadopoulos meeting his wife?

237/ God… Mueller established connections between Mifsud and the IRA *and* the GRU.

238/ It’s amazing to read Papadopoulos’ painfully yearning emails to the campaign as soon as makes contact with a Kremlin agent—*begging* to be taken s

eriously and *seen*—but somehow we’re supposed to feel that when Mifsud gave Papadopoulos the best intel *ever* he kept it quiet.

Mueller’s willingness to believe that the Coffee Boy didn’t tell anyone in the campaign is simply mystifying,

248/ Note Mueller’s words: “the Trump campaign had received”—not, as Papadopoulos would’ve said if he kept the info secret, “I received.” Mueller thinks Trump’s camp knew of “stolen Clinton emails” in May ’16. He can’t prove it beyond a reasonable doubt because Papadopoulos lied.

261/ This is why I emphasized how—early in the report—Mueller said (in effect) “here are the obstacles I faced” in collecting evidence. One of them was *Trump’s people lying*. There’s *every indication* Clovis and others—and Papadopoulos—successfully lied *many* times to Mueller.

230/ Per Mueller, it took Papadopoulos *under a week* to tell a foreign government what a Kremlin agent (Mifsud) had told him about having Clinton’s stolen emails. And we’re supposed to believe he never told the campaign? When they began seeking her emails immediately after? No.

231/ Mueller left out top Trump adviser John Mashburn’s claim (to Congress) that George Papadopoulos told the campaign what Mifsud told him about the Kremlin having stolen Clinton emails. One of the very first questions Congress will ask Mueller is why he did this. I promise you.

I can’t wait. The followup to that question should be if the name Jason Wilson means anything to Mueller.

266/ I want to caution us all—again—about *scope*. For instance, in speaking of Page around pg. 100, Mueller says he couldn’t establish (beyond a reasonable doubt) that Page “coordinated with Russian election interference”—a very high bar that has a lot of criminality beneath it.

267/ Page was never in a *position* to “coordinate” with Russian hacking or propaganda—which is why no one (even Steele) ever accused him of it. The question with Page was whether he ferried information between Team Trump and Russia as part of a criminal scheme and lied about it.

268/ I mean, Page actually told the SCO he was *working on America’s behalf* in passing private information on the U.S. energy sector to Russian spies. That’s how crazy it is—when you add that to him lying about meeting Kremlin officials in July 2016—to see his actions as benign.

As Ari Melber has publicly claimed. Melber has gone so far as to call Page innocent. It’s shocking that a lawyer with his pedigree could make this mistake-that because something isn’t established beyond a reasonable doubt means nothing happened.

Good question:

209/ Mueller’s a great investigator and a great attorney. But *many* Americans are going to draw different conclusions about Trump’s conduct than Mueller did, because Americans are like juries (literally, as juries are just citizens)—they don’t always see things like prosecutors.

210/ The reason is, Mueller had to see everything in the lens of “beyond a reasonable doubt” evidence—while Americans deciding if Trump’s foreign policy is terminally compromised are more likely to use a “preponderance of the evidence” (50.1%) standard. Which is more appropriate.

211/ And indeed, counterintelligence *doesn’t* use the “beyond a reasonable doubt standard”—but is more likely to use levels of “confidence” for which 50.1% proof of someone being compromised would be considered a *grave* national security risk. Which is what Donald Trump is now.

224/ (NOTE): Russian Deputy Prime Minister Prikhodko—in touch with Trump’s assistant about Trump coming to Russia for an in-campaign business trip—is the VERY SAME MAN who Nastya Rybka had on tape consorting with Oleg Deripaska in a way suggesting involvement in an election plot.

225/ Nastya Rybka’s stock just rose *significantly*. This also explains why Deripaska had her arrested and dragged away screaming by the cops at the airport in Moscow just as she was about to talk to reporters about the secret Deripaska-Prikhodko tapes she had. (Yep, look it up.)

191/ I’m… a bit thrown here. Trump began discussing Trump Tower Moscow with the Agalarovs *way* before the 2013 Miss Universe pageant. They announced the deal *at* the pageant. I don’t know why Mueller says they began discussing it after the pageant. That’s… *wildly* wrong.

192/ It’s bizarre—Mueller relies wholly, it seems, on Don Jr.’s testimony, which portrays his father as being uninvolved in the project. In fact, it was *Trump* who was the chief negotiator at the pageant, and *Trump* who struck a letter-of-intent deal with Aras Agalarov himself.

 

193/ Trump and Agalarov even announced funding for the deal (via Sberbank) just 10 days following the November pageant—after Trump met with Sberbank in Moscow with Agalarov. So why does Mueller say that Jr. and Emin (?) were the chief negotiators, and it all happened in December?

194/ Let me tell you why this matters: there is evidence that Trump spent the pageant *talking politics* with the Russians—including Russia policy—while he was setting up this business deal, which would establish his Russia policy was corrupt from the jump (of legal importance).

195/ Moreover, if Trump was receiving money from a Kremlin-owned bank while not only talking politics with Kremlin agents but at a time he’d already decided to run for POTUS, we’ve got the beginning of an illegal quid pro quo. Don Jr.’s false testimony elided *all* these facts.

180/ Here’s the first spot where Mueller’s *definitely* wrong. We know the *name of the hotel and the date* Smith met with Russian hackers—in fact, more than one hacking group in separate meetings. Major media reporting. Mueller says he “did not establish” such meetings occurred.

 

193/ Trump and Agalarov even announced funding for the deal (via Sberbank) just 10 days following the November pageant—after Trump met with Sberbank in Moscow with Agalarov. So why does Mueller say that Jr. and Emin (?) were the chief negotiators, and it all happened in December?

194/ Let me tell you why this matters: there is evidence that Trump spent the pageant *talking politics* with the Russians—including Russia policy—while he was setting up this business deal, which would establish his Russia policy was corrupt from the jump (of legal importance).

195/ Moreover, if Trump was receiving money from a Kremlin-owned bank while not only talking politics with Kremlin agents but at a time he’d already decided to run for POTUS, we’ve got the beginning of an illegal quid pro quo. Don Jr.’s false testimony elided *all* these facts.

 

193/ Trump and Agalarov even announced funding for the deal (via Sberbank) just 10 days following the November pageant—after Trump met with Sberbank in Moscow with Agalarov. So why does Mueller say that Jr. and Emin (?) were the chief negotiators, and it all happened in December?

194/ Let me tell you why this matters: there is evidence that Trump spent the pageant *talking politics* with the Russians—including Russia policy—while he was setting up this business deal, which would establish his Russia policy was corrupt from the jump (of legal importance).

195/ Moreover, if Trump was receiving money from a Kremlin-owned bank while not only talking politics with Kremlin agents but at a time he’d already decided to run for POTUS, we’ve got the beginning of an illegal quid pro quo. Don Jr.’s false testimony elided *all* these facts.

 

 

https://threader.app/thread/1118631217212067841

175/ Smith can’t be charged with attempting to procure stolen property because he’s dead. But it’s unclear from the Report if at any point Flynn’s involvement in the escapade acted in assistance of Smith—and again, there’s *never* been an allegation he initiated or directed him.

176/ Mueller reveals Erik Prince PAID MONEY to assist Smith’s efforts—and we have some indication from other reporting that Flynn’s network may have helped Smith secure FUNDING for his effort to solicit illegal in-kind campaign donations from the Russians. Why isn’t that a crime?

182/ What we do now know is that *Trump* tasked *Flynn* with getting Clinton’s emails from Russian hackers—a crime—and that Flynn was subsequently in substantial contact (or already had been) with Smith, a fact I discuss briefly in my first book and *much* more in my second one.

183/ I find it odd Mueller uses “displayed interest” as a euphemistic phrase to describe the Trump campaign’s relation to stolen materials it couldn’t legally receive because doing so would be a crime on two fronts. They did *far* more than “display interest”—as the Report shows.

 

 

 

 

Kline’s testimony

 

https://twitter.com/B52Malmet/status/1123969275285340160

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/barr-puts-trumps-actions-in-best-light-despite-substantial-evidence-of-obstruction-cited-by-mueller/2019/05/01/dacb0046-6c2a-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.d1ee04b30efc

 

Sargent:

The idea that there was no legitimate basis for the probe is a backdoor way of saying that the Russian assault on our political system, irrespective of any criminal conspiracy with it, was not worth investigating (and by extension, that tacit Trumpworld collusion with it is also no biggie).

Indeed, Barr has basically copped to all those things. At the hearing, Barr validated the idea that Clinton may have been the real colluder, cast doubt on the investigation’s genesis, and even declined to say that the Trump campaign’s embrace of Russian help mattered.

Many Republicans are all in with this narrative, which you saw when GOP Senators used the hearing to steer the subject back to Clinton as the real colluder and the deep state plotagainst Trump.

What’s stunning about all this is that Barr does not appear to be a conspiracy theorist. He’s playing footsie with this alt-narrative for cynical instrumental purposes, and these other Republicans probably are as well.”

 

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/hillary-clinton-i-m-living-rent-free-inside-donald-trump-n1001026

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We told you William Barr forced to Robert Mueller to prematurely shut down his investigation

https://twitter.com/NoyzeSmythe/status/1123442213357346816

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/05/democrats-bill-barr-impeachment

 

https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/1123652334171623425

https://twitter.com/neeratanden/status/1123710561966022658

 

 

Mueller Report Illustrates Trump’s Authoritarian Rhetorical Tactics

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/with-mueller-silent-barr-interprets-the-special-counsels-report–to-the-advantage-of-trump/2019/05/01/54b5f3e0-6c3d-11e9-a66d-a82d3f3d96d5_story.html?utm_term=.08542f2c181a

Jamil Smith correctly diagnoses the Dems-more concerned about elections than justice. 

All they want to talk about is moving into the WH in 2020 ignoring the fact that it may be a condemned building by then.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/kamala-harris-william-barr-confrontation-829841/

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/opinion/barr-mueller-report.html

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/01/barrs-conclusions-are-undercut-by-his-lack-familiarity-with-details-muellers-probe/?utm_term=.f8d82d354ffc

 

https://twitter.com/Susan_Hennessey/status/1123653065247207425

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/01/william-barr-his-horrible-hearing/?utm_term=.6bbee9836676

 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/01/opinion/william-barr-testimony.html

 

https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/1123618653986013185

https://www.thedailybeast.com/robert-muellers-willing-to-testify-but-trump-department-of-justice-is-holding-it-up-dems

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/us/politics/mueller-barr.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

In congressional testimony in April before the report was released, Mr. Barr demurred when asked whether he believed that the investigation was a “witch hunt” — Mr. Trump’s preferred term. It “depends on where you’re sitting,” Mr. Barr replied

Over the past month, other signs of friction between the attorney general and the special counsel have emerged over issues like legal theories about constitutional protections afforded to presidents to do their job and how Mr. Mueller’s team conducted the investigation.”

“If you are somebody who’s being falsely accused of something, you would tend to view the investigation as a witch hunt,” he said, an apparent reference to the president.

Mr. Barr’s testimony stood in contrast to comments he made during his confirmation hearing in January. “I don’t believe Mr. Mueller would be involved in a witch hunt,” he said then.

Mr. Mueller’s report, the attorney general and the other senior law enforcement officials believed, read like it had been written for consumption by Congress and the public, not like a confidential report to Mr. Barr, as required under the regulations governing the special counsel.

Ie, they worried it would be damaging to ‘the President’ and couched this worry in legalese.

In one instance, Mr. Barr took Mr. Mueller’s words out of context to suggest that the president had no motive to obstruct justice. In another instance, he plucked a fragment from a sentence in the Mueller report that made a conclusion seem less damaging for Mr. Trump.

Investigators wrote, “Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

Mr. Barr’s letter quoted only the passage that the investigation had found no conspiracy or coordination.

It is not clear whether members of Mr. Mueller’s team were angered by these points in particular, or whether Mr. Mueller’s letter cited them.

Mr. Barr also said during the news conference that some of Mr. Trump’s efforts to thwart the investigation needed to be put in “context.”

“There is substantial evidence to show that the president was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks,” he said.

Ok so we didn’t realize ‘President Trump’ was angry. Since he was mad he had every right to obstruct Justice. That’s in the statute-you don’t have to obey the law if you’re frustrated. When I’m frustrated the meter maid doesn’t ticket me for parking in front of a no parking sign.

 

 

 

 

 

https://threader.app/thread/1118631217212067841

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/us/politics/mueller-barr.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2019/04/30/mueller-told-the-attorney-general-that-the-depiction-of-his-findings-failed-to-capture-context-nature-and-substance-of-probe/?utm_term=.aef51012d001

One major question the Dems need to ask Mueller is why wasn’t Credico charged?

 

From a counterintelligence viewpoint, the Mueller report portrays a Trump campaign that was guilty as hell of colluding with the Kremlin to damage Hillary Clinton and the Democrats in 2016, to the benefit of Donald Trump (and, let’s not forget, Vladimir Putin). While that may not meet prosecutorial threshold—the Espionage Act being devilishly difficult to apply in practice—it meets any intelligence standard of colluding with the enemy

 

“One of the individuals accompanying the Russian lawyer was Rinat Akhmetshin, reportedly a former Soviet intelligence officer who “apparently has ties to Russian intelligence,” and “allegedly specializes in ‘active measures campaigns’” such as subversive political operations involving disinformation and propaganda. (See Sen. Charles E. Grassley letter to Sec. John Kelley, Apr. 4, 2017.) In testimony before the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher “acknowledged that [Veselnitskaya and Akhmetshin] were probably spies,” based on his own interactions with them.”

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/29/mueller-report-jared-kushner-dmitri-simes-russia-1291392

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Are the Dems still fighting the battle on Trump’s terms?

 

 

Sargent is on the same page

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/26/fresh-questions-about-trumps-corruption-emerge-his-lawless-threats-escalate/?utm_term=.a2c4e106a077

 

Impeachment may be inevitable-IF the Dems want all the evidence catch 22-they say they need all the evidence to consider impeachment but to get all the evidence they may need to open impeachment inquiry

 

 

Should he be asked if he was pressured to shutdown shop early-by Bill Barr

Arguably Mueller was unduly cautious 

 

Trump transition official-Bannon’s missing emails; Don Jr/Kushner not put under oath

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/stymied-by-aides-trump-sought-out-loyalist-to-curtail-special-counsel–and-drew-muellers-glare/2019/04/25/d58c79de-66ad-11e9-8985-4cf30147bdca_story.html?utm_term=.cf6b2a05648a

 

Mr. Barr had the analysis backward in his summary letter. The failure to prove an underlying crime does not mean there was no obstruction. The obstruction meant that it became impossible to know whether there was a conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt — and it impeded the Russian investigation. Mr. Barr then used that doubt to question whether there was the corrupt intent required by obstruction statutes. To the contrary, the preponderance of conspiracy evidence confirms the corrupt intent.”

Despite being heavily redacted, the report seems to add context to Roger Stone’s indictment, implicitly suggesting that Mr. Trump may have directed officials to contact Roger Stone about WikiLeaks, and may have been in contact with Mr. Stone about WikiLeaks. It may not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they knew WikiLeaks was an extension of Russian hacking and a Russian campaign, but it is more likely than not a kind of indirect coordination with a foreign government prohibited by law. And Donald Trump Jr.’s continuing contacts with WikiLeaks in September and October 2016, long after the Trump Tower meeting and the July events made its connection to a Russian campaign clear, also were likely a coordination, even if not knowingly proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Regarding the Trump campaign’s knowledge that Wikileaks was an extension of Russian hacking note Roger Stone’s many comments at the end of July and the start of August, 2016 that Wikileaks quite possibly was working with the Russians.

Did Mueller factor that in his decision?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/25/opinion/mueller-trump-campaign-russia-conpiracy-.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Because the FBI was-probably even more today is-Trumpland. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2018/06/18/there-may-have-been-an-fbi-conspiracy-involving-the-2016-election-but-not-the-one-you-think/?utm_term=.9da6769cbada

 

The Democrats need to here from Christopher Steele

 

https://twitter.com/Susan_Hennessey/status/1121415946663546881

 

Great companion read by Wittes

If the active measures section of the report is exonerating of Trump and his campaign, the section that follows it—the Russian hacking section—is not. It is much worse than is commonly understood for Trump. Just how damning it is has gone somewhat unnoticed for, I think, four reasons.

https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/1121394666610593799?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Some thoughts on Biden’s announcement

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/22/opinion/trump-republican-party.html

 

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/trump-and-massive-resistance

 

Over 7000 pages! Even longer than this book!

 

But What About Your Emails? is longer than the-redacted-Mueller Report but not the ‘Statements of Information’ of the Watergate Impeachment Committee

 

What the MR doesn’t say about Felix Sater and TrumpTowerMoscow

What the Mueller Report Didn’t Say About Felix Sater and the Trump Tower in Moscow

 

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/04/donald-trump-robert-mueller-report-collusion

 

 

 

https://twitter.com/SueinRockville/status/1120692945034842112

 

 

 

I thought ignorance of the law was no excuse?

If I park in a no parking spot is the fact that I didn’t seen the sign a defense-that will work before a judge?

 

 

https://www.themoneyillusion.com/

 

 

 

 

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/white-house/mueller-report-contains-claim-russia-taped-bill-clinton-having-phone-sex-with-monica-lewinsky?utm_source=breaking_push&utm_medium=app&utm_campaign=push_notifications

 

Mueller also apparently was bullied out of investigating ‘the President’s’ finances

“But the committee cannot rely solely on the narrow scope of Mueller’s investigation to develop a full picture of the counterintelligence risk. At the beginning of the investigation, the president sought to draw a “red line” around his finances. It appears this red line held, as Mueller’s report did not address the president’s finances.”

 

 

Just like Dowd boasts of intimidating Mueller

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/04/22/what-media-got-right-wrong-about-mueller-report/?utm_term=.72215d135188

 

 

 

https://www.npr.org/2017/12/04/568310790/2016-rnc-delegate-trump-directed-change-to-party-platform-on-ukraine-support

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/inside-the-special-counsels-long-hunt-to-uncover-whether-the-trump-campaign-conspired-with-russia/2019/04/21/57e67ac4-563c-11e9-814f-e2f46684196e_story.html?utm_term=.ea33b80c14e5

 

Questions for Mueller:

 

 

 

 

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/19/mueller-mysteries-1283775

So why wasn’t Corsi charged for perjury?

“Asked if he’d had anything to do with WikiLeaks during the campaign, Corsi issued a blanket denial. He claimed that he had told Stone during the campaign that trying to contact Assange was a bad idea that could subject them both to investigation, according to a draft court filing.”

“That wasn’t accurate.”

By then, prosecutors had obtained emails showing that Corsi was in constant conversation with his friends and contacts, including Stone, throughout the final months of the campaign, speculating about Assange’s next moves, according to Gray.”

But prosecutors used his initial assertion that he declined Stone’s request to seek information from WikiLeaks as a cudgel, saying he could be charged with a crime for lying, Corsi described in a book he wrote about the experience called “Silent No More” that was published in December.

Corsi, he noted, had sold thousands of books and built a fan base by cherry-picking facts to craft a desired narrative. For Corsi, this wasn’t lying, but salesmanship, picking “truthful facts woven in a way that you don’t have to worry about the things that are inconsistent,” Gray said.

The deeply fact-based prosecutors struggled to make sense of the conspiracy theorist and his evolving testimony.

“It’s their biggest nightmare,” Gray said. “The supposed best of the best were just frankly dumbfounded by the whole situation.”

But not to put too fine a point on it why were they dumbfounded? Isn’t it pretty obvious what was going on? Corsi lied to them. He was a perjurer. So why did they let him walk-if they have that is. There are 12 spnioff Grand Juries as we speak.

It is not clear why Mueller’s team did not file the false-statement charges they threatened against Corsi. Much of the report dealing with their interactions with him has also been redacted by the attorney general, citing possible harm to an ongoing investigation. The report does not specify whether the redactions are related to Stone’s case or other continuing matters.

Corsi said last week that the experience showed the probe was a “fraud from the start.” He said only a “criminal” would urge him to plead guilty to charges that could not be proved in court.

Gray said he believes it would be inappropriate to charge Corsi because he has a faulty memory and noted that prosecutors gave him extensive opportunities to amend their answers.

“They pushed and pushed,” he said. “But at the end of the day, they threw up their hands and said, ‘We can’t use any of this.’ ”

Faulty memory. If this were a poor young Black man rather an a rich old GOPer White man they’d call it something else.

On the other hand-maybe the answer is in those redactions referring to an ongoing investigation. So maybe Coris hasn’t been charged yet. Or maybe he’s still going to used in Stone’s trial.

As for Stone’s gloating remember the perjury may be why a crime wasn’t found.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/18/five-questions-that-still-need-be-answered-mueller-report/?utm_term=.dff6549bfdb8

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/04/20/what-we-need-hear-mueller/?utm_term=.0643cab887ea

 

 

Indeed, remember all the huffing and puffing over the slightest appearance of ‘self dealing’ with the Clinton Foundation?

 

Loose ends: Carter Page, Papadpoulos, Roger Stone-Jerome Corsi, Peter Smith.

Peter Smith:

How is this search by Peter Smith and Michael Flynn not a crime?

 

Papadopoulos:

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/15/us/politics/john-mashburn-trump-russia-email-papadopoulos.html

 

Manafort  in on Wikileaks dissemination”

Regarding Carter Page-who some like Ari Melber are calling ‘cleared’:

In interviews with the FBI before the Office’s opening, Page acknowledged that he understood that the individuals he had associated with were members of the Russian intelligence services, but he stated that he had only provided immaterial non-public information to them and that he did not view this relationship as a backchannel. 537 Page told investigating agents that “the more immaterial non-public information I give them, the better for this country.”538

Pg. 97.

“On July 7, 2016, Page delivered the first of his two speeches in Moscow at NES. 566 In the speech, Page criticized the U.S. government’s foreign policy toward Russia, stating that “Washington and other Western capitals have impeded potential progress through their often hypocritical focus on ideas such as democratization , inequality, corruption and regime change.” 567 On July 8, 2016, Page delivered a speech during the NES commencement. 568 After Page delivered his commencement address, Russian Deputy Prime Minister and NES board member Arkady Dvorkovich spoke at the ceremony and stated that the sanctions the United States had imposed on Russia had hurt the NES. 569 Page and Dvorkovich shook hands at the commencement ceremony, and Weber recalled that Dvorkovich made statements to Pa e about workin to ether in the future. 570

Pg. 108.

Page said that, during his time in Moscow, he met with friends and associates he knew from when he lived in Russia, including Andrey Baranov, a former Gazprom employee who had become the head of investor relations at Rosneft, a Russian energy company. 572 Page stated that he and Baranov talked about “immaterial non-public ” information. 573 Page believed he and Baranov discussed Rosneft president Igor Sechin, and he thought Baranov might have mentioned

the possibility of a sale of a stake in Rosneft in passing. 574 Page recalled mentioning his involvement in the Trump Campaign with Baranov, although he did not remember details of the conversation. 575 Page also met with individuals from Tatneft, a Russian energy company, to discuss possible business deals, including having Page work as a consultant.

Pg 108-109

The fact that there remains at least one ongoing Grand Jury that Page’s story is relevant to makes Melber’s ‘acquittal’ premature at best.

The Office was unable to obtain additional evidence or testimony about who Page may have met or communicated with in Moscow; thus, Page’s activities in Russia-as described in his emails with the Campaign-were not fully explained.”

With all due respect to Ari Melber ‘not fully explained’ is far from ‘Carter Page has been fully cleared’ a distinction perhaps too subtle for the allegedly elite and high powered lawyer.

There are at least three different Grand Juries pertaining to Carter Page which makes the notion that he’s ‘fully cleared’ even more of a non sequitur.

UPDATE: It’s even worse than this as it turns out Melber also says Don Jr was cleared-he really wasn’t. I mean what Mueller said here is pretty hard to understand. Somehow he gets a pass as he didn’t know you don’ t take oppo research from a hostile foreign power. Join the club-Giuliani also says it’s perfectly fine.

Pg. 110:

In July 2016, after returning from Russia, Page traveled to the Republican National Convention in Cleveland. 583 While there, Page met Russian Ambassador to the United States Sergey Kislyak ; that interaction is described in Volume I, Section IV.A.6.a , infra. 584 Page later emailed Campaign officials with feedback he said he received from ambassadors he had met at the Convention, and he wrote that Ambassador Kisl ak was ver worried about candidate Clinton’s world views.”

So sorry to hear that a Russian spy diplomat was very concerned about Clinton’s world views. So what was it about Clinton’s world views that so worried the chief Russian spy ambassador?

But then again, Ari says don’t worry about it-Carter Page is large and in the clear. And Melber’s fake ‘Exoneration’ of Page is hardly innocent for as we speak Trump and his GOP co-conspirators-Nunes, Lindsay Graham, Coverup Specialist AG Barr are putting together a counter narrative that this was all a Deep State setup and this counternarrative centers around the canard that Page was wrongly surveilled-in fact it went through the FISA process and was continued by Rod Rosenstein himself.

FN: The best way to describe Rosenstein is The Survivor.

https://thinkprogress.org/did-the-mueller-report-actually-make-impeachment-harder-watergate-experts-say-its-complicated-a394c40f42df/

 

https://medium.com/@jesscoleman/the-mueller-reports-3-most-important-unanswered-questions-4bfe49a2ae5d

 

 

License

October 28, 2016: a Day That Will Live in Infamy Copyright © by . All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book