WNU Editor: Main points from the Mueller Commission report and Attorney General Barr's remarks this morning.
* Russia tried to interfere in the 2016 election, but no Americans were involved, and there was no collusion.
* No conspiracy to collude.
* No Presidential executive privilege was used, and the President took no act that deprived the special counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation
* Attorney General Barr and Deputy General Rosenstein are convinced that with the evidence presented, obstruction was not committed.
The media is ignoring the report's conclusion that there was no Trump campaign collusion with Russia, and are instead pushing the narrative that President Trump obstructed the Special Counsel .... Attorney General William Barr says Mueller report outlines 10 instances of potential obstruction of justice by Trump (Business Insider). But from what I have read so far in this report, I am not impressed with those who are pushing the case for obstruction.
- How can you push an obstruction case when no crime was committed?
- How can you push an obstruction case when no one was fired during the tenure of the Mueller report?
- How can you push an obstruction case when in a fit of anger he wanted people fired, but were never fired?
- How can you push an obstruction case when no Presidential executive privilege was used?
- How can you push an obstruction case when President Trump took no act that deprived the special counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation?
- How can you push an obstruction case when someone who believes he is innocent lashes out publicly that a witch-hunt is being instigated against him?
I read very fast, and from what I have read so far this report reads more like a political document that was deliberately made to keep the discussion and narrative of the past two years to continue. And with a lot of innuendo being posted in this report, I can see why. Case in point, CNN and CTV News in Canada are pushing the narrative that President Trump told Attorney General Sessions that with the appointment of Special Counsel Mueller he is now f____ed. The context of this CNN and CTV News story is false. What President Trump said to everyone was basically the following .... that the appointment of Special Counsels have a history of paralyzing a White House and its agenda, and it would also create the narrative that he won the election due to the Russians when he knows that he won it on his own.
The amount of fake news that I am seeing on TV while I am reading the report is quite a sight to see. And I can understand why. They are melting down right now because they bought into the Russian collusion story, and this report is telling them the opposite. And while the lead story should be no collusion and no conspiracy to collude, it will not be.
In conclusion. The one sentence that caught my eye was the report's assertion that they have no evidence to exonerate President Trump for obstruction (this is the last paragraph of Part II, page 182, of the report). Is this the state of U.S. Justice today? That the person who is being accused must provide the evidence to prove that he is innocent? According to the Mueller Report and many in the media today this is the case, and as far as they are concerned, President Trump must provide the evidence to be exonerated. Sighhhh .... this is how Soviet Justice operated, and how the justice system of many authoritarian governments function today. Is the U.S. now abandoning this principle? Apparently yes.
Update #1: The parts that were redacted did not surprise me. Grand jury testimonies. ongoing trials, and methods used to gather information need to be kept confidential.
Update #2: A full news roundup followed by commentaries and opinions will be posted later this evening.
7 comments:
...
The allegation that Russia tried to interfere in the election is itself a fraud. https://consortiumnews.com/2019/04/16/vips-fault-mueller-probe-criticize-refusal-to-interview-assange/
"That the person who is being accused must provide the evidence to prove that he is innocent?"
Liberlas, deepstate players, and zombies want the president to prove a negative.
The only way for the president to prove he did not obstruct is to literally writwe down what he did every second of day for nearly 2 years.
Rosenstein looked zombiefied during the Barr presser. Probably the last place on the planet he wanted to be. But Barr was smart to keep him on until the end of the investigation. Negated the Dem attack on that angle.
Now its on to "Obstruction" with maximum tedium. I'm sure CNN's audience is all ready for another trip down the rabbit hole. Trump will have a ball with it.
It might well be time for a real investigation into the genesis of all this. Eg: Steele dossiers, FISA courts, spying, scheming, colluding, etc...
Looks to me that Barr is going to lift the rock and stomp some bugs
Nope. Not just moving on.
Russ, I agree with your comment about keeping Rosenstein 'til the end. Firing him would have been explosive to The Believers. As a result of keeping Rosenstein on, there's even less for them to use to get into a self-generated tither. How frustrating for them. I have a feeling The Believers expected Rosenstein to be let go.
I'm of the growing opinion that the dims are going to find their numbers dwindling. The years of this behavior are beginning to gnaw on even The Believers. After more than two years..."Where's the beef?"
What has the potential to be an enjoyable watch for awhile, is the efforts of The Flame Keepers. They will be viewed as increasingly silly. The broken record syndrome. Tedious and growing more so in the irrelevance of the whole endeavor.
These aren't leaders. Not even pathetic leaders. Just pathetic. Schiff is he who would be chosen last in 4th grade recess to be on your kickball team. Even Elizabeth, yes yes, that's right, THAT Elizabeth, was picked before Adam Schiff. And now he is declaring The Search for the holy grail will continue. Ahhhh....what a leader.
Ain't it a kick to verbally club these political baby seals stranded on a political islet of their own making?
Maybe Rosebnstein is not a Democrat.
They ain't enough to convict him of being a Republican.
He just hoisted whatever flag of convenenience, once he had spent his time as a 'grunt' lawyer and saw, who was in office.
He is not loyal and he is not moral. Why have him?
He will always be a liability in any organization.
Post a Comment