Go Bama said:

I don’t know this Honig but I question whether or not he even read the Mueller report. This piece insinuates that ithe report was unclear and I just did not find that to be the case at all. As a matter of fact, Müeller was extremely thorough in his presentation of the facts. The report was simply a presentation of facts and in no way has it passed judgement.

To me this is like having a policeman testify at a murder trial and then expecting him to also pass judgment.

Bazza, have you read any of the report? If yes, what were your thoughts?

Click to expand...

I have not read the report.

Reading the article it seems that the op-ed puts responsibility on both Mueller and Congress to get on with it.

It's time for Robert Mueller to lose the mystery, drop the double-speak and stop the riddling. He needs to tell the American public where he stands -- straight, clear and in plain English.

Click to expand...

Mueller's approach has proven problematic on two levels. First, while it seems clear Mueller intended to hand the ball off to Congress, they've fumbled it. Mueller stated in his report: "The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law."

Translation: Congress, your turn. Yet we are three months out from public release of the report, and Congress has not opened a formal impeachment inquiry, heard substantive public testimony from a single fact witness or even gone to court to enforce the subpoenas that the White House has repeatedly defied.

Click to expand...

Seems like a complicated issue with several different POV's.

IMHO, ultimately what is best result for the Democratic Party to defeat Trump will influence how the House committees proceed.

And just to make sure for everyone following along at home, Mueller went into the investigation without the ability to say whether he believes anything DJT has done is worthy of indictment.

I think this is an aspect of the Meuller report that many still don’t grasp.

As an example, had Muller found a body, a gun with fingerprints, and video of DJT shooting someone, he still would have been unable to recommend any indictment.

I fear the Democrats are going to be very disappointed with the Mueller questioning on Wednesday. The Republicans hold the high ground in the Senate and, when there are no consequences for ignoring Congressional subpoenas then I will be quite surprised if Wednesday's testimony moves the needle.

TIDE-HSV said:

Sort of wish that were true, but I'm not sure it is...

Click to expand...

Nixon would have skated if decent men like Howard Baker and Barry Gooldwater hadn't stood up and told him his time was up.

Today's GOP if full of feckless, fearful, timid bootlickers. Oh, you have the random Senator (our own Nebraska Senator Sasse or Mitt Romney) who will make statements critical of Trump or his appointees, but then, when the rubber hits the road, they fall in line.

TIDE-HSV said:

Sort of wish that were true, but I'm not sure it is...

Click to expand...

I hear ya.

Do you have a prediction on the outcome of the upcoming Mueller testimony?

GrayTide said:

I fear the Democrats are going to be very disappointed with the Mueller questioning on Wednesday. The Republicans hold the high ground in the Senate and, when there are no consequences for ignoring Congressional subpoenas then I will be quite surprised if Wednesday's testimony moves the needle.

Click to expand...

This is my suspicion as to how this will likely turn out.

Mostly because knowing human nature, there aren't more than three people on each side of the aisle who actually read the report - and that's at most. The ones who are not lawyers (e.g. most of the interns that read it and were told to pick out damaging phrases for the planned "this is my chance to be President someday" actors in the room) will by definition be at a disadvantage. My suspicion is that this is going to be the Al Capone's vault of testimonies. It's liable to be the same as when the GOP thought that televising Clinton's testimony on TV days after it was given would sway public opinion. I seriously doubt it moves the needle at all. Barring something said in a different way by Mueller that can at least open the door a shade more, I suspect it will be like a date with George Costanza and about as disappointing. In fact, barring Mueller saying something at odds with what's already there, the MORE likely scenario is a public "we're tired of this" outcome.

For the record, I've not read the report, and the actions of Trump persuaded me long before the investigation was even halfway over that he's guilty as sin.

But politics doesn't work that way. Everyone may not be a crook - and even assuming that, they're not all equal in crookedness - but the public as a whole doesn't really view it that way. Most folks have little more than a passing interest in it. If you don't believe me, go back to the polling during the 2000 recount fiasco. The news kept telling us this was an important thing, but the viewing public (even those that voted) never had the rigid partisan interest in the outcome ("Hey, look, it was pretty much a tie any way, it doesn't really matter - and oh, Christmas will be here soon, I have gifts to buy").

It's even worse now. Nixon would get away with it now because by comparison with other things since then, it's small potatoes.

TIDE-HSV said:

I think a nothing burger. Mueller worked out a deal with Barr to complete his investigation, which precluded indicting the president or even saying that he would have. Unlike the other people involved in this, Mueller is a man of honor and a man of his word. I'll be very surprised if he reveals anything not already in his (unread) report. I'd add that the toady, Barr, knew people wouldn't read it and felt safe in mischaracterizing it...

Click to expand...

This^^^. Mueller, as has been said many times, is a reluctant witness, and I agree that he will stick to his report. I have read only a small portion of the report but realized that while he set "out the road map for Congress" to pursue Trump, the various House committees, unfortunately have no real authority to carry it out. This WH has stripped the House of any real power to punish anyone for defying congressional dictates.

TIDE-HSV said:

I think a nothing burger. Mueller worked out a deal with Barr to complete his investigation, which precluded indicting the president or even saying that he would have. Unlike the other people involved in this, Mueller is a man of honor and a man of his word. I'll be very surprised if he reveals anything not already in his (unread) report. I'd add that the toady, Barr, knew people wouldn't read it and felt safe in mischaracterizing it...

Click to expand...

I think you're probably right that nothing is going to happen.

The good news is there will be questions also pertaining to the legalities of how/why/by whom the investigation was started in the first place:

GOP plans to grill Mueller about the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation

Steele was hired by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which was itself hired by Marc Elias of the Perkins Coie law firm at the behest of the Clinton presidential campaign. Information from Steele’s dossier made its way into the Clinton campaign, the media, and the government. Barr is investigating whether the unverified dossier may have contained Russian disinformation.

Click to expand...

Rep. Guy Reschenthaler told the Washington Examiner that he wants answers about the origins of the investigation as well as about possible abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by "securing a warrant based on the Democrat’s political opposition research.”

Justice Department Inspector General Michael Horowitz launched an investigation in March 2018 into the FBI and the DOJ filing four FISA applications and renewals to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page while relying on Steele’s dossier.

Click to expand...

Rep. Greg Steube of Florida told the Washington Examiner that he had questions about the way Mueller conducted his investigation.

“How did we get to a place where we spent 22 months, had 40 FBI personnel investigating, issued 2,800-plus subpoenas and nearly 500 search warrants, interviewed 500 witnesses, and spent over $12 million dollars only to find nothing?” Steube said.

Click to expand...

More taxpayers dollars........being spent for political theater?

Bazza said:

I think you're probably right that nothing is going to happen.

The good news is there will be questions also pertaining to the legalities of how/why/by whom the investigation was started in the first place:

GOP plans to grill Mueller about the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation

More taxpayers dollars........being spent for political theater?

Click to expand...

The GOP cannot defend the position that the president did not obstruct justice so they will use diversionary tactics. The how/why/by whom the investigation was started is irrelevant to whether or not the president is guilty.

I have not read the report in its entirety, but I have read enough to form an opinion. I encourage everyone to read just 25 pages. It’s free, it’s double spaced, and it’s interesting. Rather than trusting a biased media, go straight to the source and form your own opinion. We don’t often have that opportunity.

Go Bama said:

The GOP cannot defend the position that the president did not obstruct justice so they will use diversionary tactics. The how/why/by whom the investigation was started is irrelevant to whether or not the president is guilty.

I have not read the report in its entirety, but I have read enough to form an opinion. I encourage everyone to read just 25 pages. It’s free, it’s double spaced, and it’s interesting. Rather than trusting a biased media, go straight to the source and form your own opinion. We don’t often have that opportunity.

Click to expand...

If a crime has occurred - diversionary tactics or not - I think it should be revealed and dealt with appropriately.

I don't care who did it.

Nevertheless.....the political theater aspect of this is the biggest crime of all - but as we know....business as usual in Washington.

Bazza said:

If a crime has occurred - diversionary tactics or not - I think it should be revealed and dealt with appropriately.

I don't care who did it.

Nevertheless.....the political theater aspect of this is the biggest crime of all - but as we know....business as usual in Washington.

Click to expand...

multiple crimes occurred

here you go, in plain english https://www.lawfareblog.com/full-text-mueller-reports-executive-summaries

I am 100% certain that you will now be on board for indicting and prosecuting Trump

It seems that not just many in the public but democrat reps in congress want Mueller to do a big reveal and make it clear as a whistle to everyone that they pursue impeachment. Maybe some up there just want to be able to huff and puff for a time about it. The frustrating thing is that as a group they don't seem to have the will to do what needs to be done. IOW, I want them to stop trying to put this burden on Mueller's shoulders and take it upon their own.

CharminTide said:

I find it interesting that someone who takes every opportunity to bash the media would rather read 100 pages of news articles and op-eds about the investigation rather than lift a finger to read the actual Mueller report.

Click to expand...

you don't even need to read the report, the executive summaries that Mueller's team created and Barr refused to share until forced to do so, lay out everything perfectly.

in fact all you have to do is read one paragraph or even just two sentences. The report did not clear the President, if it had it would state it.

CONCLUSION
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

Click to expand...

Bazza said:

If a crime has occurred - diversionary tactics or not - I think it should be revealed and dealt with appropriately.

I don't care who did it.

Nevertheless.....the political theater aspect of this is the biggest crime of all - but as we know....business as usual in Washington.

Click to expand...

I agree, but it’s two entirely different crimes by different people. Can we not and shouldn’t we deal with them one at a time?

18 U.S. Code Title 18— CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

i may have missed it, but i did a quick search and surprisingly did not find political theater listed as a crime