# A Thread for the Mueller Investigation Results and Outcomes (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 28, 2017, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093 "2017-10-28T20:14:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 264
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5262 "2018-07-01T01:47:12Z")
God_damn_ that was a stupid post, Sam. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5263 "2018-07-01T02:26:17Z")
> **[There's a huge caveat in the US' expulsion of 60 Russian diplomats](https://www.businessinsider.com/theres-a-huge-caveat-in-the-us-expulsion-of-60-russian-diplomats-2018-3)** > > Russia can send new diplomats to replace the ones who have been kicked out. > [@](#): > > A State Department official confirmed to Business Insider that the White House’s diplomatic expulsion will not require Russia to reduce its staffing levels in the US, and vice versa. In other words, the 60 diplomats who were kicked out — many of whom wereundercover intelligence operatives— can be replaced by others. > > … > > Targeted expulsions like the one announced this week are not uncommon. When former President Barack Obama expelled 35 Russian diplomats in response to Russia’s interference in the 2016 US election, the move was made under similar conditions. > > **Russia, however, responded to Obama’s targeted expulsion by ordering the US embassy in Moscow to cut its staff by 755 diplomats, meaning those who were kicked out could not later be replaced by newcomers.** Seriously, Sam. It’s just like Obama except for the retaliation which led to a 20x response from Russia. :rolleyes: The rest of your post is just as easily refuted. This is still the SDMB - don’t come in here with your El Rushbo/Fox News takes. That shit works on Facebook with all the other grandads, but not here. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5264 "2018-07-01T03:37:21Z")
Then go ahead and refute it. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5265 "2018-07-01T04:15:41Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Did Putin want Trump to expel 60 Russian Diplomats? No, and neither Trump: [https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-felt-misled-angry-over-expulsion-of-60-russian-diplomats-report-2018-04-15](https://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump-felt-misled-angry-over-expulsion-of-60-russian-diplomats-report-2018-04-15) > [@](#): > > President Donald Trump erupted in anger when he learned the U.S. was expelling 60 Russian diplomats in March, while France and Germany were only expelling four each, the Washington Post reported late Sunday. Trump reportedly only wanted to match the number of allies’ expulsions, and not to be seen as taking the lead. Trump believed his aides misled him, the Post said. “There were curse words,” one official told the Post, “a lot of curse words.” > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Did he want Trump to put new sanctions on him because of the election meddling? > **[Comparing Trump and Obama's 'tough' actions on Russia](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/feb/20/donald-trump/has-donald-trump-been-much-tougher-russia-barack-o/)** > > Amid swelling evidence of Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election, President Donald Trump pushed back ag > [@](#): > > Trump, on the other hand, has cast doubt on Russia’s election meddling and repeated Putin’s denials of his government’s involvement. > > “The Trump administration has repeatedly tried to undermine the credibility of the FBI and intelligence agencies in their investigation and assessment of the threat to the integrity of U.S. elections by Russian operatives,” said Yoshiko Herrera, a political science professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. > > Herrera added that Special Counsel Robert Mueller is looking into whether the Trump administration crossed the line into obstruction of justice by trying to impede the investigation of the Russian threat to the American electoral system. > > While some experts noted that Trump signed a law calling for new sanctions against Russia in response to its interference with the election, they added that the legislation was hardly the product of Trump’s hardline advocacy. Congress largely passed the bill — with veto-proof majorities — in response to Trump’s downplaying of the meddling question and his seeming interest in lifting sanctions against Russia, Sestanovich said. > > When it came time to sign the bill into law in August, Trump did so grudgingly. He expressed significant reservations, saying it was “seriously flawed” because it usurped the executive branch’s negotiating authority. [http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/371333-state-dept-tells-congress-no-additional-russia-sanctions-necessary-at](http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/371333-state-dept-tells-congress-no-additional-russia-sanctions-necessary-at) > [@](#): > > The Trump administration told Congress on Monday that bipartisan legislation passed last year authorizing new sanctions on Russia is already “serving as a deterrent,” and there’s no need to actually implement the penalties at this time. > > A spokesperson for the State Department said the mere possibility of facing sanctions through the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) has served as an effective countermeasure. > > “Given the long timeframes generally associated with major defense deals, the results of this effort are only beginning to become apparent. From that perspective, if the law is working, sanctions on specific entities or individuals will not need to be imposed because the legislation is, in fact, serving as a deterrent,” the spokesperson said. > The 2017 legislation allows President Trump to postpone imposing sanctions on people or entities if he determines they are largely scaling back their transactions with Russia’s defense or intelligence sectors, as long as he notifies the appropriate congressional committees at least every 180 days that they are seeing such progress. > > The move is likely to be sharply criticized by Democrats and Russia hawks, who have called on Trump to take a stronger hand in countering Moscow’s election meddling, aggression in Ukraine and support of President Bashar Assad in Syria. > > If Trump didn’t opt to delay, he would have to impose at least five sanctions on those that knowingly conduct significant transactions with Russia. > **[Timeline: Trump's Acts of Accommodation/Engagement with Russia](https://www.justsecurity.org/58108/timeline-trumps-acts-accommodation-engagement-russia/)** > > "Some may view certain steps as acts of rapprochement aimed at a more cooperative relationship with Russia to fight common enemies and avoid dangerous escalation. Other observers will see the acts as incriminating evidence of a quid pro quo or a... > [@](#): > > March 15, 2018 — The Trump administration announces it will meet the congressional mandate to implement Russian sanctions legislation passed in August and reveals Russian efforts to penetrate the U.S. energy grid, according to CNN. The sanctions include five entities and 19 individuals, including those already indicted by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, in February. According to Reuters, the individuals sanctioned did not include oligarchs and other Russian officials close to Putin, prompting Democratic and Republican leaders to criticize the relatively restrained response. Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the administration’s sanctions were “a grievous disappointment and fall far short of what is needed to respond to that attack on our democracy, let alone deter Russia’s escalating aggression, which now includes a chemical weapons attack [against the Skripals] on the soil of our closest ally.” Brian O’Toole, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council , noted that the sanctions “didn’t hit Putin’s power structure.” Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin says additional sanctions against Russian government officials and oligarchs may be imposed but did not give a time frame, according to Reuters. So the Treasury finally acts, but the administration puts a lot of escape hatches that help Russia or Putin get around them: > [@](#): > > April 20, 2018 — Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin meets with Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov to discuss the recent sanctions targeting several Russian oligarchs with ties to Putin, including Russian billionaire Oleg Deripaska. On April 23, the U.S. Treasury reveals a path for lifting sanctions against the large metals company Rusal should Deripaska divest from the company and its owner, the EN+ Group. > > May 1, 2018 — The Trump administration amends its Russia sanctions program to allow aluminum giant Rusal to escape the blacklist, according to the Wall Street Journal. Rusal’s owner, the En+ Group, pledges that its majority shareholder, Deripaska, will reduce his holdings and relinquish his board seat. On May 25, Deripaska officially resigns from his role at Rusal. And of course, the bending over by Trump continues: > [@](#): > > June 8, 2018 — Trump tells G-7 leaders during a dinner that was closed to media that Crimea is Russian because everyone there speaks Russian, two diplomatic officials told BuzzFeed. Russia seized and illegally annexed the Ukrainian peninsula in 2014, and most countries of the world have refused to recognize the territory as Russia‘s. One of the officials also said Trump questioned why G7 leaders were siding with Ukraine in the struggle with Russia. > > June 12, 2018 — Russia’s Foreign Ministry praises Trump’s decision to call off a war game with South Korea scheduled for August. According to Reuters, the ministry says the move is needed to stop provocations and ease tensions on the Korean Peninsula. [Recall entry on July-Aug 2017: Trump told aides he got the idea of stopping military exercises with South Korea after speaking with Putin.] ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 5:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5266 "2018-07-01T05:00:46Z")
Launch a thousand Benghazi investigations and you’ll never come up with anything as damning as… > ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5267 "2018-07-01T15:50:28Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Really? Did Putin want Trump to strike Syria after the last gas attack? Did Putin want the Americans to wipe out 200 Russians who tried to take an American installation in Syria? For that matter, if Putin is Trump’s buddy, why did Russia stage that attack in the first place? > > Did Putin want Trump to expel 60 Russian Diplomats? Did he want Trump to put new sanctions on him because of the election meddling? > > I wonder if Putin wanted Trump to cut a deal giving Ukraine a whole bunch of weapons to fight Russian forces? Or to try to convince NATO countries to increase their defense spending? > > We can compare that to the Obama Administration, whose failed ‘red line’ in Syria strengthened Russia in the region, and their subsequent indifference to Russian mobilization into Syria which gave Russia the strongest middle east presence since the 1970’s. > > Then there was Obama’s pulling missile defense out of the Ukraine - the issue he was caught on open mic telling Dmitri Medvedev that he would have ‘more flexibility’ on once he didn’t have those pesky voters to deal with. > > Remember the Russian ‘reset’? Or Barack Obama mocking Mitt Romney when he said that Russia was a threat to the U.S.? “The 80’s called, and they want their foreign policy back.” > > I don’t think the Obama Adminstration was intentionally helping Russia- I think they were guilty of arrogance and a world view that saw Russia as a potential partner, not an adversary. But the effect of that failure of realpolitik was to give Putin a largely free hand in all the shenanigans he was up to during the 8 years of Obama’s presidency. > > I guess it took Trump and the last election to wake up the left and make them realize that the Russians are not our natural friends. Some of us having been saying that for decades. But the idea that Trump is in bed with Putin is laughable - or at least has a lot less evidence than the claim that Obama was as well. But Obama. But the Dems. But my fucking ass. Fuck off. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5268 "2018-07-01T16:04:10Z")
> [@](#): > > …But the idea that Trump is in bed with Putin is laughable… “Is not wanting get bed with Trump! Is puking guts out!” “But, Vlad, just once! Then Exxon and Tillerson build oil pipeline and we make billions more to steal!” “Hmmm. Top or bottom?” “Top, Vlad! _Knyeshna_, top!” “_Horrorshow_. Once!” ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5269 "2018-07-01T21:49:31Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Launch a thousand Benghazi investigations and you’ll never come up with anything as damning as… > > [x.com](https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/884789418455953413?s=19) It would be a slam dunk for _'this campaign was, unambiguously, willing to work with a foreign adversary_’ for any Republican Congress of the past. But this Republican Congress has given up all pretense of concern about the security of the nation. Apparently great big wads of cash can do that, if you’re not possessed of much integrity to begin with. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5270 "2018-07-01T21:57:54Z")
> [@GIGObuster](#): > > No, and neither Trump: So you don’t dispute that America’s actions under the Obama administration favored Russia in many ways, and the Trump Administration’s actions have been pretty harsh, but you know this is a sham because of the list of leaks you posted about Trump’s true state of mind. Is that it? Trump has undermined Russia in many, many ways. For example, pushing domestic energy sources like fracking creates competition for Russia’s natural gas. Pushing the Saudis to open up production to drive down the price of oil hurts Russia. The U.S. massive military buildup hurts Russia. The U.S. in Syria is currently working against Russia’s interests, as is the U.S. effort to build an alliance between Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Israel against Syria and Iran. For that matter, Trump’s belligerence against Iran both in Iran and Syria hurts Russia’s interests. As a comparison, the Obama Administration started right out of the gate appeasing Russia with that stupid ‘Reset’ button. And their effort to ‘reset’ relations and prove Russia could be an ally caused them to overlook all sorts of Russian aggressions. Even to the point that the Obama Administration knew about Russia trying to hack the election but did nothing about it - possibly because they thought Hillary couldn’t lose anyway and it could potentially be used against Trump if he became the nominee. In 2009, as part of the ‘Reset’ campaign, the Obama Administration [unilaterally canceled](https://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/19/world/europe/19shield.html) an Eastern European missile defense system: > [@](#): > > President Obama’s decision to cancel an antimissile defense system in Eastern Europe earned a strong welcome from Russian leaders on Friday. Now, the question is whether Russia will do more to help prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. > > Prime Minister Vladimir V. Putin, who had repeatedly assailed the antimissile system as a grave danger to Russia’s security, called Mr. Obama’s decision “correct and brave.” President Dmitri A. Medvedev hinted that Russia would respond favorably to the decision to replace former President George W. Bush’s plan with a missile shield seen as less threatening to Moscow. > > Still, neither leader offered any immediate indication that Russia would make specific concessions, especially on Iran, which has become a major stumbling block in relations between the countries. If Russia does not toughen its opposition to Iran’s nuclear program, analysts say, Mr. Obama may be vulnerable to criticism that he yielded to Russian complaints on the antimissile plan but received little in return. > > “I hope our administration really thought this through and this was not about appeasing Russia, because I don’t think that justifies the decision,” said Riki Ellison, chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, a nonpartisan group that receives financing from defense contractors as well as private individuals who support missile defense. > > The White House described the missile defense announcement as a response to changing Iranian capabilities, not as giving in to Russia, and said there was no quid pro quo. But the Obama administration needs support from Russia, which has veto power in the United Nations Security Council, in order to increase sanctions on Iran. American and European officials argue that Iran has carried out significant advances in recent months in developing a nuclear weapon. > > Russia and China so far have resisted taking strong diplomatic steps or imposing tougher sanctions against Iran. Mr. Obama’s decision to remove one of the main irritants in relations between Washington and Moscow seems intended, in part, to alter that diplomatic equation and help increase the chances of addressing the impasse over Iran without resorting to military force. > > But Mr. Obama was already facing a backlash on Friday from Congressional Republicans and politicians in Poland and the Czech Republic, nations that have looked to the United States for protection against what they perceive as Russian aggression. > > Mr. Obama’s decision on Thursday cancels an antimissile plan proposed by the Bush administration. Mr. Obama replaced the Bush system, which would have been based in Poland and the Czech Republic, with a reconfigured system designed to knock down short- and medium-range missiles instead of intercontinental ones. > > The Bush administration had said the system was intended to deter countries like Iran, but the Kremlin had long insisted that it was in fact aimed at Russia. > > Mr. Medvedev on Friday maintained that Russia did not feel obligated to respond to the United States as part of some deal. But he added: “There always is a score in politics. And if our partners hear some of our concerns, we will, of course, be more attentive to theirs.” Then there’s Iran, a Russian ally and a major source of arms and technology purchases that provided a lot of money for Russia, and which is partner in Russia’s shenanigans in Syria. Obama thought he could appeal to Russia’s better nature if he gave away missile defense for nothing in hope that Russia would then back off helping Iran. That did not happen. Then inexplicably, Obama dropped the sanctions on Iran, gave them billions of dollars of hard currency, and turned a blind eye to their incursion into Syria. # When Obama blew the ‘Red Line’ strategy, he instantly accepted Russia’s offer to get rid of all the WMD in Syria. The result was a massive mobilization into Syria by Russia - followed by several more gas attacks. No one now believes that Russia had any intention of getting rid of Assad’s weapons. Obama got played after making a bad error in foreign policy. Then there was Obama’s whispered “Tell Vladimir that I will have more flexibility after the election”, when asked about acceding to Russia’s wishes on missile defense and other issues: > [@](#): > > As he was leaning toward Medvedev in Seoul, Obama was overheard asking for time - “particularly with missile defense” - until he is in a better position politically to resolve such issues. > > “I understand your message about space,” replied Medvedev, who will hand over the presidency to Putin in May. > > “This is my last election … After my election I have more flexibility,” Obama said, expressing confidence that he would win a second term. > > “I will transmit this information to Vladimir,” said Medvedev, Putin’s protégé and long considered number two in Moscow’s power structure. I can only imagine the sounds of all the heads exploding around here if Trump were caught whispering the same thing to a Russian President. The point is not ‘whattaboutism’ or to criticise Obama or accuse him of being a Putin stooge. He also did lots of things that pissed off the Russians, including putting harsh sanctions on them. The point is to show that you can work yourself into believing just about anything about your enemies if you are willing to ignore all the evidence that doesn’t fit your narrative, while elevating evidence which does. And the fact is, most of the policies Trump has implemented which have anything to do with Russia have hurt Russia’s interests. His ripping up the Iran agreement has deprived Iran of a lot of hard currency it was using to buy Russian weapons and support Iranian soldiers meddling around the world and supporting Russian efforts in Syria. Trump’s attempt to build alliances between Sunni majority countries in the Middle East and Israel is in direct opposition to the Russian/Syrian/Iranian axis. His military buildup is a direct threat to Russia. Claiming that everything Trump has done benefits his buddy Putin flies in the face of reality. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5271 "2018-07-01T22:00:37Z")
> [@SteveG1](#): > > But Obama. But the Dems. But my fucking ass. Fuck off. Wow. Was “I know you are but what am I?” taken? ---
**Author:** ![Mollie\_Magill](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mollie_magill/32/20882_2.png) [@Mollie\_Magill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mollie_Magill)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 10:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5272 "2018-07-01T22:34:19Z")
So how many pages of The **Sam Stone** Show are we in for? ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2018, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5273 "2018-07-01T22:51:09Z")
Who knows? He apparently thinks this is the “compare Trump to Obama” thread which is, in fact, non-existent. Perhaps he can make one? Narrator: That was a hint. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5274 "2018-07-02T01:17:32Z")
What I want to know is why Sam cares so much. He’s a fucking Canadian! ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5275 "2018-07-02T01:35:00Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > So you don’t dispute that America’s actions under the Obama administration favored Russia in many ways, and the Trump Administration’s actions have been pretty harsh, but you know this is a sham because of the list of leaks you posted about Trump’s true state of mind. Is that it? What it is clear is that you did not counter those reports presented. As for your weak “but what about Iran?” > **[Russia and Iran Deepen Ties to Challenge Trump and the United States](https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/russia-and-iran-deepen-ties-to-challenge-trump-and-the-united-states)** > > The President’s decision to challenge the 2015 Iran nuclear deal comes at a broader geostrategic price: a growing alliance between Moscow and Tehran. > [@](#): > > A few days later, I was in Moscow for the Valdai Discussion Club conference on the Middle East. The keynote event featured the snowy-haired Zarif and his gruffly imposing Russian counterpart, Sergey Lavrov, sitting next to each other, chummily, on white leather chairs. Both men spoke at length to diplomats and specialists from thirty countries, and then fielded questions. Afterward, they held widely covered bilateral deliberations. “The positions of Iran and Russia on many regional issues are very close,” Zarif pronounced. > > What a difference a year—and a policy reversal—can make. The Trump Administration’s decision to challenge the 2015 Iran nuclear deal now carries a broad geostrategic price. The relationship between Moscow and Tehran—once tactical militarily, coldly calculating diplomatically, and practical economically—has been converted into a growing strategic partnership. Vladimir Putin’s relentless quest to make Russia a superpower again is part of it; Iran’s goal is just to be a player again. Since President Trump took office, in 2017, Moscow and Tehran have shared increasingly common bonds: growing tensions with Washington and a quest to expand spheres of influence in the Middle East. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > The point is not ‘whattaboutism’ or to criticise Obama or accuse him of being a Putin stooge. Sure it was. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > He also did lots of things that pissed off the Russians, including putting harsh sanctions on them. The point is to show that you can work yourself into believing just about anything about your enemies if you are willing to ignore all the evidence that doesn’t fit your narrative, while elevating evidence which does. Again, you are ignoring that Trump did so under duress. And once again, you are wilfully ignoring the escape hatches Trump is giving to Putin while the sanctions are placed. ---
**Author:** ![glowacks](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/glowacks/32/5548_2.png) [@glowacks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glowacks)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5276 "2018-07-02T01:37:35Z")
Is it too much to ask that this thread’s conversation be confined to Mueller’s investigation’s results and outcomes? Maybe we could put that in the title so people would see it every time they posted. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5277 "2018-07-02T01:45:29Z")
> [@glowacks](#): > > Is it too much to ask that this thread’s conversation be confined to Mueller’s investigation’s results and outcomes? Maybe we could put that in the title so people would see it every time they posted. This. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5278 "2018-07-02T02:11:40Z")
Michael Cohen will be interviewed on Good Morning America tomorrow. In a tweet, he says his “silence is broken”. > **[Michael Cohen teases new interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos](https://thehill.com/homenews/media/395106-michael-cohen-teases-new-interview-with-abcs-george-stephanopoulos/)** > > President Trump’s former lawyer Michael Cohen teased a new interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos on Sunday night.“Spent Saturday afternoon with @GStephanopoulous @abc (not on camera) interview… About a month ago, I really scaled back my news consumption, including keeping the radio off in my car. But I’ll probably be champing at the bit to see what Cohen says. I doubt he’ll reveal anything that Mueller doesn’t already know and will include in his eventual report. So I’m less interested in what Cohen says about Trump than what he says about the Daniels case, Broidy, and Hannity. I mostly hope he fucking unloads on Hannity. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5279 "2018-07-02T02:24:08Z")
Here is Foreign Policy Magazine (that was used before by Sam as a good source) on the Trump delays to sanction Russia: > **[Trump's Attitude Toward Russia Sanctions Makes a Mockery of the United States](https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/03/01/trumps-attitude-toward-russia-sanctions-makes-a-mockery-of-the-united-states/)** > > The question now is whether Congress will do anything about it. > [@](#): > > The Trump administration shocked Washington when it refused to implement new, legally mandated sanctions against Russia in January. The White House claimed there was no need for new sanctions, because the law itself was already deterring those considering doing business with Russia. Yet, since then, not only did a U.S. grand jury indict 13 Russians for fraud and other charges, but the U.S. intelligence community unanimously told Congress that Russia hasn’t stopped interfering in American democracy. Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats even testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee that the “United States is under attack.” Despite this, the Trump administration continues to stick to its claim that the situation requires no additional sanctions. This is worse than doing nothing. > > Deterrence only works if it is credible: The actor threatening retaliation has to be seen as willing to carry it out. By refusing to implement Russia sanctions mandated by Congress despite tremendous political pressure to do so, the administration has sent a clear message: Don’t worry about sanctions, the United States won’t follow through. > > The White House has somehow turned lemonade into lemons — taking the one strong piece of legislation intended to both punish Russia for its unprecedented attack on U.S. democracy and deter it from striking again, and instead giving the world a green light to do business with those responsible for attacking the United States. If the Trump administration was trying to purposefully undermine the United States’ credibility, it could not have done a better job. > > To date, the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, which passed Congress with near-unanimous, bipartisan support last summer, remains the only significant U.S. response to Russia’s unprecedented attack on the United States. > > The administration’s willingness to implement the sanctions has long been in doubt. From the very beginning of the Trump administration, it sought to remove sanctions on Russia. When Congress first took up the legislation, the administration said new sanctions were unnecessary and lobbied against the bill. When its passage looked inevitable, the administration pushed to water it down. And when Congress passed the sanctions nearly unanimously, the president grudgingly signed the bill into law, letting the world know he thought it was “seriously flawed.” Then, in October, the administration missed an initial implementation deadline. > > The Trump administration therefore began the sanctions implementation process with no credibility, and with congressional oversight as the only hope for salvaging trust. Unfortunately, by making a mockery of the process, the administration essentially destroyed that hope. > > **First, the administration did not even acknowledge what the sanctions are for: Russia’s interference in U.S. democracy. The White House’s statement announcing its decision did not make reference to Russia’s interference in the United States, citing only Russia’s “aggression in Ukraine, interference in other nations’ domestic affairs and abuses of human rights.” Ignoring this is a flagrant disregard for the clearly outlined intention of the legislation.** > > Second, the administration did not impose a single sanction. Law required the government to meet a deadline on Jan. 31 imposing sanctions related to the Russian defense and intelligence sectors. Rather than comply, the State Department decided not to impose any, instead releasing a statement saying that sanctions “will not need to be imposed because the legislation is, in fact, serving as a deterrent.” > > To be clear, implementing sanctions, particularly on defense-related sectors, is a complicated and delicate matter, and the agencies responsible should be granted a degree of flexibility. For example, the legislation enables the United States to sanction “persons” doing business with the Russian defense industry, which would include Eastern European NATO members. While no one expects the U.S. government to levy sanctions against the defense officials of NATO allies, the administration should be ratcheting up the pressure to deter countries, including allies, from considering buying Russian equipment. > > But none of this appears to have happened. In fact, since the sanctions have gone into place, a series of large agreements to purchase Russian weapons — including by U.S. allies Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar — have taken place. Clearly they are not deterred. I had to add what is in bold to assure **glowacks** that this is indeed also related to the investigation of Muller, I do think that **Sam** does not give a damn if his sources are still peddling the idiotic idea that the Mueller investigation is “Much ado about nothing.” When even the Republican congress doesn’t think so and compels Trump to sanction the Russians or Russian entities that meddled in the past election. ---
**Author:** ![Morgyn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/morgyn/32/3041_2.png) [@Morgyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morgyn)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5280 "2018-07-02T03:03:39Z")
> [@Mollie\_Magill](#): > > So how many pages of The **Sam Stone** Show are we in for? No idea, but he’s finally going onto my ignore list. I’ve had it with his nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![Thing\_Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecb155/32.png) [@Thing\_Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thing_Fish)\ **Post date:** [July 2, 2018, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/5281 "2018-07-02T03:08:31Z")
So this just showed up in my FB feed: “So to recap: Healthy lifetime appointee Justice Kennedy randomly steps down days before stunning NYT report linking him, his financier son, and Russia-connected Deutsche Bank to Trump and a billion dollar loan deal and nobody finds this at all fishy?” I’m guessing if this were real I’d probably have heard about it from other sources as well… Anybody have any clue what this is about? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=263) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=265)