# 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:** 509
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10163 "2019-03-24T20:03:20Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > So was there a time, perhaps in the past, when this person had any journalistic credibility? This will be a fair criticism once the report is actually released. Not sure what you’re talking about here. > ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10164 "2019-03-24T20:04:19Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Apparently the special counsel with his 19 lawyers and 40 FBI agents, after nearly two years of investigation involving the issuing of 2800 subpoenas, executing almost 500 search warrants, interviewing over 500 people, asking for extra information from 13 different governments and pulling hundreds of phone records and other documents requiring court orders, could not find any evidence of collusion or obstruction - not just by Trump, but anyone in his orbit, or any other American citizen for that matter. “No evidence” is a ridiculously hyperbolic (and false by implication, from a careful reading of the summary letter) assertion, especially when the only summary of the report comes from the Trump administration’s DOJ. A careful reading implies to me that there was indeed evidence of obstruction, but it may not have risen to the strength required to warrant an indictment by the (Trump admininstration’s) DOJ. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10165 "2019-03-24T20:04:37Z")
> [@dasmoocher](#): > > Fair point about Pelosi. But hasn’t Trump himself directly given the Russians classified info? In the Oval Office the day after Comey was fired, for example. > > [Donald Trump’s disclosures of classified information](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump%27s_disclosures_of_classified_information) > > Apparently, if the Russians want to know something, they can just ask Trump (or, tell him to “share”). And who knows what goes on in those one-on-one meetings with Putin where there is no US personnel. I believe we went over this in depth at the time. The power and authority to classify or unclassify anything resides in the executive branch. The authority is generally delegated to a lower level in the executive branch but that doesn’t mean the president doesn’t have the authority to declassify whatever he wants. For better or worse. Congress of course has their own constitutionally provided recourses. And this is why I know aliens have never visited the earth. Trump would’ve spilled the beans on day one. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10166 "2019-03-24T20:05:24Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > So was there a time, perhaps in the past, when this person had any journalistic credibility? This person was referring to the Mueller report itself, not the Trump DOJ summary. She made that clear in subsequent tweets. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10167 "2019-03-24T20:06:16Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Virginia Heffernan (via source): bad for president > > [https://twitter.com/page88/status/1109881090339155968?s=21](https://twitter.com/page88/status/1109881090339155968?s=21) > Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk > [@enipla](#): > > Who the hell is Virginia Heffernan? > [@Aspenglow](#): > > Nadler just tweeted that a “very brief” memo has been provided to him and will release shortly. Who the hell is Nadler? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10168 "2019-03-24T20:08:01Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Who the hell is Nadler? > [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > And apparently followed by: > No idea what that means. I’m suspecting they mean that it’s up to Congress, but they did find something. Okay, nevermind. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10169 "2019-03-24T20:08:08Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Who the hell is Nadler? Rep. Jerry Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee. ---
**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:** [March 24, 2019, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10170 "2019-03-24T20:10:38Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > “No evidence” is a ridiculously hyperbolic (and false by implication, from a careful reading of the summary letter) assertion, especially when the only summary of the report comes from the Trump administration’s DOJ. A careful reading implies to me that there was indeed evidence of obstruction, but it may not have risen to the strength required to warrant an indictment by the (Trump admininstration’s) DOJ. Fair enough. I’m not a lawyer, but I guess I have to parse my words more carefully on this board, or a small semantic difference will be elevated to ‘ridiculous hyperbole’. “There was no actionable evidence for collusion or obstruction that would lead to a reasonable indictment of Trump or anyone in his orbit.” Is that better? ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10171 "2019-03-24T20:11:49Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This person was referring to the Mueller report itself, not the Trump DOJ summary. She made that clear in subsequent tweets. She saw the report before the AG reported on the summary? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10172 "2019-03-24T20:13:09Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > She saw the report before the AG reported on the summary? Her source did, apparently. She was reporting the words of one of her sources. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10173 "2019-03-24T20:14:28Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > She saw the report before the AG reported on the summary? The thread on Twitter would take 45 seconds to read. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10174 "2019-03-24T20:15:48Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Fair enough. I’m not a lawyer, but I guess I have to parse my words more carefully on this board, or a small semantic difference will be elevated to ‘ridiculous hyperbole’. > > “There was no actionable evidence for collusion or obstruction that would lead to a reasonable indictment of Trump or anyone in his orbit.” > > Is that better? “The opinion of Trump’s AG, who prior to being confirmed had been extremely critical of Mueller’s investigation, is that there was no actionable evidence for collusion or obstruction that would lead to a reasonable indictment of Trump or anyone in his orbit”. That would be better, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10175 "2019-03-24T20:26:11Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > The thread on Twitter would take 45 seconds to read. I just read it. hashtag unverified. Time will tell, I suppose, but it looks like Trump just broke through the tape at the finish line, and that it was not bad for Trump at all. ---
**Author:** ![Mike\_Mabes](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mike_mabes/32/1782_2.png) [@Mike\_Mabes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mike_Mabes)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10176 "2019-03-24T20:27:36Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > _For all practical purposes_, thump is in the clear and fully exonerated. I’m going to go throw up now. Exonerated for collusion. Not for violating the emoluments clause, tax fraud, campaign finance violations, illegal use of inaugural funds, and about a dozen other crimes ---
**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:** [March 24, 2019, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10177 "2019-03-24T20:28:45Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > “The opinion of Trump’s AG, who prior to being confirmed had been extremely critical of Mueller’s investigation, is that there was no actionable evidence for collusion or obstruction that would lead to a reasonable indictment of Trump or anyone in his orbit”. That would be better, IMO. If by ‘Better’ you mean adding a conspiratorial, non-fact based assumption that Trump’s AG and Ron Rosenstein are somehow covering up for Trump. Because, of course, if he lied about what the report actually said, no one could ever actually disprove it by, say, leaking the report or parts of it. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10178 "2019-03-24T20:29:05Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > I just read it. hashtag unverified. Time will tell, I suppose, but it looks like Trump just broke through the tape at the finish line, and that it was not bad for Trump at all. It shouldn’t really be a surprise to us that the Trump AG’s summary of the Mueller report looks good for Trump on the surface. It would have been almost shocking if it hadn’t been. > [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > If by ‘Better’ you mean adding a conspiratorial, non-fact based assumption that Trump’s AG and Ron Rosenstein are somehow covering up for Trump. > > Because, of course, if he lied about what the report actually said, no one could ever actually disprove it by, say, leaking the report or parts of it. Huh? It was a factual statement. That should be kept in mind for a political document such as this. And it doesn’t even require lies – Barr might genuinely believe there’s no solid case for obstruction. I’m saying that based on the things Barr has already said, this doesn’t actually tell us much at all about what is in the report. ---
**Author:** ![Mike\_Mabes](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mike_mabes/32/1782_2.png) [@Mike\_Mabes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mike_Mabes)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10179 "2019-03-24T20:29:54Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Apparently the special counsel with his 19 lawyers and 40 FBI agents, after nearly two years of investigation involving the issuing of 2800 subpoenas, executing almost 500 search warrants, interviewing over 500 people, asking for extra information from 13 different governments and pulling hundreds of phone records and other documents requiring court orders, could not find any evidence of collusion or obstruction - not just by Trump, but anyone in his orbit, or any other American citizen for that matter. > > But the internet sleuths, armed with angry blog reports and lubricated by the tears of Rachel Maddow are certain that’s wrong. Of course. I had not seen the news. I slept late. ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10180 "2019-03-24T20:30:32Z")
> [@Mike\_Mabes](#): > > Exonerated for collusion. Not for violating the emoluments clause, tax fraud, campaign finance violations, illegal use of inaugural funds, and about a dozen other crimes Shit. They don’t care about treason. The other stuff is small potatoes. ---
**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:** [March 24, 2019, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10181 "2019-03-24T20:32:30Z")
> [@Mike\_Mabes](#): > > Exonerated for collusion. Not for violating the emoluments clause, tax fraud, campaign finance violations, illegal use of inaugural funds, and about a dozen other crimes Yeah, and after the big NULL of a two year special prosecutor investigation, Americans are really clamoring for more of the same. The people who really lost in this debacle were the media. Public opinion flipped on the Mueller investigation some time ago, and a majority saw it as mostly a political attack on the President. So by all means, keep it up. If the House keeps opening investigation after investigation and continues to find nothing, Trump is going to be the big winner. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [March 24, 2019, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/10182 "2019-03-24T20:35:57Z")
One of the concerns I’ve had all along in the era of Trump is the potential for people to reach the conclusion that there’s no way to know the truth, and that it’s just politics as usual. Authoritarianism scored a major victory today. It’ll be interesting to see how Trump moves on from this, and I’ll be curious to see Barr’s relationship with him. Barr, for all of his faults, seems like basically a guy who’s interested in being attorney general and not just some toadie like Matt Whitaker. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=508) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=510)