# 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:** 580
**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:** [June 3, 2019, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11583 "2019-06-03T22:44:30Z")
This is a good start. Set up hearings. Read passages from the Mueller report, and ask experts if this is how a normal presidency functions. Just having live hearings and having people talk about the Mueller report’s findings is important enough – mainly because most reporters in the mainstream press probably haven’t even read the report themselves, which is why we don’t hear reporters really talking about its contents. We need to talk about the report so that more of the general public knows what’s in the report. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [June 4, 2019, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11584 "2019-06-04T00:23:07Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > This is a good start. > > Set up hearings. Read passages from the Mueller report, and ask experts if this is how a normal presidency functions. Just having live hearings and having people talk about the Mueller report’s findings is important enough – mainly because most reporters in the mainstream press probably haven’t even read the report themselves, which is why we don’t hear reporters really talking about its contents. We need to talk about the report so that more of the general public knows what’s in the report. The general public doesn’t care. They trust their elected politicians to know what’s an actual crime and what’s just politicized nonsense. And, on the side of the politicians, they just care that the people keep giving them a job, and won’t move unless the general public moves first. On the side of the general public, half of the people aren’t even aware of the involvement of the GRU in the 2016 election - Russia just put up some crap ads on Facebook that got fewer views than 0.01% of all of the other political ads of the time. 99% of the people aren’t even aware that the Trump Organization admitted in court that he stole money from a charity for US veterans, and 99.999% of the people aren’t aware that the FTC cracked down on charities that were using veterans as a lure to get money to steal as a result of that. The media has had years to explain why we should or shouldn’t have a wall, and I’ve yet to see a cogent article that lays it all out. They’ve had years to investigate things other than Russia. As it is, they only ever seemed to have leaked stuff that was given to them by Schiff and Trump’s own people. The NYT actually did a little bit of extra work and looked through his public financials, but botched the message by surrounding everything that he did which was criminal with a bunch of stuff that was simply slimy but completely legal. In the world of the media, the gatekeepers no longer have any power. All of the money flows to the people who are entertaining, and there are a lot of them so the money is spread thin. There isn’t enough money nor interest in the people who practice real journalism for them to hire the people smart enough to have original hypotheses, nor to give them the resources to investigate those topics. The Washington Post and the New York Times may have once been amazing, but they are not today. It may be that they are still honest and have rigorous standards for publication, but that’s not the same thing as having **smart** employees nor employees with **the budget** to roam the Earth, hiring translators and paying bribes, for months and years, before they need to write their article. And in the world of politics, we were so afraid of backroom deals, that we forced Congress to make everything public. Now the politicians are all the whipping boys of everyone with an agenda who ever cut them a check, because the check-cutters know whether or not their orders were obeyed. We have deprived our representatives of the ability to do their job, and the people who actually want to do the job simply don’t last. There is no reason, looking at what we have seen, to expect any of that to change. It’s a catch-22 situation. Just fixing those flaws in the systems that we have today is something that can’t be done today, for essentially that same catch-22. Trump is only liable to be impeached if a state prosecutes him, and that only if he is clearly too distracted by the trial or is going to be sent to jail. If New York State isn’t investigating him for crimes, we’re just as likely looking at 6 more years of Trump. But, at the same time, the inability for our systems to be able to deal with Trump is a pretty good indication that the problem isn’t Trump, it’s that we need reform by people who are honest, intelligent, inventive, know their history, and willing to compromise. I don’t see that on the horizon and I don’t see any path to get things moving in that direction. That’s a greater issue than Trump. Trying to convert the people to hating Trump isn’t going to happen - and particularly not via Russia. Kicking that dead horse is a waste of time and the sheer amount of kicking probably has turned Trump into someone who can no longer ever be blamed for any crime unless a literal, provable pee tape from Russia comes to light. As noted, he stole from veterans and it’s not even news. His popularity in the military is probably higher than among the general public. That’s f’ed up and should be an obvious thing to be shouting out from the tops of the roofs, and yet nobody is. If we’re still arguing abortion, 40 years later, and Russia six months after Manafort didn’t flip, and no one has pointed out that the President stole from veterans and that he pulled out of Syria the day after Iran, Turkey, and Russia cut a deal on how to split the country, hoping that drama in the Congressional Committees is going to change something, I’m pretty damn doubtful on that front. The politics of the day should be discussions of the problem of foreign criminals acting under the protection of national sovereignty, how to compete with the success of countries under single-party rule, how to compete when vastly overshadowed in population count, the likely dangers of 3D printing and computer vision as related to terrorism, how to contend with the expanding rift between rural and urban America, etc. As said, instead we’re still rehashing battles fought 40 years ago - when we started to make the politicians’ individual votes public. Our wounds have been festering for a long time. Trump is just the ooze leaking out. Tamping off the ooze doesn’t heal the issue and no one’s even bothering to note that _more_ of what failed to tamp off the ooze is not the wisest course of action. ---
**Author:** ![UnwittingAmericans](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d9b06d/32.png) [@UnwittingAmericans](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UnwittingAmericans)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2019, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11585 "2019-06-05T23:05:32Z")
I don’t love the idea of Judiciary calling John Dean, it just smells like nostalgia. They need to keep matriculating the legal ball down the field - 3 yards and a cloud of dust - have the contempt vote(s), get into court, start an impeachment inquiry if that gives them more legal leverage and what it takes to get bodies in front of mics. Get all that shit well into the pipeline. Mueller should go first, but not until they have the others (McGahn, et al) already scheduled behind him. If it takes all summer to get the ducks in a row, that’s fine. ---
**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:** [June 5, 2019, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11586 "2019-06-05T23:16:30Z")
> [@UnwittingAmericans](#): > > I don’t love the idea of Judiciary calling John Dean, it just smells like nostalgia. > > They need to keep matriculating the legal ball down the field - 3 yards and a cloud of dust - have the contempt vote(s), get into court, start an impeachment inquiry if that gives them more legal leverage and what it takes to get bodies in front of mics. Get all that shit well into the pipeline. Mueller should go first, but not until they have the others (McGahn, et al) already scheduled behind him. If it takes all summer to get the ducks in a row, that’s fine. “Matriculating”? I don’t know anything about football, but is that a football term? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![TroutMan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troutman/32/6721_2.png) [@TroutMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TroutMan)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2019, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11587 "2019-06-05T23:32:35Z")
It was used by the coach of the Chiefs in the 1970 Super Bowl, who clearly didn’t know what it meant. He was wired for sound in the game (maybe the first time that was done?) and it has since become a common joke phrase in football. ---
**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:** [June 5, 2019, 11:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11588 "2019-06-05T23:37:36Z")
> [@TroutMan](#): > > It was used by the coach of the Chiefs in the 1970 Super Bowl, who clearly didn’t know what it meant. He was wired for sound in the game (maybe the first time that was done?) and it has since become a common joke phrase in football. 😃 Thanks! That’s hilarious! ---
**Author:** ![dasmoocher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/dbc845/32.png) [@dasmoocher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dasmoocher)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2019, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11589 "2019-06-05T23:39:14Z")
> [@TroutMan](#): > > It was used by the coach of the Chiefs in the 1970 Super Bowl, who clearly didn’t know what it meant. He was wired for sound in the game (maybe the first time that was done?) and it has since become a common joke phrase in football. Yep. [Words We’re Watching: ‘Matriculate’](https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/words-were-watching-matriculate-football-slang-definition) > [@](#): > > Almost any time former Kansas City Chiefs coach Hank Stram wanders through an airport or hotel lobby, someone will walk up to him and say, “Hey coach, how about 65 toss power trap?” Or “Let’s punch it in there, rats.” Or “Let’s matriculate the ball downfield.” Those are phrases Stram used on the sideline at Tulane Stadium in New Orleans the afternoon his Chiefs beat the Minnesota Vikings in Super Bowl IV [in 1970]. Stram was wired with a microphone by NFL Films and his colorful stream-of-consciousness narrative is one reason the production still ranks as among the most popular of all the Super Bowl films. > — Leonard Shapiro, The Washington Post, 26 Jan. 1996 ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [June 5, 2019, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11590 "2019-06-05T23:50:22Z")
> [@UnwittingAmericans](#): > > I don’t love the idea of Judiciary calling John Dean, it just smells like nostalgia. I think, more importantly, most people just think he’s the guy who sells frozen sausages. I might be wrong, but I feel like even names like Newt Gingrich or Colin Powell would either be a total blank or just a vague senses that “Oh yeah, that was that guy. He was a governor or Presidential candidate or something?” Honestly, I’d be hesitant to expect that most Republicans even remember Mitt Romney with any clarity, outside of Utah. Nor that most Democrats would remember All Gore. Obviously, hard to know without a survey. I might be being overly cynical. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2019, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11591 "2019-06-06T00:20:38Z")
(I think it’s that last, to be honest. 😉 ) ---
**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:** [June 6, 2019, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11592 "2019-06-06T00:58:45Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > … Nor that most Democrats would remember All Gore. > … Wasn’t that the tag line for \*The Texas Chainsaw Massacre \*-- “All Gore All the Time!” ---
**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:** [June 6, 2019, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11593 "2019-06-06T02:20:15Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > I think, more importantly, most people just think he’s the guy who sells frozen sausages. > I might be wrong, but I feel like even names like Newt Gingrich or Colin Powell would either be a total blank or just a vague senses that “Oh yeah, that was that guy. He was a governor or Presidential candidate or something?” > Honestly, I’d be hesitant to expect that most Republicans even remember Mitt Romney with any clarity, outside of Utah. Nor that most Democrats would remember All Gore. > Obviously, hard to know without a survey. I might be being overly cynical. No, I think you’re right. The thing about the hearings is that no one that could be called is going to be electrifying to the mass audience. Sure, Mueller’s name is at least vaguely known to most, but even if the House can induce him to testify, he’s going to be dry as dust, and many viewers will be reaching for the remote. The only way these hearings can do the job of bringing home to the mostly-checked-out American public, the magnitude of Trump’s wrongdoing, is if the questioning is super-charged with the staples of high-ratings TV: conflict, drama, tension, and flashes of wit. But since we don’t have a Franken-level talent in the House, the other Reps will have to step up their games. Nadler has genuine rancor towards Trump; people might tune in just to see if he can remain upright. And even Adam Schiff is capable of coming through, as he did on March 28th (link below). It’s doable. But it will take some passionate performances by House members who are smart, well-informed, and articulate. Otherwise the mass of mostly-indifferent-to-politics Americans will assume that calls for impeachment are just what Fox et al are saying: partisan hackery by butt-hurt losers. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/wlWyGOvFwSo/maxresdefault.jpg "Hear congressman's heated response after Republicans call for his resignation") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlWyGOvFwSo) ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2019, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11594 "2019-06-06T02:34:29Z")
> [@UnwittingAmericans](#): > > They need to keep matriculating the legal ball down the field - 3 yards and a cloud of dust - have the contempt vote(s), get into court, start an impeachment inquiry if that gives them more legal leverage and what it takes to get bodies in front of mics. Get all that shit well into the pipeline. Mueller should go first, but not until they have the others (McGahn, et al) already scheduled behind him. If it takes all summer to get the ducks in a row, that’s fine. Begrudgingly I’m on board with this. I think it’s Pelosi’s strategy as well. Keep the process moving. Maybe the long-overdue recession hits and makes the calculations easier. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2019, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11595 "2019-06-06T04:31:01Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > But since we don’t have a Franken-level talent in the House, the other Reps will have to step up their games. Nadler has genuine rancor towards Trump; people might tune in just to see if he can remain upright. And even Adam Schiff is capable of coming through, as he did on March 28th (link below). Of the inquisitors, Cummings seems to be the one who is on the right path for paydirt and using the right means to get it, if I’m honest. It’s just that his investigations aren’t Russia nor collusion…so the media don’t care. ---
**Author:** ![UnwittingAmericans](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d9b06d/32.png) [@UnwittingAmericans](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UnwittingAmericans)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2019, 7:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11596 "2019-06-06T07:24:18Z")
> [@TroutMan](#): > > It was used by the coach of the Chiefs in the 1970 Super Bowl, who clearly didn’t know what it meant. He was wired for sound in the game (maybe the first time that was done?) and it has since become a common joke phrase in football. Stram mic’d: [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/MnPr1R_QlTM/maxresdefault.jpg "matriculate") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnPr1R_QlTM) [![]( " - YouTube") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSeWMOZzzhU) ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2019, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11597 "2019-06-06T16:02:48Z")
I’m not sure this exactly fits here, but it is Russia-related news, so: [Putin says Russia hasn’t meddled in US vote and never will](https://apnews.com/1f12eaf734014da6bcd0995ae89c6636): > [@](#): > > Russian President Vladimir Putin on Thursday reaffirmed his staunch denial that his government meddled in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, adding that Moscow has no intention of interfering in any future votes, either. > > Speaking in response to a question from The Associated Press during a meeting with chief executives of international news agencies in St. Petersburg, the Russian leader said that “we didn’t meddle, we aren’t meddling and we will not meddle in any elections.” > > Putin and other Russian officials have hotly denied any interference with the U.S. vote to help Donald Trump win presidency, even though U.S. special counsel Robert Mueller has uncovered evidence of a Kremlin operation to interfere with the 2016 vote. He charged 12 Russian military intelligence officers with breaking into Democratic Party emails, and also indicted other Russians who used phony social media accounts to spread divisive rhetoric and to undermine the U.S. political system. > > Putin insisted that “we don’t have and never had any plans to interfere in U.S. domestic politics,” but added that the Russian government can’t stop private citizens from expressing their views about developments in the U.S. online. > > “How can we ban them from doing that?” he said. “Do you have such a ban with regard to Russia?” It’s funny, but I’m pretty sure I remember that Russian citizens are not free to express their views on the Russian government online; why can’t they extend the ban to talking about developments in the U.S.? :dubious: Putin is, like other scum throughout history, counting on not needing to be logically consistent. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2019, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11598 "2019-06-06T16:19:28Z")
Like the old Cold War joke: “The difference between the US and Russia is that I can go to the White House and protest US involvement in Vietnam!” “So? Any Soviet Citizen is also free to march on the Kremlin, protesting US involvement in Vietnam.” ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [June 6, 2019, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11599 "2019-06-06T17:18:30Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Like the old Cold War joke: > > “The difference between the US and Russia is that I can go to the White House and protest US involvement in Vietnam!” > “So? Any Soviet Citizen is also free to march on the Kremlin, protesting US involvement in Vietnam.” This brings to mind an observation from Mort Sahl (I believe it was in reference to the House Un-American Activities Committee): > [@](#): > > The Cold War — we’re fighting fire with fire. When the Russians put an American in jail, we put an American in jail. ---
**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:** [June 6, 2019, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11600 "2019-06-06T23:06:37Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Of the inquisitors, Cummings seems to be the one who is on the right path for paydirt and using the right means to get it, if I’m honest. > > It’s just that his investigations aren’t Russia nor collusion…so the media don’t care. Well, they might start caring if the findings on Administration corruption are juicy enough. They did like the ‘Interior Secretary’s personal flag’ and ‘Health and Human Services Secretary racks up over a million dollars in private jet travel’ and ‘Treasury Secretary flies at taxpayer expense to get good viewing spot for eclipse’ stories. Cummings is smart as hell. You may be right about him being the one who will come through with paydirt. ---
**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:** [June 7, 2019, 11:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11601 "2019-06-07T23:55:56Z")
[ **4 Disturbing Details You May Have Missed in the Mueller Report** _Some troubling-to-outright-damning episodes have been lost in the noise around its release._](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/07/opinion/mueller-report-trump-impeachment.html?emc=rss&partner=rss) By Quinta Jurecic _Ms. Jurecic is the managing editor of Lawfare._ June 7, 2019 > [@](#): > > …The document is packed with even more details, ranging from the troubling to the outright damning. Yet these have been lost in the flurry of discussion around the report’s release. > > Even the most attentive reader could have trouble keeping track of the report’s loose ends and dropped subplots. Here are four of the most surprising details that you might have missed — and none of them are favorable to the president. > > \*\*Coordinating with WikiLeaks? \*\* (Volume I, pp. 52-54) > How much did Mr. Trump personally know about Russian efforts to assist his campaign, and when did he know it? Three pages of heavily redacted text provide hints. > … > > This section suggests that Mr. Trump may have been in the loop on the campaign’s efforts to get a heads-up about what WikiLeaks had planned. And that is a very long way from “no collusion.” > > \*\*Looking for Clinton’s “missing” emails \*\* (Volume I, pp. 49, 62-63) > At a July 27, 2016, campaign rally, Mr. Trump said, “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing” — referring to Clinton emails reportedly stored on a personal server. “Within approximately five hours” of Mr. Trump’s remarks, according to the Mueller report, Russian military intelligence began a cyberattack against “Clinton’s personal office.” > > After his July 27 comment, the report states, Mr. Trump “asked individuals affiliated with his Campaign to find the deleted Clinton emails” — including Michael Flynn. > > Mr. Flynn, in turn, reached out to a Republican Senate staffer and a G.O.P. operative who worked separately to obtain the emails. The operative raised money to support the project, which he marketed as “coordinated with the Trump campaign,” and told others that he was in communication with Russian hackers who had access to emails he believed were Mrs. Clinton’s. > … > > “Collusion” has no legal definition. But if the term means working behind the scenes with Russian actors to obtain hacked information damaging to Mrs. Clinton, then this section of the report describes just that — collusion that took place at Mr. Trump’s request. It just wasn’t successful. > > \*\*Sharing polling data \*\* (Volume I, pp. 130-131, 140) > Throughout his time as the Trump campaign chairman, Paul Manafort stayed in touch with a Russian man named Konstantin Kilimnik, whom, according to the Mueller report, “the F.B.I. assesses to have ties to Russian intelligence.” Mr. Gates, Mr. Manafort’s deputy, believed Mr. Kilimnik to be a “spy.” — a view, the report says, that he shared with Mr. Manafort. > > While managing the campaign, Mr. Manafort told Mr. Gates to share “internal polling data” private to the campaign with Mr. Kilimnik, so he could share it with Ukrainian oligarchs and a Russian oligarch. > … > > The report also states that Mr. Manafort hoped his campaign work would help him recover money he was owed by the other oligarchs. Yet Mr. Mueller “could not reliably determine Manafort’s purpose” in sharing the data with Mr. Kilimnik. > > This remains one of the more troubling loose ends in the report. > > \*\*Obstructing justice \*\* (Volume II, pp. 90-93) > A month after Mr. Mueller’s appointment, President Trump’s ordered his former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski — who was not a government employee — to convey a message to Attorney General Jeff Sessions, telling him to constrain the scope of the Mueller investigation. Mr. Sessions, Mr. Trump said, was to deliver a speech restricting the investigation to only future election interference. Mr. Lewandowski never delivered the message. > > Simply firing Mr. Mueller would have been within the president’s power. Asking a private citizen to deliver that message, however, moves this outside the realm of the president’s management of the executive branch and toward clearer-cut obstruction of justice. > … > > The longer one spends with the report, the more disturbing a document it is, despite the initial fuzziness of some of Mr. Mueller’s conclusions. The instances here make up only about 12 pages out of a report that spans hundreds. Mr. Mueller makes clear that the Russian government interfered in the 2016 election with the goal of supporting Mr. Trump; that the Trump campaign sought to benefit from that interference; and that the president worked to put to an end to the office investigating the interference effort. Questions remain, but the most important question is whether this conduct should be acceptable. Bold is in the original (which, of course, has more detail than I can quote here). Do we need the unredacted version? It seems like there’s plenty here for someone who will read it closely. ---
**Author:** ![Celidin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/cc9497/32.png) [@Celidin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Celidin)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2019, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/11602 "2019-06-08T22:25:18Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > Do we need the unredacted version? It seems like there’s plenty here for someone who will read it closely. No. Sadly, we need the current version with all of these things in it read aloud so it can be filmed and shown by TV networks. For the like 2/3 of America who can’t be bothered to read (or even skim it!) on their own. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=579) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=581)