# 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:** 604
**Author:** ![Ann\_Hedonia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ann_hedonia/32/319_2.png) [@Ann\_Hedonia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ann_Hedonia)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2019, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12063 "2019-11-06T15:41:03Z")
First, my apologies for my technical misstatements. The newsreader I used to read the Mueller Report ( and I read every single word, as well as the full text of every indictment along the way ) uses different pagination and it is 787 pages in that format. And I’m glad to know that Muellers pension is safe although that makes his actions less understandable. But I just read Marie Yovanovitch’s testimony, and her pension is definitely not safe. And that document is kind of scary. Because of the scheme by Trump’s cronies to discredit the Mueller report. And not just the part of the report having to do with the Trump campaign. I wasn’t happy with the Mueller Report, but at the time I was fairly understanding of his actions. I was surprised that Don Jr ( the Traitor Tot) wasn’t indicted - given the national security implications of some of his actions, but I got it. And I still don’t think it’s overreach to expected a freaking prosecutor to issue a “traditional prosecutorial decision”. But that isn’t why I’ve been calling him out now. I’m calling him out because he was the person that we entrusted with the task of getting to the bottom of Russian interference in the 2016 election. Which he did, admirably. But there is now a concerted effort going on inside TrumpWorld to reverse his narrative. When I read the Yovanovitch testimony, it was kind of frightening to see how Jim Jordan and Mark Meadows tried to paint her as corrupt for taking US State Department endorsed positions against individuals who were generally considered to be working against Western interests. The average American citizen isn’t going to know or care whether or not Lutsenko or Lestchenko is actual the corrupt one ( hint — its Lutsenko ) So, a bunch of good State Department civil servants are probably going to lose their jobs and pensions and possibly they might get arrested. And the White House and the DOJ are gleefully crapping on all the evidence of Russian interference laid out by Mueller. Because they are trying to prove that Manafort and the Russians were framed by Mueller and the Democrats. And I’m taking the silence of private citizen Robert Mueller as acquiescence. Well, he may speak up when they try to arrest him for framing poor innocent Paul Manafort, but it’ll probably be too late then. Should’ve done it while there was still a vestige of the rule of law left in our country. ---
**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:** [November 6, 2019, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12064 "2019-11-06T15:45:39Z")
Are there not still sealed indictments out there waiting for…something? ---
**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:** [November 6, 2019, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12065 "2019-11-06T17:36:03Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > …He failed to interview the main target. … He would NEVER have been able to get the main target to submit to an interview in a million zillion years. And he didn’t need to. Everything is in the report. This argument y’all are presenting that Mueller somehow failed because he didn’t physically shove a lighted firecracker up DJT’s butt is utter crap. ---
**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:** [November 6, 2019, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12066 "2019-11-06T17:39:37Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > He would NEVER have been able to get the main target to submit to an interview in a million zillion years. And he didn’t need to. Everything is in the report. This argument y’all are presenting that Mueller somehow failed because he didn’t physically shove a lighted firecracker up DJT’s butt is utter crap. It’s also the position of the Trump Administration, as cited above. I mean, when the _criminals_ are celebrating the Mueller testimony (for it is this testimony where he failed the most), that merely adds evidence for the hypothesis that Mueller left a lot on the table. ---
**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:** [November 6, 2019, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12067 "2019-11-06T17:44:50Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > It’s also the position of the Trump Administration, as cited above. > > I mean, when the _criminals_ are celebrating the Mueller testimony (for it is this testimony where he failed the most), that merely adds evidence for the hypothesis that Mueller left a lot on the table. O, please. :rolleyes: That is also pure crap. **JohnT** , you are losing your grip. Don’t let the Trumpers write the narrative. ---
**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:** [November 6, 2019, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12068 "2019-11-06T17:50:29Z")
Lol, I have the Mueller report. I also have his testimony. I also have the subsequent reaction, from both the Dems (who functionally ignored the report) and the President (who thought the testimony so vindicated him that he was emboldened to bribe Ukraine _the very next day_). I’m not writing this timeline, Thelma. I’m speaking to the sequence of events, bringing citations, and drawing the _reasonable_ conclusion that a retired FBI Director could have been more forceful in his last public hearing. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2019, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12069 "2019-11-06T18:24:47Z")
> [@DesertDog](#): > > Yet he managed to testify before Congress and _not_ say, “Barr’s redacted version of my report is, at best, a misleading version of the facts, at worst a fucking lie.” Instead, he just rolled over for Barr (his old buddy). > [@JohnT](#): > > I can add that her assertion that civil servants are non-partisan is merely that: An assertion, not a fact. > I can also assert that a white, 70-something Republican man retired since 2012 has very likely filled his head with Fox News crap for 5 years prior to being called as a “safe choice” to handle the investigation. That, too, may not be factual, but in my experience (as Aspen expects us to depend upon hers), that’s a strong possibility. They can be, and some are, partisan as all fucking hell. And they LOVE Trump. No lie, crime or betrayal will budge them, one iota. They were the same about GW Bush. They are just MORE fanatic about Trump. > [@drad\_dog](#): > > Mueller taking a pass on dt sitting down for a normal interview led directly to the arrogant flouting of congress by all of his toadies, including the Sec of State. > Once you let that go by, why not just invite don to be president for life? And that is exactly what is happening. They are simply refusing to appear, refusing to testify. That is the precedent Meuller created when he let the orange traitor off the hook. They all should be locked up for contempt. But no, the Dems don’t have the backbone to actually DO it. They too are a spineless joke. > [@drad\_dog](#): > > It was “decency” not “dignity”. > He failed to interview the main target. So it was not the lack of fireworks or drama or aha that dems care about. It was that he spiked the whole investigation by not interviewing and then calling it an investigation, when it was really just investigation with an asterisk. > As soon as he did it, dt and other of his minions began treating US Congress with more contempt than the day before. Do you really think that rm’s passivity hasn’t led to recent troubles with Barr, Giulliani, Pompeo, Ross, ad nauseum? Correct. As soon as he caved to Trump on the whole question of having him testify or provide written answers, and then let him completely off the hook – KNOWING the lying fuck would perjure himself, the bullshit floodgates opened. And also, the investigation\* was limited in scope, insuring the fat orange rat would skate. > [@JohnT](#): > > I will say that as a person who quit the family business, bought out a competitor, and lodged bids at my parents clients for 3 years, finally stopping when they bought me out, going all out for a _moral_ point is apparently easier for me than it is for Uber-Bureaucrat Robert Mueller. > I, for one, am thrilled that Mecha-Mueller did not break the bonds of his programming. His world might have been disturbed. I mean, the man had _memorandums_ which needed obeying! And of course, internal DoJ bullshit memos supercede and cancel ALL laws. > [@bobot](#): > > Are there not still sealed indictments out there waiting for…something? What are they waiting for? I know. Stalling for us to forget. And then throw them away. If they EVER existed to begin with. > [@JohnT](#): > > Lol, I have the Mueller report. I also have his testimony. > I also have the subsequent reaction, from both the Dems (who functionally ignored the report) and the President (who thought the testimony so vindicated him that he was emboldened to bribe Ukraine _the very next day_). > I’m not writing this timeline, Thelma. I’m speaking to the sequence of events, bringing citations, and drawing the _reasonable_ conclusion that a retired FBI Director could have been more forceful in his last public hearing. The whole thing stinks from beginning to end. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2019, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12070 "2019-11-06T19:26:37Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > He would NEVER have been able to get the main target to submit to an interview in a million zillion years. And he didn’t need to. Everything is in the report. This argument y’all are presenting that Mueller somehow failed because he didn’t physically shove a lighted firecracker up DJT’s butt is utter crap. If Mueller was convinced he had sealed the case up without interviewing the president then he needed to say something when he realized he was so very very very wrong in the eyes of the boss that he was writing the report for. It’s all new this stuff, but how do you have an investigation without an interview? How does the US POTUS refuse to be deposed? Was there any other time in US history where it is acceptable for the US POTUS to: refuse to keep the tax return promise; and to also rickroll the investigator by refusing to be interviewd and refusing topics of questions? And now it’s defiance of subpoenas. Once you close the thing without an interview you can’t convict him anyway. It’s not a real investigation. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2019, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12071 "2019-11-06T22:59:44Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > If Mueller was convinced he had sealed the case up without interviewing the president then he needed to say something when he realized he was so very very very wrong in the eyes of the boss that he was writing the report for. > > It’s all new this stuff, but how do you have an investigation without an interview? How does the US POTUS refuse to be deposed? > > Was there any other time in US history where it is acceptable for the US POTUS to: refuse to keep the tax return promise; and to also rickroll the investigator by refusing to be interviewd and refusing topics of questions? And now it’s defiance of subpoenas. > > Once you close the thing without an interview you can’t convict him anyway. It’s not a real investigation. It was after all the smoke and mirrors, just a dog and pony show - but now it’s a SHIT show. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2019, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12072 "2019-11-06T23:14:20Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > If Mueller was convinced he had sealed the case up without interviewing the president then he needed to say something when he realized he was so very very very wrong in the eyes of the boss that he was writing the report for. > > It’s all new this stuff, but how do you have an investigation without an interview? How does the US POTUS refuse to be deposed? > > Was there any other time in US history where it is acceptable for the US POTUS to: refuse to keep the tax return promise; and to also rickroll the investigator by refusing to be interviewd and refusing topics of questions? And now it’s defiance of subpoenas. > > Once you close the thing without an interview you can’t convict him anyway. It’s not a real investigation. I am firmly of the opinion that it’s entirely possible to mount a criminal investigation even if the person you’re accusing lawyers up or otherwise refuses to say a word to you. ---
**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:** [November 6, 2019, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12073 "2019-11-06T23:16:04Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > …I also have the subsequent reaction, from both the Dems (who functionally ignored the report)… And you blame Mueller for that? > [@](#): > > …and the President (who thought the testimony so vindicated him that he was emboldened to bribe Ukraine _the very next day_). You blame Mueller for that, too? > [@](#): > > … drawing the _reasonable_ conclusion that a retired FBI Director could have been more forceful in his last public hearing. I completely agree with you: he _could have been_ more forceful. But your assertions go way beyond that into the realm of the absurd. > [@drad\_dog](#): > > …How does the US POTUS refuse to be deposed? By flat-out refusing, that’s how. You’ve been watching him refuse every lawful directive that has been issued to him. > [@](#): > > Was there any other time in US history where it is acceptable for the US POTUS to: refuse to keep the tax return promise; and to also rickroll the investigator by refusing to be interviewd and refusing topics of questions? And now it’s defiance of subpoenas. You are correct. This is new and unprecedented. Next question? > [@](#): > > Once you close the thing without an interview you can’t convict him anyway. It’s not a real investigation. Does not follow. It was absolutely a real investigation with real conclusions. Even without the president’s testimony, which NEVER would have happened. > [@begbert2](#): > > I am firmly of the opinion that it’s entirely possible to mount a criminal investigation even if the person you’re accusing lawyers up or otherwise refuses to say a word to you. Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Let’s get some lawyer-ish opinions on this. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12074 "2019-11-07T00:29:37Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > I am firmly of the opinion that it’s entirely possible to mount a criminal investigation even if the person you’re accusing lawyers up or otherwise refuses to say a word to you. So am I. But that is when you have an adversarial system; and a judge; and it’s a trial. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12075 "2019-11-07T00:43:49Z")
> [@ThelmaLou](#): > > And you blame Mueller for that? You blame Mueller for that, too? > > I completely agree with you: he _could have been_ more forceful. But your assertions go way beyond that into the realm of the absurd. > By flat-out refusing, that’s how. You’ve been watching him refuse every lawful directive that has been issued to him. > > You are correct. This is new and unprecedented. Next question? > > Does not follow. It was absolutely a real investigation with real conclusions. Even without the president’s testimony, which NEVER would have happened. > > Yes, yes, yes, and yes. Let’s get some lawyer-ish opinions on this. It feels to me like you are sitting in the water and letting it get hot. I voted against dt. If I am going to live under his regime he is going to have to be clean, give up his tax returns, and show up for interviews when required. If he fails to do this he has lost any claims he had to fairness and frankly should resign, that day. I am part of the majority of this country and there is a minority that wants to ignore the law and the rules. Apparently you do too. You are posing special rules for dt. Why? He gets away wtih shit and you say “See he got away with shit! How can anyone cope with such a man” You know that is not the only response one can have right? Do you really see no meaning in taking a stand to obtain dts deposition? You already know how it’s going to end? ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12076 "2019-11-07T00:45:29Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > So am I. But that is when you have an adversarial system; and a judge; and it’s a trial. It is **extremely** clear that Mueller believed that he was, and is, operating within such a system - he was doing discovery for the case that the House of Representatives would prosecute and the Senate would judge. Conditional, of course, on the prosecutors (the House) deciding that there was enough evidence to make a case on. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12077 "2019-11-07T00:51:38Z")
I will repeat: Donald Trump has failed to do things he promised as a candidate, or refused normal levers of government so often that all the posts, cases, arguendos etc here stated, by ignoring this need in public life (for dt to resign for bad faith basically) are just invalid on the face. When he broke those promises he needed to feel the full weight of the system pushing back, to represent the voters who voted against him, that he is not representing or even pretending to. After that breach he needs to get hit back, hard, in all venues, until he is out of US public life. ---
**Author:** ![begbert2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/begbert2/32/3357_2.png) [@begbert2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/begbert2)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 12:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12078 "2019-11-07T00:58:00Z")
Of course Trump is awful and breaks both norms and laws constantly and overtly. I just don’t follow what precisely you think should be done about that - overtly breaking the law? Which law? ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12079 "2019-11-07T00:59:51Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > It is **extremely** clear that Mueller believed that he was, and is, operating within such a system - he was doing discovery for the case that the House of Representatives would prosecute and the Senate would judge. Conditional, of course, on the prosecutors (the House) deciding that there was enough evidence to make a case on. the m.r. wasn’t a trial though. And he failed in a few matters: not interviewing dt; not geting transcripts of dt phone calls with world leaders that have been “hidden”; and making it so Barr could “land the plane” in an airport rm never even thought of. I find it hard to believe people just give a pass to the lack of an interview with dt when democracy seems to be on the block. We’re paying his salary and he doesn’t have the right to sneer at the country while getting the “benefit of the doubt” that we reserve for those who have not trolled and rat fucked our country. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12080 "2019-11-07T01:06:55Z")
> [@begbert2](#): > > Of course Trump is awful and breaks both norms and laws constantly and overtly. > > I just don’t follow what precisely you think should be done about that - overtly breaking the law? Which law? I didn’t mention the law. You did. I am saying that dt has breached his social contract with the nation by breaking campaign and presidential promises, because his fans don’t care about them. But every voter has a right to take an interest in dt and his promises. We all have to live here. If he breaks them, what does the law have to do with it? He asked for a job and we gave it to him. He is not entitled to just shit all over the place just because his base likes it. There is a majority who are paying his salary. Those people were betrayed by the lack of an interiew with dt. But the biggest deal about it is that he gets treated like he is not rat fucking us as a country, by the people who say “Well what are you gonna do right?” ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12081 "2019-11-07T01:55:39Z")
We need a voters rights association. The first plank would be “no position without deposition.” Like a morals clause, or an anti trolling measure. You cannot stay in your job if you are refusing to obey a lawful summons. For public employees that’s the way it works. Dd you ever try to get a license renewed, but you just didn’t feel like paying the tickets you had. So you prevailed on them by being an aggressive alpha male with a huge head of hair? Did they let you have your license? When you flaunt the rules, like we have seen from dt and many players in this, in a public job, you have to go, right then and there. The rules should become strictly enforced for such a person, until they’re gone. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2019, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093/12082 "2019-11-07T02:30:20Z")
Really I could just say if you flaunt the oath you need to go. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=603) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-thread-for-the-mueller-investigation-results-and-outcomes-part-1/800093.md?page=605)