To everyone mad at Mueller - have you read his report?

[Claritie Pixie]

Thanks in advance.

[Sherman A1]

1. Does it count if I haven't

And am not mad at Mueller?

I believe that he did an excellent job and also believe some of the talking heads along with folks here were exercising a lot of wishful thinking.

[Claritie Pixie]

2. Ha no but thanks for responding. I urge you to read it though.

Every single American should.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. I've read his report, I'm not mad at him, and his today statement says

exactly what he said in the report: the Russians tried to interfere in the election; there was insufficient evidence to establish the Trump campaign committed the crime of conspiracy; and he did not absolve Trump of obstruction of justice but left that for Congress to deal with because DoJ policy says a sitting president can't be indicted. Clear as gin.

[spooky3]

7. Agree. But this is a good example of why having him

testify is so essential—to communicate it in a different way that will have impact on more people who just do not “get it” or won’t read.

[Nevermypresident]

4. Yes I have. As a result, I realized his position was to (a) provide a roadmap to the House for

Articles of Impeachment and (b) follow the DOJ memo which states he could not indict a sitting President.

All of which he reinforced today, while highlighting he did not exonerate trump for obstruction.

[cilla4progress]

5. Listening to audio book .

Mad he didn't indict DJTJ. Makes no sense to me.

[Hoyt]

6. Yep, and it says exactly what Mueller said today. There was not one thing new. In fact, Barr's

summary said what Mueller said today, but in slightly different words.

Mueller Report:

"Fourth, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President
clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state." [Page 2, Vol II]


Maybe Mueller saying it again today will change things, but the report already said it almost word-for-word, and Barr came very close to saying it over 2 months ago in his 4 page summary:

"The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President – most of which have been the subject of public reporting – that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion - one way or the other – as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President's actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

[redstatebluegirl]

8. I did read it and I think he did a great job.

Now he wants Congress to do theirs. Of course they need to read the report as well. I so question however whether some of them can handle that type of written material with their limited intellect.