Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Did Mueller come up with nothing?


Did Mueller come up with nothing? Certainly not. Just not the slam-dunk "unindicted co-conspirator" affirmation that might have provided a bipartisan basis for impeachment, which is what you need to get impeachment and removal. Leading Russian figures were indicted for a criminal attack on the American election system. Several American figures, including the former campaign chair, deputy campaign chair, and national security advisor, have all been convicted of felonies, based on questionable relationships with Russia and lying about it. Evidence of criminal activities were found which Mueller did not think to be part of the narrow scope of his inquiry, which he farmed out to other jurisdictions, such as the Southern District of New York. What they did not find was sufficient evidence that Trump or people in the campaign assisted in the basic Russian crime of interfering in our elections.
There was a crime against our country, and it was Mueller's job to prosecute those who were involved in committing it. Please, please, please, don't tell me that you're OK with a foreign government hacking into campaign computer systems and leaking secret stuff, so long as they do it to the Democrats and not the Republicans. The Russians try to do this in elections around the world. It was no witch hunt--Mueller did his job and was honest enough not to try to make illegitimate cases that could not be carried through to convictions. Where he did prosecute, no one has been acquitted. And yet, through all of this, he had to endure constant a constant media attack calling his investigation a witch hunt. Now Trump supporters are calling for Trump opponents to apologize and back off. Maybe. But Trump supporters need to apologize for their constant Mueller-bashing and witch hunt charges. Lots of people in the Trump orbit were guilty of inappropriate relationships with Russia, which is why they're going to jail. There was a major crime against our electoral system, a cyber 9/11. I was actually kind of hoping Mueller would indict a sitting President--Vladimir Putin of Russia. But he didn't. But don't call it a nothingburger. You don't have to be on the Left to have problems with a foreign government hacking our election system and a President who benefits from that hacking and then acts as if the Russians did nothing wrong, and even carries on conversations with their leader while insuring that we have no record of it. Trump consistently welcomed the fruits of this crime against our country, asked Russia to provide Hillary's hacked e-mails, and as President consistently has disregarded his own intelligence community's assessment that there is no reasonable doubt that this interference was the work of the Russians. . I would call that collusion after the fact (rather like being an accessory after the fact to murder), but that is not the sort of collusion that fell within Mueller's mandate to prosecute, and is not, I guess, illegal. It may be within reason to impeach the President on just these grounds, it is certainly something for Americans to take into consideration in 2020 when, as is expected, Donald Trump’s name will appear at the top of the Republican ticket.

We have not been given a definitive answer to the question of whether our President is so under the influence of a foreign government that he is likely to do things that are not in our national interest in virtue of his business interests or the undue influence that foreign governments might have over him. That is the proper subject, not of a criminal investigation, but of Congressional oversight.



24 comments:

Legion of Logic said...

There was a major crime against our electoral system, a cyber 9/11

Comparing the DNC getting hacked to 9/11 is...well, I wouldn't do it.

Trump consistently welcomed the fruits of this crime against our country, asked Russia to provide Hillary's hacked e-mails

If you are referring to the same "asking" of Russia to provide Hillary's emails that she deleted (despite their being subpoenaed) that I saw, it was obviously a joke. And a pretty amusing one, I thought, given how unconcerned the left was with her behavior. Was there another moment where he seriously asked them for their help retrieving the emails she wasn't supposed to even have, let alone delete?

consistently has disregarded his own intelligence community's assessment that there is no reasonable doubt that this interference was the work of the Russians

Trump punting on Russian responsibility for the hacking is certainly a valid question, but the whole presumption-of-innocence thing makes me not leap straight to "collusion" as the explanation. He knows things I do not, and he lies all the time, so any guess of mine or yours is a guess only. I never figured he colluded with Russia to affect the campaign (looked like a Democrat smear job from the beginning), so blaming this question on collusion doesn't fit the factual narrative thus far. I'd blame incompetence before being a Russian actor at this point.

We have not been given a definitive answer to the question of whether our President is so under the influence of a foreign government that he is likely to do things that are not in our national interest in virtue of his business interests or the undue influence that foreign governments might have over him. That is the proper subject, not of a criminal investigation, but of Congressional oversight.

I do not really think there is anything anyone in Congress (or anywhere else) can say or do that would make you or others with your mentality agree that this question has been definitively answered in the negative. I'd happily be proven wrong, though. What would it take?

As for me, I still go with presumption of innocence until presented with a compelling reason to suspect otherwise. Democrats have yet to present such a reason, despite their rabid attempts to do so.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

Prolegomena part 2

Still setting up the TS argument for God's existence, This is part 2 of the Prolegomena where I explain about Transcendental Signifies and deal with TAG, separatism that argument fro my own. Again my own original argumemt the Existence of God, and as always, for rational warrant rather than proof,

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

I did not expect a direct indictment of Trump. It is a disappointment but one I expected.It is not crushing to the resistance. Colbert had the right rapport, took a big white board with two full columns of stuff in little letters taking up every inch of the board,(reasons why Trump is bad pres)then erased one line.

One Brow said...

As for me, I still go with presumption of innocence until presented with a compelling reason to suspect otherwise.

As in, Hillary Clinton has never been convicted of a crime, and is therefore innocent?

Legion of Logic said...

As in, Hillary Clinton has never been convicted of a crime, and is therefore innocent?

Innocent of what?

One Brow said...

Legion of Logic said...
Innocent of what?

Whatever she is being accused of doing at the time.

Legion of Logic said...

Whatever she is being accused of doing at the time.

A conviction is not the same as a compelling reason to believe something occurred, such as her extremely reckless- sorry, careless - handling of sensitive information through her prohibited private email server. We know that occurred, yet it was not part of a trial.

So again, it would all depend on what specifically she is being accused of, same as anyone else. Including Trump.

One Brow said...

Legion of Logic said...
We know that occurred, yet it was not part of a trial.

We know one of Trump's campaign managers, a senior adviser, one of his sons, and other staff cooperated in various ways with Russia during the campaign. You don't find that a compelling reason to think Trump was, at the very least, aware of such cooperation?

Legion of Logic said...

You don't find that a compelling reason to think Trump was, at the very least, aware of such cooperation?

Yes, that's a compelling reason to believe Trump was aware. Not so much that Trump is a Russian actor of some sort, or that he collaborated with Russia to steal the election from Hillary. Trump being aware of people meeting with Russians is not an impeachable offense.

Starhopper said...

"Did Mueller come up with nothing?"

We cannot answer that question at this time, because we have not yet seen the report. It's reputedly somewhere between 300 and one thousand pages long, and all we've seen so far is a 4 page digest written by a person with no pretence of objectivity.

Once I see the report, I'll weigh in on what he may have found. Not until then.

bmiller said...

You should wait at least until Lent is over.

You've been doing good on your pledge to avoid politics.

Starhopper said...

There was nothing partisan about that comment. No politics whatsoever. It's what everyone ought to be doing. There's a giant (and quite unjustified) rush to judgement going on.

It's like critiquing Moby Dick after reading the first 4 pages.

bmiller said...

Good for you.

Interesting choice, Moby Dick.

Starhopper said...

One of my all-time favorite books. I've read it three times so far, and would like to read it once again at some point.

bmiller said...

I've seen the movie, but not read the book.

Why do you like it so much?

Starhopper said...

It makes me think.

It's a big book. For a sampling, read Chapter 119, The Candles.

bmiller said...

Had to look up "corpusants". St Elmo's Fire (the phenomena, not the movie).

Ahab was obsessed all right...and more than a little crazy.

Starhopper said...

It also helps if you are, like me, a fan of "over the top" language, like in Eddison's The Worm Ouroboros or Charles Williams' Arthurian Poetry.

bmiller said...

It also helps if you are, like me, a fan of "over the top" language,

Really? I never noticed! :-)

bmiller said...

Sometimes an intentional understatement can be entertaining too.

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...

I am defending my own original God argument no one else makes: the transcendental signified argument, on Metacrock's Blog

the last two posts have been setting up this argument,

Joseph Hinman (Metacrock) said...



Defending the premises of my transcendentalism signer argument fro God part 2. This is 3-7

Metacrock's blog


1. Any rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe must of necessity presuppose organizing principles (Ops)
2. OP's are summed up in TS
3. Modern Thought rejects TS outright or takes out all aspects of mind.
4. Therefore, Modern thought fails to provide a rational, coherent, and meaningful view of the universe.

6. Therefore universal mind, offers the best understanding of TS

7. Concept of God unites TS with universal mind therefore offers best explanation
for a view that is Rational, Coherent, and Meaningful (RCM).

Oswald said...

Victor, the US government interferes with elections around the world. Remember Obama trying to do in Nentanyahu?

And all this so called interference, which the DNC itself also engaged in, happened during OBAMAS WATCH!

Limited Perspective said...

The The Mueller Report was started on a fraud, a lie, a conspiracy theory. The report said the original basis of the investigation was a fraud, a lie, a conspiracy theory. Of course when investigating a fraud, a lie, a conspiracy theory someone will uncover some facts. If the investigators have unlimited power to look into the personal and financial lives of people with the purpose of destruction, they will destroy.

Thanks Victor for advocating for a fraud, a pack of lies, and conspiracy theories. May God save you from the Inquisitor when the politics turn against you.