The Mueller Report Has Been Delivered

The Senate and House Judiciary Committees have officially been notified that the William Barr received the Mueller report. He notified them that neither the Acting Attorney General nor he vetoed any prosecutorial decision.

He told the Chairs and Ranking Members he may be able to inform them of the main jist of the report this weekend. And he will work with Mueller and Rod Rosenstein on how much else can be released.

Update: DOJ is now saying that there are no outstanding indictments, and no more expected.

image_print
275 replies
    • Drew says:

      It was announced that there are no sealed or forthcoming indictments coming from Mueller. However it isn’t clear how many referrals to other prosecutors (e.g. SDNY, but there may be others) that may have been made. Those investigations wouldn’t be terminated by this.

      In addition, state prosecutors, esp in New York aren’t influenced by this at all, except to the extent that they were waiting for Mueller to be done before acting.

      • Kevin Finnerty says:

        The thing I’m most surprised about is that there are not even additional cooperating guilty pleas. Nothing regarding Felix Sater or Erik Prince? Genuinely surprising. I would have expected a few more people to have been tripped up at some point.

    • SM says:

      That is what I’ve been wondering. How can someone see how many sealed indictments are still there to be unsealed?

        • TracyLynn says:

          Perhaps you could unpack what you mean by “more vaporous than fools gold.” We, so many of us, are disheartened by this news.

          • bmaz says:

            Sorry for the delay. It is just that many people have been contemplating the existence of a bevy of sealed indictments from almost the start of the Mueller investigation. I have consistently tried to disabuse folks of this thought. Still doing so.

            • Lovely says:

              RIght, We’ve been hearing about sealed indictments from the right and the left for a pretty good while.

  1. Jockobadger says:

    I wonder if any indictments will also be dropped (or maybe unsealed) concurrent with the announcement of the delivery of the report? Not getting my hopes up. Damn it.

    • punaise says:

      via TPM:

      Late Update: Attorney General Bill Barr in a letter CNN read on the air is telling Congress he may be able to provide it with more information as early as this weekend.

    • smurphy999999999 says:

      The letter is public so if it isn’t true Mueller could just inform Congress that the letter is a lie.

  2. Jacques Clouseau says:

    No matter the outcome, I’d like to thank the entire emptywheel staff for all of the coverage and insight here. I look forward to reading your insight once we get more information.

  3. viget says:

    Not good, Marcy. This is Fitzmas all over again. Guessing the SC has granted cert for mystery appellant.

    On the flip side, can you now discuss your story?

    • Jacques Clouseau says:

      I too am interested in learning what emptywheel submitted or talked about. When do you think you’ll be able to share those details, if at all?

    • emptywheel says:

      I hope to lay out the outlines after thinking through how to do so. As I’ve always noted, the issue I went to DOJ about was related to but different from the Mueller investigation, but it ended up having overlaps with it. So I’m not sure the status of it (except that it hasn’t been charged).

      • Viget says:

        You are right Bmaz. I am sorry for doing so, I shouldn’t have. It’s the selfish curiosity about it all, I gave into that. I just would like to know that the powers that be won’t stand for this kind of meddling by our adversaries.

      • ivaluemyprivacy says:

        actually, it seems pretty reasonable since it was trumpeted (sorry, disclaimed) at the beginning of every post. whether intentional or not, it was good advertising for her blog. drew me in, anyway

    • Njrun says:

      This is worse than the Chiefs seemingly winning the championship game and then having it pulled away by a penalty and a coin flip.

      • quickbread says:

        Now I realize why Trump has been so open about letting the public see the report. He knows he and none of his family will be named in it because they remain unindicted. So, if they remain unnamed, how will Congress have enough information to even consider impeachment proceedings? I feel totally sick.

    • ivaluemyprivacy says:

      why? assuming Mueller’s integrity is intact, would you prefer that he have evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians or committed Sone crime? I don’t see Mueller stopping because evidence not yet conclusive

      • quickclaude says:

        I’d have preferred indictments where ample evidence likely exists.

        [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so community members get to know you. Thanks. /~Rayne]

      • klynn says:

        My regrets EW and bmaz. I did not mean to put you in a position of harm. Regretably my inquiry was a misunderstanding of the “Putting A Face” post. It was my failed interpretation that if the report revealed any information pertaining to your source, that you were going to revisit the disclosure of the text sent. Again I am sorry.

  4. punaise says:

    Easy to say as an outsider not risking professional suicide, but I hope there is a potential whistle-blower willing to leak the report if Barr buries it.

    • PR says:

      Face it: you knew more about a cum-stained blue dress & a loose-lipped bitch named Linda Tripp in 1990-whatever & how every morally righteous senator thought THAN you will ever know about treason. History used to be written by the victors, but now it’s just a bunch of hackers working for Uncle Sam.

  5. Badger Robert says:

    There can be broad report about a conspiracy to defraud the US, without any content about collusion by the Presidential candidate. Good lawyers can write around a fixed obstacle. Do not assume anything.
    The political impact that is more concerning is that there was assistance and it was effective particularly in the northern tier states.

    • hester says:

      Can you expand a bit more on your last sentence? Would be appreciated. Not sure what you mean ‘northern tier states’, etc.

      • P J Evans says:

        I think he means Michigan and Wisconsin (though IME “northern tier” is more Minnesota and the Dakotas).

  6. x174 says:

    mt–thanks for providing us with the Barr letter with details about our reprobate in chief and his droogs.

    the timing of the release is interesting too: coinciding with what appears to be the economy teetering into a recession with today’s bond yield curve inversion.

    • x174 says:

      that should have read “the Barr letter with details soon to follow about our reprobate in chief and his droogs”

    • P J Evans says:

      and Himself wanting a non-economist political hack for the Fed isn’t going to improve the economy.

      • x174 says:

        yes and horrifying. i wonder what he expects Moore to do? probably spy on Powell a la Nunes and feed all the latest poop to our dog shit president

    • BroD says:

      Speculation re timing always borders on the whimsical: there’s always something else going on. From here, it’s the NCAA basketball tournament–news of The Report hit a lot of eyeballs glued to hoops.

  7. HAROLD says:

    Anybody have an idea how closely the full unredacted report is held?
    Anybody have odds of someone falling on a grenade and leaking it?
    My family and I can’t survive this orange nightmare skating!
    Thanks to you all, especially you Marcy. God Bless you for your work!

    • Drew says:

      The report was that VERY few have seen the full report. Now we know that Rosenstein & Barr have seen it (as well as the subset of Mueller’s leakproof office). It will probably take a while before anyone grenade worthy will get close enough to leak it. I kind of expect some leaks to come from Barr–i.e. juicy unauthorized tidbits wandering out through congressional or friendly reporter channels in order to shape the narrative according to his liking. Or, if not Barr, some operatives close to him. But it’s unlikely that career people will get close to it for a while yet.

      • hollywood says:

        Trump will see the report and will discuss it with Giuliani. Rudy will start blabbing his spin on the report which will be slanted if not completely inaccurate. Trump will again advise: No collusion.

  8. Coffae says:

    I am completely flummoxed. Amazon has released a copy of the report, saying that the author is the US Government.
    https://www .amazon .com/Mueller-Report-US-Government-ebook/dp/B07PHDQS99/

    [ref=pd_sim_351_2/143-8153099-6487255?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B07PHDQS99&pd_rd_r=20054ce8-4ce9-11e9-81ea-71d290bf4808&pd_rd_w=FaGlH&pd_rd_wg=pExNc&pf_rd_p=90485860-83e9-4fd9-b838-b28a9b7fda30&pf_rd_r=1XMDWQDQHQAYDMM0Z8B5&psc=1&refRID=1XMDWQDQHQAYDMM0Z8B5]

    Can this be? I purchased it and skimmed through it, and it has everything that we already know: Flynn, Papadopoulos, Kilminick, Cohen, Flynn Jr., Manafort, the 13 Russians, Van Der Zwaan, The Internet Research Agency, Richard Pinedo.

    I am wondering if this is just a sham put out by the GOP right now to look like the report.

    [FYI, I have ‘broken’ the link you shared as well as de-linked tracking (see the material inside the brackets which likely shares information about you as an Amazon customer, creating an association with anyone who uses that full link). Amazon frankly does a crappy job of policing content published through its Kindle self-publishing platform; this same material is likely available for free through federal government sites. In the future, please use more care sharing links as well as removing tracking content./~Rayne]

    • PieIsDamnGood says:

      Why would the Mueller report be available on Amazon?

      Congratulations you just made a scammer’s day!

    • hollywood says:

      Amazon has 2 place holder reports for sale. One has commentary by WaPo writers, the other by Dershowitz. You can order an advance copy, but it can’t be delivered until something has been released.

  9. Alan Charbonneau says:

    Marcy, I have enjoyed and been immensely informed by your analysis. I am continuing to read emptywheel.net because I know that this story is far from over. But obviously, this is a milestone and I wanted to express my appreciation for a job well done.
    Regards,
    Alan

    • Report counselor says:

      Marcy, assuming Mueller is playing by the DOJ rulebook and laws on the book which we would expect him to adhere to. How do we get the information gathered to figure out if we need to change these laws or close lloopholes that could be protecting “criminals” that weren’t taken into account for when the laws were created. It seems like there are abuses with FARA and money moving through proxies that maybe legal but contradict (maybe) the intent we want the law to prevent.

      • manymusings says:

        FWIW I believe a spinoff of the Mueller investigation is a strengthened focus within broader DOJ on FARA violations. Foreign lobbying is pervasive and the reporting requirement has been blown off without real consequence for years.

        Re money moving through proxies — I’m pretty sure our corporate overlords still manage to package this as a positive or at least a vital “business practice” and the pols they keep fat ‘n happy are only to glad to play along.

  10. Molly Pitcher says:

    Well this explains some of the Electoral College President’s recent odious Twitter spews. I find it hard to believe he hasn’t had some sort of heads up.

    And now it really begins…

  11. perris says:

    Rosenstein filed a confidential brief to senate republicans, (not democrats?…if so, that’s a scary indication to his feelings)

    In essence, unless there is an indictment nobody should be implicated in public.

    I’d link but suspect I’d be flagged as spam, since cannot create an account, the search term would be to be fair, it does sound like a reasonable position, just not the one I’d like to see;

    “Rosenstein’s confidential letter to Senate Republicans offers road map for the remainder of the Mueller probe: report”

    Here’s an excerpt

    “… In the letter, Rosenstein argued that the Justice Department cannot and should not include in a special counsel report “disparaging or incriminating information about anybody who has not been charged with a crime.”

    We know the justice department has a policy against indicting the sitting president, so he won’t be implicated if they agree with that policy, which we have to assume Barr will.

    I opined all along, Mueller wouldn’t indict any in the family until the end of the inquiry, for the political firestorm, I didn’t expect them to go unindicted, just not till finished.

    Though we don’t know if they’re in sealed indictments, it doesn’t look like they are right now, hopefully wrong on that, but if they’re not, then the report would not implicate them for public eyes.

    Frankly, with Stone, Jr, the favorite daughter, and Kush going unindicted as yet, I am ready for another punch in the stomach.

    • perris says:

      and now;

      UPDATE: 6. The Justice Department says there are no more sealed indictments to come from Mueller’s probe.

      Which means if none in the family are yet indicted, nor will they be

    • perris says:

      Too late to edit, but I didn’t mean to include Stone going unindicted, but not-flipped and not convicted

    • hollywood says:

      We have to see what details Barr releases. Then, we can assume the House committees will tailor their investigations to go after more dirt on the Trump crime family. Meanwhile, the SDNY US Attorney’s office and others are free to start deposing people.
      This may all play out well with a crescendo of indictments and investigations dumping on Trump as the economy dovetails and the 2020 election looms. Bye Trump and family.

    • Mulder says:

      I’m guessing but it’s likely that the Repubs requested a response from RR on how would the SC handle writing the report.

      Recall that RR helped write a version of the Comey firing letter highlighting his handling of HRC non-indictment. Comey broke DOJ policy. He publicly shared the “extremely careless dirt” on HRC despite not moving for indictment.

      Barr’s report will not include the “dirt” on anyone who isn’t going to be indicted. We should learn more details about those who have been assuming no CI/classified details are involved.

    • InfiniteLoop says:

      That suggests 1) that the report *contains* information about individuals not charged with crimes, 2) that those individuals are associated with the Republican Party, and 3) that Mueller, for whatever reason, is declining to prosecute.

      • Mulder says:

        From Barr’s letter to Congress referencing Meuller’s report…”confidential report explaining the prosecutions and declination decisions” he has made’.

        I don’t see Barr’s report releasing any of the “declination dirt”. Comey is our only hope. “He’s a leaker”. jk

  12. Laura says:

    When does Trump get the report? Does he already have it? Has he started compulsively tweeting ‘NO COLLUSION’ yet?

    • perris says:

      Doesn’t look like Trump has it yet, I can’t post the link but here’s the leed;

      Rep. Swalwell warns AG Barr to give Mueller report to Congress before Trump so he doesn’t ‘taint it’

  13. Badger Robert says:

    The SCO definitely has enough names to write a good report on how the Russians interfered with the election. The information for any other prosecutions now lies with other offices. I suspect the inauguration committee investigation has so many leads that it will be the main focus.
    Do you really think that in the week that saw Trump once again attack McCain, Robert Mueller is going to just white wash Trump? This is most likely a step Robert has to take in order to testify before the House committee. But we shall see.

    • Perris says:

      Hi punaise, long time, isn’t it?

      I’ve suspected, and mentioned, the inquiry is suspect, since the players are republican, investigating their standard barer.

      Sure, Mueller enjoys a reputation for integrity, but I’ve always bemoaned, there was enough evidence from the start to put an end to the criminality, the longer it took, the harder it would be for efficacy.

      As far as the president’s support, Trump has indeed inoculated himself from the report.
      Sure, it took less time than previous investigations, sure it produced more in that short time, but it had an easier charge, with more easily investigated crimes.

      I don’t know how this winds up, but surely I won’t be satisfied it hadn’t wound up sooner.

      Good seeing you again Punais

        • Laura says:

          I expect we will see a lot of conspiracy mongering in the coming days. Might actually be a good weekend to stay off the Interwebz,,do yard work, listen to science fiction on Audible.

          • P J Evans says:

            Read some of the e-books I have that have been sitting for months or even years, knit some, merge genealogy some more (trying to get all the versions into one file, very slow going). Shop for groceries and a plastic shelf unit that will fit around the AC so I can put plants on it.

      • ivaluemyprivacy says:

        don’t pull that crap. otherwise all you are doing is pushing your preconceived conclusions or preferences.

        is be quite happy to learn that our president is not a Russian agent. wouldn’t you?

    • Robert Chiovoloni says:

      “Whirl”? If your going to steal frm the greats, it’s gotta be better than “whirl.”

      • Rayne says:

        If you are going to criticize one of this site’s greats, you’re going to have to do better yourself. Now pony up a pun.

        Welcome to emptywheel, by the way.

      • punaise says:

        ciao, Roberto, potrei dire “non me ne frego un cazzo” bthat would be rude.

        Point taken, but it worked on the fly for me. Hasn’t this been a whirlwind?

        (Pssst: thx Rayne!)

  14. greengiant says:

    Not unexpected. No paper trail, no digital trail that can be revealed without disclosing sources and methods. Major win for the likes of Putin, Farage and Nix. Recall that the same prosecutors and FBI head gave Sater a free pass under the Bush administration. Good enough to go after the Italian mob. Hands off Wall street, the Russian mob and the Saudis.

  15. Thomas Paine says:

    I think this likely means that the probe into Conspiracy to Defraud the United States has not found enough compelling evidence to make a case. That is not to say that other crimes were uncovered and referred to other parts of the DoJ, (SDNY for example). In that event, there might not be much, if anything, in the report to describe these referrals, since they are ongoing investigations. In any event, a declination to indict is NOT an exoneration. Advocates for justice need to keep this point in mind.

    I think Mueller pushed his mandate as far as he could. It is up to the Congress and the People to reign the tyrant in – either via Oversight or the Ballot Box.

    • Richard G says:

      It’s sinking in. You put it simply. Not enough evidence to charge anyone else with Conspiracy to Defraud the United States. And it’s hard to imagine there could be a case against Trump Sr without accomplices. Time to let all that go, as a criminal matter. (NAL)

  16. Peacerme says:

    It feels like the day he was elected. We can’t stop a man who is harming children on purpose. Can you see? We can’t stop him. We didn’t stop Bush and we can’t stop Trump. He’s harming children on the border. He will make himself a victim here. He’s threatened the full force of law for protests. I feel sick. Someone say something hopeful. How do we get rid of him? (Legally, of course)

    • cat herder says:

      It would be Too Divisive to get rid of the Russian agent currently fondling the nuclear codes and appointing judges who will be the ones to decide said Russian agent’s fate.

  17. tinao says:

    I really hope the repubs can see they’re way clear to Impeachment. This is our nation at stake, damn. Hell, at this point with the baffoon, they would be helping their party reorganize!

      • tinao says:

        K hester, fair comment, but we have yet to know what is in the report. Also, just cuz the “polls show” that, not unlike the beginning of watergate, that is not what the VOTERS know. And if i know anything, the general public, repub and dem are not stupid. We are living in a fact check time. The stupid repubs at best are 30%. So, more than ever before, voting counts and if ’18 was any clue we all can do this. Oh yes, lets get rid of wormtongue and the turtle!

    • manymusings says:

      It’s our nation at stake — but realize that without indictable evidence after almost two years, a good part of the electorate — certainly a good portion that elected this president — will not perceive *republicans* gathering to impeach Trump as anything resembling justice or protecting democracy. Quite the opposite. It would be seen as a gilded elite from both parties stealing back power from a “populist” outsider president. Step back, and see this from different eyes.

      This didn’t *have* to get kicked to a special counsel — but once it did, indictable evidence became the standard, for better or worse. And remember those supposedly in the know have been *promising* that evidence this whole time. Not just guessing — telling us they’d seen it. “Just wait for Mueller’s report.”

      Let’s see what actually comes from the report. But the idea of enlisting republicans for impeachment if Mueller leaves Trump unscathed — especially with Trump’s polling numbers where they are among republicans — just isn’t going to happen, and honestly, big picture I’m not sure we should wish for it to happen. This whole thing is a massive debacle.

      • Democritus says:

        Thank you, still processing but you lived up to your name and have given my something to chew on. Like some others I am pretty scared, though I realized this might happen I have deliberately not poked at that nerve.

        Hopefully there is more to come, but. Sigh. Would love to read some optimism, and logically I can see it with Dem candidates a chance to get Trump out, but I’m not feeling it just yet.

      • tinao says:

        Manymusings I disagree, Democracy is a messy thing. And like I said above, do you realize that only about 30% of Americans identify as repubs? I know money and spin plays in, but call me an eternal optimist…I believe in PEOPLE.

        • manymusings says:

          But what about the PEOPLE who elected the president you want to impeach? The whole point is if we subject him to the rule of law and then say, what the hell let’s get ’em anyway — that is NOT democracy in action, it’s canceling the outcome of an election by persuading enough people in power to go along with it. Persuading those in power to undermine their own constituents and our fellow citizens.

          Look, the prospect of the Mueller report seems to have allowed people to wholly write-off the FACT that Trump was elected, and the people who elected him are also citizens of this country, and however much we hate or condemn Trump — the rules we’ve set for democracy aren’t SO messy that we override an election because the “right” people didn’t like it, and many of us smart people are sure he’s acting for Russia or otherwise a criminal even if a two-year investigation didn’t prove it (because a dedicated criminal probe is burdened by oh so many constraints ….).

          Sorry … I just can’t help seeing this from the perspective of what if it happened against OUR side, because we voted in the “wrong” person. Don’t get fooled that this is somehow a Trump aberration. If it happens once, it can happen again.

          Bottom line, if Trump is/was a Russian asset — our sprawling intelligence community and law enforcement apparatus damn well should have found it and proved it. It doesn’t lack the tools or resources. They literally have more information and enforcement power than any other powers on earth. If they can’t protect the presidency, what they hell do they need all those powers for and what are they doing?

          If they don’t have the goods on Trump, they don’t have the goods. It puts him in the status as many if not most national politicians who aren’t exactly girl and boy scouts, but whom we somehow manage to live with without trying to cast aside the rules and norms and respect that hold together a diverse and often divided democracy.

          • Doug R says:

            2,800,000 MORE voted for the Democratic candidate for President in 2016, more than any white man.
            8,000,000 MORE voted for their Democratic candidate in 2018, the highest margin in a midterm since they started keeping track in 1948.

          • tinao says:

            K, I can see you are very upset. But I think you are not so much mad at me as you are as at a system that is fucking us, and trust me i am not arguing against that so much as …here we are. Let us deal wisely now. I am not stupid or your enemy.

          • Rayne says:

            Wow. He wasn’t elected. He lost the popular vote. He only won the electoral college and that’s questionable. He had help from undisclosed unregistered foreign entities from the same country he asked for help in a speech (Hillary’s emails) and whose political party received donations laundered by the NRA — for starters. Most of the goods you believe Mueller doesn’t have are right out there in plain sight, spelled out here at emptywheel in myriad posts.

            If a Democratic candidate had “won” the White House this way they’d have been removed inside the first six months of their term by the GOP majority in Congress.

            Trump is in no goddamned way like Nixon (who was paranoid) or Clinton (who was a philanderer) or Bush (who was a corporatist puppet). He’s a racist, misogynistic narcissist who has broken nearly every norm of the presidency and violated a crapload of laws. The real problem has been the corrupt hyperconsolidation of power by the GOP and the public’s complacency about it which your shrugging attitude exemplifies.

            • Hika says:

              Hear! Hear!
              One small quibble: “He wasn’t elected.”
              Well, he was elected, just not democratically elected. And unfortunately, he is exactly the type of person the Founding Fathers had in mind to stop with the Electoral College. That mechanism was put to the test in the case of Trump and proved a failure.

              • tinao says:

                Yup Hika, true, very true. That’s why I like Elizabeth Warren, the electorial college should go, but i also want provisions for the type of shit we just lived through. Like meddling by foreign powers…

                • tinao says:

                  I still say its just the profit-driven-media that says we have to have results that night. We as Americans would be much, much safer to be patient and count votes together at the precinct level before anything moves to a central location. WE all should be in control, instead of corporatist.

                    • tinao says:

                      Full disclosure, I have been an election integrity advocate since shrub. So much so that when I signed up to be a poll worker, they made me a judge of elections in a tiny podunck precinct. But, I witnessed the placing of hackable voting machines in a firehall with mutilple access by who knows who for several days before the election. And I had even gone down to the senate hearing on electronic voting and seen with my own eyes a computor science expert from carnegie mellon hack the vote in under 60 seconds! I mean, SHIT PEOPLE WAKE UP. I know some things have gotten better, but PLEASE we can figure this shit out together.

            • manymusings says:

              Winning the electoral college means he was legitimately elected. Whether he illegally had help from foreign entities is what Mueller was supposed to prove. For two years — “just wait.” If the evidence were in plain sight, then Mueller is either incompetent or corrupt, or he was stymied — though today he affirmed to Barr/Congress that he was not stymied. Or, something in this conclusion needs to be reconsidered.

              I agree that if an opposition party held both the House and the Senate, they might unseat a president for the accusations leveled against Trump, if they thought public opinion would support it. My opinion would be the same if impeachment articles followed a special counsel report that provided no evidence of crimes by the president.

              I don’t believe I have expressed a “shrugging” attitude. I have a different take on how we got a “hyperconsolidation of power” by the GOP (not to mention other entrenched interests with a stranglehold on the republic) and how we got Trump, and the most constructive (and democratic) thing to do about it.

              What does it looks like when rage and certainty and the comfort of group-think turn reasonable people into pushers of what their own consciences and intellect normally would defend against?

              • tinao says:

                So pray tell manymusings, who would those other entrenched interests be? Be plain or be gone, we really don’t have time for games do we?

              • Rayne says:

                manymusings, you’ve made 17 comments to date at this site, most of them overlong meanderings. In your first last September you asked if there were any lawyers here which should have been a flag. Now having read back through your body of comments I am skeptical of your intent, particularly after your attempts to normalize a massive fraud.

            • Democritus says:

              You rock! I’m trying to stay off the twitters and out of he comment sections in most places so I don’t get wound up, and I’m sure the shills and trolls are both out in force this weekend.

              Here and one other place is my exception,and honestly this is where I come to follow people who did not stop tracking this tragedy closely.

              I want to see Mueller testify, and right now I am gobsmacked. Did they start wrapping up months ago, did it happen recently?

              What was the original sourcing they were wrapping up around the turn f the year? Was that planned, or was the team already being pressured to stop?

              Is Mueller trust worthy?

              Should we all be slowing down and waiting to see?

              United States of Anxiety is more like it. :-/

          • James says:

            Manymusings- Thanks. It’s refreshing and rare to hear a reasonable, and reasoning, voice these days. Hopefully, we’ll all do better in the next election.

            • Marinela says:

              You find reasonable that the corruption is not on Trump, rather on Mueller. This is some crap that M said. This is not refreshing, is wrong.

              The so called “rare” finding I am sure you can see it on your “favorite” biased sides.

          • Tim says:

            Well, you’re right, if it’s there they [the intelligence community] should know it. OTOH, they missed the Indian nuclear test and they presented some evidence of WMD’s in Iraq, so I wouldn’t place too much faith there. They’re good at the issues that they’ve focused on already, but bad at surprises. I’d say they’ll be pretty good at Russian hacking in the future.

            There is also the “protection of intelligence” measures, methods, etc. that could mean that damning evidence is not handed over because the security community (that Trump is ignoring) needs it for its own data collection.

            Not that this matters now; the other stuff swirling around him might make him miserable but is unlikely to remove him. It’s down to the ballot box in 2020.

  18. Michael says:

    The whole thing is just bizarre. What was the point of fighting a big court battle over Steven Miller and then giving up before getting his testimony? And why did Noel Francisco urge the Supreme Court to deny cert to Mystery Appellant on February 22nd if Mueller didn’t need their documents? And why was Mystery Appellant still on expedited review as recently as a few weeks ago?

    • Ruthie says:

      I need a drink… or two, or more. Tonight looks like it will be as depressing as election night

      • Jenny says:

        Ruthie, I have already started. Staying positive because there is a trail of evidence for SDNY, VA and DC. With the congressional investigations, emoluments, inauguration committee, campaign finance, and probably money laundering, so much more to be revealed.

      • mister bunny says:

        That is indeed what it feels like. Election night all over again.
        The bastards are getting away with it.

        Sure, not Paulie, not Cohen, not Flynn. But the Trump family is getting away with it.
        Other investigations … not putting a lot of stock in those changing anything for 2020 at this point.

    • Marinela says:

      Why Trump was not dragged in front of the grand jury to testify?
      How could Mueller complete the report without his testimony?

      They forced Clinton to testify, but they could not get Trump in front of a grand jury? Why?

      Rotten to think there is so much difference on how law applies to different Presidents.

      And maddening to think there is so much public information regarding Trump’s illegal acts. It is astonishing.

      • P J Evans says:

        Targets don’t get called in front of GJs. Neither do most witnesses – it’s for the prosecutors to make decisions about whether to take the person to trial or not.

        • Marinela says:

          So back to Clinton. He was “forced” to testify in Grand Jury. I think they pressured him, and he agreed to testify.

          They didn’t have the goods to take Clinton to trial, so why the difference?
          They went to the impeachment route after he lied under oath (GJ).

          To me seems arbitrary, but I guess I am missing something obvious here.

          I know Trump sets the bar really low, so he gets away in public with much, but Mueller didn’t fight for his GJ testimony, or we don’t know about this aspect.

          • safari says:

            It’s not the difference in Presidents that matters, but rather their political affiliation. This latest Trump/Russia saga is the crescendo act of seeing how far the IOKIYAR principle has taken root.

            • Marinela says:

              Ya, but it is not making it right.
              Waiting to understand what caused the “abrupt” Mueller report.

    • Rick Ryan says:

      I don’t want to think it but a little part of me wonders if this isn’t Barr shutting the whole thing down, using the basic political competence his dumbass party has by and large forgotten. “Hey Bob, ol’ buddy, you’ve got a non-compromised, fully confirmed AG in charge now, no need for a Special Counsel anymore. Please refer your ongoing investigations to other entities under my purview. I’ll make sure they all get handled appropriately. Just go ahead and write up what you’ve got now and leave it on my desk.” [all reports are subsequently buried deep in the stacks in some basement somewhere]

      Overall, I’m actually cautiously optimistic that at least a few cats are coming out of their various bags one way or another within the next 18 months. But there’s a pretty obvious explanation for what’s happening right before our eyes (remember the Manafort non-speaking memo), in the absence of countervailing information.

      • Marinela says:

        Maybe as soon as next week we’ll understand what happened that precipitated the Mueller report generation.
        Why is Barr siting on the report to review it?
        The more time he takes to make it public, the more I tend to think we the public are not going to see it soon.
        If Mueller did the report on his time frame, I would think the report would be ready to be public already or close to it.
        Why would the President see it, but not the congress, and/or the public?
        President as the target should see it at the same time we all get to see it.

  19. jfortran says:

    I cannot fathom how Don jr. or anyone else in the Trump Tower meeting skates away from a conspiracy to defraud charge. Do crimes become legal if you do them or admit to them in public? Mind-boggling. Trump publicly asks an adversary to disclose stolen materials, then they do, and it’s all ok? The Teflon Don does it again…

    [Welcome back to emptywheel. Please use the same username each time you comment so community members get to know you. Thanks. /~Rayne]

    • punaise says:

      A buddy wrote a song – more of a dirge, really – just after the 2016 election that starts:

      “It’s just sinking in
      And I’m sinking with it”

      • bg says:

        I ran into my recently new Congressional rep just now. “The longer I’m in DC the more I learn how truly terrible he is. I had no idea how bad it could really be.” I don’t have any additional insight, did not have the opportunity to try to wrest out more detail.

  20. sand says:

    If no other shoe drops, we have only 592 days until we each get to put our foot down. Only 19 months. I’ve already cleaned out the dustbin to make room.

  21. I Never Lie and am Always Right says:

    The only thing that can be said is that, as to potential indictments, the “farming out” of certain investigations means that the fat lady has not yet sung. My own speculation is that we are nowhere near the final act.

    • Ruthie says:

      But didn’t Mueller farm out only those parts of the investigation that don’t pertain directly to his remit, ie Russian interference (COLLUSION!!) in the election?

      If that’s the case, any indictments by other law enforcement agencies presumably wouldn’t be about conspiracy.

      • Rick Ryan says:

        I wonder (especially in light of EW repeatedly noting ‘maybe the obstruction worked’) if the report will say that, well, the obstruction worked. Like, “For reasons X, Y and Z I believe there is credible evidence that Individual 1 conspired with Individuals 2 and 3 to commit ConFraudUS, but Individual 1 refused to submit to questioning and asserted executive privilege over all communications related to Event A (which rhymes with Shminauguration Shmommittee), so I do not judge the evidence available to me to be sufficient for indictment. I consider challenging executive privilege to be outside the scope of my authority as a temporary entity within the Executive Branch, so I refer this matter to Congress.”

        Given that the House just voted 420-0 to make the report public, this might actually be something of a disastrous outcome for the big orange pissbaby. It’s easier to avoid answering questions when you’re being hounded by a secretive “witch hunt” than when your own compatriots showed the world you’ve got a cauldron and a flying broom.

    • Rick Ryan says:

      Does anyone know if Mueller’s report would identify (and/or, discuss?) intestigations that are “farmed out”?

      If so, how does that work exactly? Actually spelling out “I uncovered pieces of evidence A, B, and C that give probable cause that Individual 1 committed Crime X, and gave all that to Department Alpha to investigate further” in a report that could go public would seem to be… counterproductive. Although I guess in theory the report is confidential.

  22. Richieboy says:

    Wow, lots of handwringing over early unconfirmed reports. If they’re true and there’s no ConFraudUS charges, I don’t think I’ll be crushed, not more than I already am at least.

    Thomas Paine 7:11pm nails this. I’ve never expected that a report would be an immediate game-changer, whatever it said. MW said a long time ago that Mueller speaks through indictments. If he can’t indict, it doesn’t mean he doesn’t think or know crimes were committed. More likely it’d be because he didnt have the lead pipe cinch, slam-dunk proof he’d have to have just to indict this case.

    Also, if true, it’d make Nancy Pelosi’s recent comments on impeachment seem all the more canny.

    Also, I’m gonna take a breath, turn all this off for now, and see what the morrow brings.

    • mister bunny says:

      I expected the final report to bring at least obstruction charges.
      The fact that those have been passed over is disappointing to say the least.

  23. Eureka says:

    Hi *there* bell, you need to learn how deictics like *here* work. In other words, go pick your belly lint somewhere else. Byeeee

  24. Democritus says:

    I want to hear from Mueller. Also why did Khuzami leave SDNY today?

    Anyway, that recommendation for some sci-fi and maybe some quiet sounds very nice.

  25. Fran of the North says:

    While no one can elide the future, I’m deep in my cups and in deep despondency. I fear for my country and those who serve it.

    Last weekend my family buried a stone-Cold Warrior: WWII vet, WIA Korea, and on the tip of the spear in US Military intelligence fighting the Soviets. The Army sent a detachment of 10 for the service: Pall Bearers, Flag Folders, 21 gun salute shooters and a Colonel to command. These were no weekend warriors, each had a chestful of medals.

    Many wonderful images and memories but the searing lie stands out.

    When the Colonel presented the casket flag to my mother, he said “The president of the United States sends his condolences….”

    Sitting behind my mother, I about jumped out of my skin with my rejection of the obvious untruth. However, my respect for decorum and my understanding of military protocol required my silence.

    My experience with, and views of the US military are dramatically different than many in this forum. That said, I am very apprehensive as to whether true patriots will volunteer to serve an administration and government as obviously corrupt as this one.

    Fran

    • Eureka says:

      Aw, Fran- I felt that gut punch with you where you wrote about the flag transfer. I am sick for you, with the words passed over it as it was handed to your mother.

      My sincerest condolences. And I’m sorry I mostly have groan words for you. My family has not had former service-member deaths during this presidency; I just cannot imagine all that would come forth in feeling under the circumstances.

      From a family of many vets, I am sorry for your family’s loss.
      (Hugs)

      • Pablo in the Gazebo says:

        Fran (of the North)
        I cannot speak for all vets, but I can and will speak for the vets that I keep close. We hold the soldiers who protected us, we hold the soldiers who saved us, we hold those who fought and won for us, soldiers like yours who was finally laid to rest today, in the highest regard. We stand and salute him, those ceremonies are heart wrenching.
        And to your comment, “…views of the US military are dramatically different than many in this forum” I would add, but not all. The groups I am in agree wholeheartedly with the views alive here, but we are a minority – vocal, but alas, only amongst ourselves. Our war of fifty years ago was a waste that taught us nothing, but the hero whose casket was set in the ground today, his war gave us the freedom for this forum to exist. His flag may have been profaned with its presentation, but the ceremony’s meaning is what should be kept alive. His service saved us then, we must continue his fight now.

        • Fran of the North says:

          Amen Pablo.

          Thank you for your views and support. The military fraternity lives a different life which is little understood, and too easily vilified. Those that practice the combat arms are in and of the world, and yet they have an immense responsibility that is easily Monday morning quarterbacked.

          For too long, (that 50 year conflict that you reference) the easy analysis has been that any and all service members are nefarious and not to be trusted. The truth is that like all professions, there are both good and bad. The country losses when we ignore those who have difficult jobs and can contribute.

          Adding fuel to the fire, is that this is actually the second time we’ve been presented with a flag, the first being exactly 50 years ago when my biological father came home from South East Asia in a sealed glass box.

          To all of you below, thank you for your support. This community is amazing. Thank you to the mods for keeping this a place where real conversation take place.

    • readerOfTeaLeaves says:

      What a life your father must’ve led.
      There is much wisdom in military decorum.
      So glad that your father was honored, and in a way that he’d merited. Judging from your comments, he left quite a heritage.

      After reading, back in the day (at FDL), Reddhead claim that ‘a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich’, it’s hard not to be completely disgusted and contemptuous of today’s news. One hopes that Mueller is playing a deeper game than appears on the surface.

    • CitizenCrone says:

      @Fran of the North
      Condolences. Today is my father’s birthday–in fact, he would have been 100 today. He was a veteran, a modest man, an honest man, a life-long republican. I’m glad he didn’t live to see this president. He began to see changes when W was prez. He only said: “He’s not his father.”

    • tinao says:

      Fran, I have always loved your comments. That said, my folks have been gone since 2007, and what i’ve learned is, they are not gone just transformed and still with us. Hope it helps
      Love to ya,
      Tina

    • Democritus says:

      My condolences Fran. I also come from a long line of military officers and I am worried as well. My father left the GOP over Trump, NOT the way I wanted to win that argument.

      By electing one so odious it even drove my jerk of a father out of the party. Ironically in my closet I have the letter from Nixon from when my a forbearer died. I mean, couldn’t he have gone out during any other admin?

      I am scared, but trying not to show it. Seriously considering if I could move abroad, because it’s my health I don’t think I can take two more years of this if there is no hope.

    • InfiniteLoop says:

      Fran, my sympathy to you and your family. Loss is never easy.

      Sometimes it helps me to remember that the best of our traditions go beyond this moment in time. It wasn’t just Donald J. Trump, 46th President of the United States, whose condolences the Colonel conveyed, but those of the *office* of the Presidency — and through that office, the nation your loved one fought to protect.

      Peace to you.

    • Fmr. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says:

      I understand the feeling of disgust. It’s like when I found out that Richard Nixon’s name is on the lunar plaque left by Apollo 11 — just disgusted that he gets to attach his name to an honorable piece of America’s legacy.

  26. PaulWartenberg says:

    The thing bothering me is that given how Mueller went after many of trump’s handlers and staffers for lying to investigators, and how there is every likelihood trump’s son(s) and son-in-law gave false or misleading testimony at some point… how they avoided getting indicted for lying to investigators as well. That just doesn’t seem right to me. There’s something missing on that. :(

    • Democritus says:

      Jist is a word that means:

      the essential core meaning of a matter- jist

      Is that an uncommon usage? It’s normal around here.

        • gedouttahear says:

          Geezus Krist, it’s “gist”.
          But I guess it’s jist one of those things,
          Jist one of those illiterate things . . .

          • Rayne says:

            Look, this post was put up quickly. The team here also doesn’t have copyeditors. We work for free; donations fund development, hosting, bandwidth.

            What we don’t need are grammar addicts nagging or poking fun when we’re trying to do the work mainstream media isn’t doing. Capisce?

              • Democritus says:

                Being called illiterate isn’t good fun. I imagine the professional whose site you wrote that one thought it was as funny as I did.

                Not at all. Jerk

                Though to be fair a have a block with g and j if not using golf Juliet etc I’m also disabled and have a hard time typing.

                I also constantly belittle and cut down people who think they are clever by pointing out typos and the like, or even little errors.

                you don’t look clever you look like a consisted yet also insecure ass. Do you want people who honestly may be illiterate to stop learning? What if someone actually was? How would that make you or them feel?

                Finally I literally have issues because I may be too smart, get your head out of your ass

          • P J Evans says:

            I was ignoring it because it’s so common a misspelling. (I read people who have grammar and spelling problems all the time. It’s better to let it slide.)

  27. X says:

    For those with experience, is it possible that Mueller left a map for Barr to do the actual indicting, or left to Barr’s discretion? I’m in the camp that it’s been a couple of years of waiting, what’s another few days.

    • J Barker says:

      I was wondering the same thing. Is “Mueller will bring no further indictments” consistent with the following? Mueller has enough to support an overarching conspiracy charge, but wants to let Barr decide whether or not to bring the relevant set of indictments since (1) doing so would implicate Trump himself and (2) Mueller would prefer that if a sitting president is going to be indicted for the first time, someone higher up in DOJ, ex. the AG, should be the one to do it.

  28. Bobby Gladd says:

    My @BobbyGvegas tweet:

    Well, national Concern Troll in Chief @HardballChris Matthews just concluded a pearl-clutching hour of The Vapors over the #MuellerInvestigation report perhaps failing to assure that Trump won’t yet again Slip The Surly Bonds of Accountability. YOU helped elect him, bro’. Own it.

  29. Drew says:

    I am waiting in gleeful anticipation for the days after the public release of Mueller’s “comprehensive document” when Marcy will explain to us who “Individual 247”, “Individual 184” and “Foreign National 853” are.

  30. sneakynordic says:

    Coincidence that SDNY AUSA Khuzami (former general counsel at Deutsche Bank) resigns on the same day?

  31. Tom says:

    As Frederick the Great once said when his military fortunes were at their lowest ebb during the Seven Years War: “Never despair too soon.” With the Mueller report having been completed, the President can no longer claim that the “witch hunt” is preventing him from completing his agenda for the nation. And I think it will become even more apparent than it is now that Trump’s real agenda is getting through each week doing as little work as possible so that he can bugger off to Mar-a-lago every Friday afternoon. I also hope that the MSM, now being unshackled from the need for endless speculation on the timing of the release of the Mueller report, will begin devoting more time and attention to the blatant incompetence and scandals of the Trump administration. In the April issue of “The Atlantic” magazine there is a short sidebar article pointing out that 88% of Americans think it is unethical to cheat on one’s taxes. I still remember that moment during one of the 2016 debates when Trump said, in so many words, that he was too “smart” to pay taxes. There was a panel discussion afterwards in which one Trump supporter said he was taken aback by the President-to-be’s attitude. If the investigations coming out of the SDNY can highlight the various ways and means by which Trump and his adult children have avoided paying taxes and engaged in various other shady and unscrupulous financial dealings, the cumulative effect of such revelations may prove to be effective in eroding his support even from among his base. At least, that’s what I’m pinning my hopes on.

  32. 888 says:

    My guess is Barr has a hot potato on his hands. No indictments doesn’t mean anything since the president wouldn’t be indicted under guidelines, and this news comes to us via a leak, a “senior Justice Department official.” This leak is by someone with access to the report, possibly pro-Trump. If pro-Trump, and I suspect this leaker is a lackey, then this is the best news in the report. Otherwise this person would’ve leaked that it clears the president. Ipso facto, it doesn’t.

    • mister bunny says:

      I can get behind this spin. Hell, I need something to hold onto before drifting into oblivion.

    • bmaz says:

      Would you care to elaborate? Or is that all you have?

      And, by the way, are you the old “Water Carrier For Diogenes” or just an unfortunate carry on? If you are sock puppeting, stop.

      • Rayne says:

        Not a sockpuppet as far as I can tell, but definitely a drive-by trolling. I’m of a mind that this kind of crap gets the boot. The thread is +100 comments deep now which is a pain in the ass on mobile device. Drive-by poo-flinging just takes up valuable real estate.

  33. pseudonymous in nc says:

    TBC.

    EW has listed a range of possible conclusions. One that sort of gets left behind is the “Russian govemment’s efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election” part at the very top of Rosenstein’s appointment letter.

    We have the IRA and GRU indictments and a few significant lacunae — the US persons who cooperated (unwittingly or otherwise) with the IRA troll operation, the extent of the GRU’s efforts to infiltrate local election boards and election vendors. The working assumption has been that it didn’t affect the casting of ballots — or perhaps that there’s no mechanism to void an election long after the fact — but I don’t think that’s a given.

    And I’m still wondering what was keeping Dreeben and Jed busy.

  34. gedouttahear says:

    It has puzzled me why this work which concludes that the Russians did swing the election to t, has gotten such little coverage: “Cyberwar: How Russian Hackers and Trolls Helped Elect a President What We Don’t, Can’t, and Do Know” by Kathleen Hall Jamieson. Jamieson is no slouch and no radical.

  35. LeeNLP says:

    While I feel disappointed about the lack of new indictments, one bit of hope I cannot seem to let go of (it springs eternal, you know) is how edgy Trump has been all week. He almost certainly knows more about the content of Mueller’s report than any of us (he is an eyewitness to many of the crimes after all), and had his spies at all levels, and still does not seem too happy. Why? If he is not happy, that seems like a good omen.

    Patience is not one of my virtues, but I see no alternative. The wheels of justice grind slowly. I can only hope that, as an old man, I live to see the assault on America that is DJT and his spawn defeated, and he and his spawn and accomplices held accountable for their crimes, so that my children, grandchildren, and the children of honest men and women the world over may live to see a brighter future.

    And may I add my voice to the chorus of Thanks extended to Dr. Wheeler and the other great minds at this remarkable website.

    • hollywood says:

      Old man as another oldster I feel your pain. I have to believe that this is not an end but a beginning. A beginning that will eventually end Trump, once and for all.

    • TheraP says:

      I too am old. In this “era” of such a criminal, mal-administration, I live between hope and fear. Hope that the Rule of Law and those who put our Republic before their own self-interest will right the Ship of State. And fear that a Constitution, which has inadvertently led to a minitory party “ruling” from a criminal White House, aided and abetted by a supine GOP Senate, needs some tweaks to allow for a more representative electoral process. (And other things which I am not expert enough to articulate.)

      But my fears relate to how adherents of the Rule of Law can become pushovers or road kill in the face of criminal elements, whose greed and disregard of laws and norms seems so often throughout history to end in loss of democratic ideals and the ultimate demise of nations, empires, hopes and dreams for repair and resurgence of the Rule of Law.

      Bottom line for me is that we are losing the opportunity to reverse climate change, that floods, fires, droughts, and criminality will result in more people losing homes, livelihoods, clean air, water etc.

      Please forgive airing my sense of impending doom.

      Though I do believe many of these investigations will soldier on, and maybe even many bad guys (and gals?) will go to prison or lose their shirts financially. (Fingers crossed!)

      But I look at the downsides for future generations and I worry for their sake.

  36. Troutwaxer says:

    I have a couple questions. First, if we do see the report, how do they write around the unwillingness to name unindicted names? Will it be “Individual 123” and “Individual 46?” Also, if someone is not a suspect will their real name be used?

    Second, what about the already filed “sealed indictments?” Will any of those come into play here? If so, how? If not, is it because they were not filed by Mueller, or are they waiting for someone who got turned to disobey their controller?

    • P J Evans says:

      “sealed indictments” aren’t worth anything until they’re unsealed – and there’s nothing that says they’re part of Mueller’s work.

  37. orionAtL says:

    robert Mueller and his team members must be saying to themselves, “thank god the most formal, public part of this process is over and we can begin to decompresed, kiss our wives and children, and go back to leading a normal life.

    congratulations to every citizen involved from receptionists, to the court reporters and bailiffs, to fbi staff, to prosecutors and staff, to chief mueller, and to the grand jury members for an exception job done under tremendous, ceaseless malevolent presidential harrassment.

    and congratulations to Emptywheel for running this incredible ultramarathon at full speed start to finish. mr. e. must be both relieved and proud.

  38. Eureka says:

    Marcy quote-tweeted this thread, which I think is funny. Not sure how folks’ humor flux meters are doing today, I suppose some may see this as “more bad news”… YMMV:

    emptywheel: “stakeout from the Ecuadoran embassy”
    https://twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1109251939483766784

    Mac William Bishop “(image)”
    https://twitter.com/MacWBishop/status/1109228877577142272
    “Hello, Twitter. There are a number of rumors circulating about Julian Assange & Wikileaks this evening, including: 1) That a US DOJ plane has been dispatched to London w/ an “extradition team.” 2) That there’s a lot of plainclothes/undercover officers near Ecuadorean Embassy”
    “3) That “MI5 vehicles” are circling the neighborhood around the embassy. So since I was nearby I thought I’d engage in a little gumshoe reporting…” (thread continues, with pix)

      • tinao says:

        I dunno, I was shakin my head earlier this week saying to myself, “Sure wish assange would get his head out his ass and come clean with the evidence.” One can dream true awake too. :-)

        • Rick Ryan says:

          [Galaxy Brain] Assange is playing the long 78-dimensional chess game, his plan all along has been to give the 2020 Dem candidate proof of Trump’s collusion if she promises to drop the charges!!!1!

          • tinao says:

            Hmmm, really. Life does not imitate that complicated a structure, but damn, I’ve seen all kinds of things happen. We’ll see.

  39. viget says:

    Luckily for me I had the joy of taking my little one to the daddy-daughter dance tonight. It cleared my mind. I am still disappointed but I think I understand things better.

    I am now of the opinion that some of the findings are so damning that Mueller and Barr are concerned about releasing them. There may be a conspiracy indictment in there, but there was no way to reasonably charge it without compromising national security and/or the nation’s faith in the political system. And of course without indicting Trump.

    My guess is that the report isn’t going to say no collusion. That’s why Trump isn’t gloating right now. I think we will see a heavily redacted version.

    The best way to deal with this is to first shore up the voting system (which I suspect they are doing), then deal with the CI implications in order to stop active measures. Parallel to that we will have ongoing investigations and prosecutions to expose the garden variety corruption. Tom Barrack, in particular, needs to be held accountable. And Stone’s trial is likely to make his brand radioactive as well. I still think he will cop a plea to avoid the real embarrassing stuff.

    To move this all along, I think there will be strategic leaks of the report from time to time. We, however, need to do our part and ensure Trump is not reflected.

    • viget says:

      Oh, and thanks to Marcy Wheeler and the emptywheel staff for enlightening me and showing the way. You all, especially Marcy, rock. My much belated donation has been made. It’s a great down payment on our society’s future.

  40. hollywood says:

    I’m starting to look at this as analogous to the OJ trials. With her mountain of evidence, Clark could not convict OJ. But in the civil case, with a lower standard of proof, Dan Petrocelli and associates clobbered OJ. I guess the election will be the “civil case.”

  41. Savage Librarian says:

    To paraphrase a toast from an unknown author: Let us drink not to the past which is weak and indefensible, Nor to the present which is not above reproach, But let us drink to the future which, thank goodness, is immaculate!

    And to all who are young in body or in spirit, I repost this hopeful comment I made to Ed’s post of 3/20/19. It might be something worth thinking about.

    Rutger Bregman states, MLK, Jr. didn’t say, “I have a nightmare.” He said, “I have a Dream!”
    Rutger Bregman says if DT wants to “MAGA,” let’s make taxes like they were in the 1950s, when the rich had a 90% tax rate.

    Rutger Bregman is a young Dutch historian who wrote a book titled, “Utopia for Realists.” He also was invited to Davos where he went off script and told the super wealthy to stop their BS philanthropy and raise taxes on themselves instead.

    If you haven’t heard of him yet, you will soon. Or, you can watch his TEDx. He is making the MSM rounds, too. Trevor Noah also interviewed him.

    Take a look. It will make you feel better. Hope is a good thing! Looking forward to 2020…

  42. fpo says:

    Yep – just the end of the beginning, people. Hang in there. We’ll have a few days of ‘I told you so’ and ‘No indictments’ and then it starts anew. Easing of sanctions on NK, today – one day after he touted putting ‘maximum pressure’ on Kim. What’s next? No one knows for sure – and the Rs are scared shitless about that. And they should be. And it shows.

    SDNY, EDVA, the NY AG (re Deutsche Bank), the Congressional investigations…they’re just getting started. And with all that as a backdrop, the Ds are way out front with ideas whose time is now – and a diverse group of smart, likable people to talk about them. Graham, Meadows, Jordan? Yeah, right.

    On balance Mueller got his job done – that was never a sure thing. Glad for that. Now, let’s watch calls by the WH for “transparency” with the final report turn to “Executive privilege!”

    Thanks for helping to light the way, EW…brings out the optimist in me.

    • orionATL says:

      thanks. i like the tenor of this comment very much.

      all the sobbing and moaning in the commentary for this post is unwarranted. cheer up folks. we got what we needed – a thorough investigation that gave us the nitty gritty details of the Russian meddling and trump collusion. now we got facts. we got knowledge. we got understanding. we can use that information as we see fit. the critical issue now is political will and democratic and Republican leadership. it was never mueller’s job to take down trump, if that is what one wanted. it was his job to investigate and report and he has done just that. other parts of our political machinery must now take the baton that is the mueller’s report and run with it.

      finally, mueller did not expose the trump-Russian collusion all by himself. it should be acknowledged and appreciated that much of the useful information about trump and the Russians came from american and british (e.g., the guardian) press reporting.

      mueller got his job done – and well done. the press got theirs done, though a bit fitfully with major newspapers too often laggardly or wrong. the little press led. now we know the nature and depth of the russian interference in the presidential election in great detail with great confidence. we have certain knowledge we can now use as we see fit if we see fit collectively. we know that trump colluded with the Russians using the same management style he used with the mafia – always keeping one layer of operatives between himself and the bad guys,e,g., manafort, stone, sessions, flynn, and the little guys like papadupe, et al. we know there were 70+ meetings between the trump campaign and the Russian government of its private operatives like putin’s collection of billionaires during the csmpaign. and we have just scratched the surface Russian involvement in breaking up the economically successful and powerful e.u. thru the british brexit brouhaha and in breaking up NATO with trump’s help. these are true national security issues that need attention from a competent president.

      still to come i would hope, is an investigation by some trustworthy entity of the russian money that went to the republican party for its congressional races, e.g., graham, mcconnell. all in due time. maybe even an investigation into the reverand falwell and the florida poolboy, and turn to masses of christian fanatics supporting trump.

      • koolmoe says:

        Excellent reply. I wanted to get through all the comments before posting something similar myself. Overall, I think this ‘collusion’ investigation, while absolutely important, is too…political to be the last straw. I have much higher hopes on SDNY/etc investigations in finding true corruption (financial if nothing else) which may be much more easily proved than conspiracy.

  43. CitizenCrone says:

    Trying to get clear…
    Mueller was handling the Mystery appellant and Miller. Presumably, DoJ atty will follow these now.

    Miller testimony, if it ever comes, impacts Stone and possibly Trump’s knowledge of email hack to wikileaks? That would be part of conspiracy charge, yes?

    The Mystery company–was this about following a money trail? Illegal contributions or money laundering or such?

    As this info comes in to DoJ, if it impacts Trump will there be any addendum to Mueller’s report. Or will we just not know about it unless it leads to an indictment of someone?

    And what was referred to as the CounterIntelligence investigation–is this what is laid out in Mueller’s report? If so, then the Senate and House Intel committees MUST receive a full copy, right? But Barr would have to release to the public a redacted version unless Intel cleared what’s in the report to be released.

    So, there won’t be a CI report separate from today’s report.

    And calling Mueller in front of Congress? As SC he was a DoJ employee; he’s not likely to go against Barr.

    There is now an abundance of things either being investigated or worthy of investigating re: Trump and Spawn. Criminal charges will come sooner or later. (Even if Congress is stonewalled.)

    Impeachment only lops off the head. The little worm Pence must be dealt with as well. That leaves election as the only remedy.

  44. Marinela says:

    It is odd that Trump is happy with Barr. This cannot be good. Another oddity (out of millions with this administration), remembered Matt Schlapp saying Barr will be the end of Mueller, and soon enough, it happened.

    Maybe Mueller wanted to get it out in this stage, his own timing, as he decided it cannot prosecute, but it looks rushed to me, with so many leads up in the air.

    • pizza says:

      No offense, but instead of listening to political whores like Schlapp (they literally get paid to say things like that to make their GOP pimps feel better about the world they’re holding back), I suggest Barr’s doubters put aside those infamous executive-supporting opinions and look at a) his committee testimony and deliberate use of specific words (like “Bob”), b) his decades of service, conservative or not, upholding the law and the most important institutions of our government, and c) the tremendous respect he’s earned from the likes of Jim Comey (like him or not and poor decisions made – re: Clinton email bullshit – aside, Comey is exactly the kind of person we need in our government, especially now).
      Let’s just weigh the entirety of his lifetime of service for the people before we decide that he will so easily turn his back on everyone and everything he believes in.
      Admittedly I’m nowhere near the intellectual (or grammatical) level of all you other fine people on this board, but I absolutely know people and either Barr is giving one helluva snow-job to the entire country, or is, surprisingly, the exact person we want in that position right now.
      And we’ll find out soon enough I guess.

      • earlofhuntingdon says:

        I think the verdict on Bob Barr’s career is already in, regardless of his relationship with lifelong Republican Bob Mueller. It has been devoted to being a courtier for the wealth elite: at the CIA, the DOJ and in private practice. Those are the interests he has served.

        Apart from his current office, Trump has been outside of those concerns for a lifetime, and he holds that office partly owing to help from a foreign power, which gives Barr greater room for maneuver.

  45. Colonel Alexsay Potemkin says:

    It appears that Robert Mueller has reconsidered and decided handing over 76 pages of detailed polling data isn’t such a big deal after all.

    Its been a wild ride

  46. wwwinter says:

    If there is one thing that we know for sure (and has been pointed out numerous times here on EW), Mueller makes calculated moves. Of course people are going to have reactions to what the perceived outcome of this report—no further indictments being a big one—but there is so much we still don’t know. Mueller has been put in a position where what he has done kinda has to be above reproach. His investigation sets the precedent for all of the investigations that will/are coming after it. If there is even the slightest hint of impropriety, Trump and the Republicans will go for blood. Plus, he has got to uphold the law and Constitution against a person who has no problem breaking the law and could care less about the Constitution, so I have never thought he’d go directly after Trump and his kids. All of the things Mueller has done has been done with purpose. I have to assume this is the same.

  47. viget says:

    One other thing —

    This is for @Bmaz and the other lawyers out there.

    I had suggested in a previous comment a few weeks back that maybe if Mueller wrapped up, that would essentially moot Andrew Miller in STL (not the pitcher)’s appellate challenge, since it was based on the validity of Mueller’s appointment. Could the GJ (which I think still exists) again ask for Miller’s testimony under the direction of the USA for DDC in relation to Stone’s case? And move towards immediate contempt proceedings should he decline?

    Remember that the FBI knows what Miller could testify to, he clammed up once subpoenaed. If the above is true, it certainly could have been a strategic move on Mueller’s part to try to get his testimony before the GJ expired.

  48. Bay State Librul says:

    Handicapping Mueller the day after the gate flew open

    We are all playing the odds and rolling the dice.

    Who will salute the judge?

    I trust Mueller, but not Barr

    Mueller is a thoroughbred, a stayer.

    Barr is slow out of the gate, an also-ran

    The oil in the can runs half full.

    I’m jumping the bridge and putting my money on Mueller

  49. harpie says:

    Well, I’m back on this tac:
    *
    emptywheel Retweeted:
    *
    [I think this would be 6:38 AM ET]
    [quote] https://twitter.com/CivMilAir/status/1109403970164924416 3:38 AM – 23 Mar 2019 JENA622 – just got airborne from Luton 🇺🇸 US Dept of Justice GLF5 N996GA [screenshot] / 40,000ft heading over Wales. This dude’s on his way back to the States, whoever is on board…[screenshot] / 🇺🇸 US DOJ G5 N996GA #N996GA #JENA622 #DOJ / and there he goes over Ireland, Atlantic bound. #N996GA #DOJ #JENA622 [screenshot] [end quote]

  50. Willis Warren says:

    I’m wondering about the press leaks… Today and for the last few weeks, some people seemed to know Mueller was finishing (or guessed) but there were a few that seemed to have been leaked.

    Who leaked? it wasn’t Mueller? was it just the guys going back to whatever?

  51. harpie says:

    The question: Who will be the first to call for investigating Hillary?
    And the answer IS…..
    *
    https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1109427494535553036 5:11 AM – 23 Mar 2019
    *
    [quote] Congrats to everyone who correctly said “Lindsey Graham.” [screenshots] [end quote]
    *
    [links to:]
    https://twitter.com/Kevinliptakcnn/status/1109285870711070720 7:48 PM – 22 Mar 2019
    *
    [quote] A “lock her up” chant broke out at Mar-a-Lago tonight during Sen. Graham’s speech as he called for an investigation into Clinton and the origins of the dossier. Trump watched on from a table in the ballroom. [end quote]

    • orionATL says:

      senator graham is engaged in a blatant Republican manipulation of the media to distract attention from reporting and commentary about the mueller report (and possibly about implications of the assange extradition).

  52. Tony Cincy says:

    So many obvious unanswered questions.

    Who is the DOJ Official so quick to let us know no further indictments? Happened within hours of the close of Mueller’s leak proof investigation. A plant. By whom.

    Why is Mueller bailing with Stone and Mystery Appelant and others twisting in the wind?

    What did Nancy P know when she recalibrated the drive for impeachment?

    Why is Trump so nervous? Why hiding out at MaL?

    My guess, Fitzmas all over again. Manafort=Scooter Libby. The obstruction kept Mueller from getting at the underlying crimes.

    The worst is yet to come and will come from Prosecutors not directly under Trump’s thumb.

  53. Pete says:

    This started it: https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download Does anyone know if there were any official modifiers or clarifications of Mueller’s investigation scope?

    I bring this up, because it’s often beneficial to re-ground in what started a complex nearly two-year investigation and see how resultant actions fit – or didn’t fit – the mandate. We know the OSC indictments. We know some of the spinoffs to, for example, SDNY. We probably do not know all of them.

    If the report is comprehensive as Josh Gerstein and CNN have reported it may be that there is a lot of information in the declinations. And Schiff states that law requires CI information uncovered to be communicated to the House (and probably Senate) Intelligence committees.

    So, while Mueller may not have found – or found enough – or for other reasons chose not to indict Trump, Jr, Ivanka, Eric, or Kushner that does not mean that there isn’t info in the declinations to support an impeachment decision – yeah or nay – or further action on the spawn and Kushner.

    Bijan Rafiekian has a trial date. Stone has a trial date.

    What if the Mystery Appellant is the QIA and is a quid-pro-quo involving Kushner? That case lives on for the time being. Corsi may continue on…he is simply not indicted – yet.

  54. John Forde says:

    Mueller closing his office.
    Recommending no new indictments.
    Holds no sealed indictments.
    He’s been feeding info to SDNY & EDVA for 18 months.
    …do they hold sealed indictments?

  55. Willis Warren says:

    We’re already to the “watch all the people turn on Mueller” predictions without pointing out that Mueller has been attacked as a democrat for two years

    don’t worry folks, this will be over in six years

  56. harpie says:

    Remember when we found out that Barr’s son-in law suddenly got a job in the WH Counsel’s office?
    *
    https://twitter.com/dcpoll/status/1096132451867467776 11:41 AM – 14 Feb 2019
    *
    [quote] Tyler McGaughey, son-in-law of new Trump AG William Barr, has just landed a job in the Trump White House counsel’s office and will be advising Trump on “legal issues.” McGaughey’s work WILL intersect with the Russia investigation. THIS IS SUCH BULLSHIT. [emphasis added] [end quote]
    *

  57. dimmsdale says:

    Constant reader/lurker here: I just want to add my thanks to Marcy, Bmaz and Rayne for everything you’ve done to keep this site a reliable North Star for Mueller info. I go through the site multiple times a day, scanning threads for the newest comments, though my poor overloaded brain doesn’t retain much of the truly boggling detail you all have assimilated and presented here. I am tipping my invisible “Make America Sane Again” cap to you as I type this. Thank you, thank you, thank you.

    • TheraP says:

      I am appending this here – as it seems the thread is sooooo long now that independent comments are verboten. (As Rayne writes a post.)

      Just a THANK YOU, not just for all who write and comment. But for all the lurkers/readers – a number I imagine to be HUGE.

      I think of all of those who love the Rule of Law, who keep within it, celebrate fellow law-abiding citizens (around the world), and denigrate the amount of criminality and outright evil that seems about to triumph everywhere. But I think of that evil like the night sky. And all the honest, law-abiding, Rule of Law promoting and protecting people as like the infinite number of stars in that night sky. And it gives me HOPE!

      So thanks to all the Readers and Lurkers! You too make a difference.

  58. InfiniteLoop says:

    There are far too many dangling threads for this to be the end of “this Russia thing with Trump and Russia”. Just for starters:

    What information did Flynn provide that was worth a sweetheart deal despite his coat of pond scum looking thicker every time we turn around?

    What information did Cohen provide that was worth a good word on sentencing and an unprecedented witness-credibility voucher? What was the purpose of getting Cohen’s guilty plea for lying to Congress?

    What are the implications of Manafort’s lies, the ones that were so central to the investigation? Why was OSC so cagey about its knowledge of Manafort’s contacts with the White House?

    Who are the “other persons known and unknown to the grand jury” who conspired with the GRU in the hack-and-leak?

    Why, even in recent filings that had to have been made after Mueller knew he wouldn’t indict anyone else, did so much remain redacted?

    Why the loud silences in the Stone indictment, which Mueller may well have known would be his last? Why back away from Corsi?

    What’s the story with Andrew Miller? The Mystery Appellant?

    Is it truly conceivable, given that the long list of other people who were interviewed by OSC have made an even longer list of publicly known lies, Mueller’s team failed to find convincing evidence of a single other crime?

    If Mueller did not spin off more than we already know about, I’ll be gobsmacked.

    • Areader2019 says:

      Thank you, that is a good list of the ‘dangling threads’. I hope you don’t mind if I quote you…..I’m so sick of the ‘well, that’s it, it is over’ line of spin.

      • InfiniteLoop says:

        Not at all, quote away! Also quote Yogi Berra: “It ain’t over ‘til it’s over.”

  59. Dcom says:

    Here’s what I don’t get. If Mueller is as honorable and the true patriot I think he is, he’s got to know Trump and this gang of criminals are not only guilty of many crimes, but a real danger to this country. I can’t imagine, with all we know, he could possibly come to a “conclusion” of this investigation without more than what we see now. Kilimnik. Stone. Jr. Individual 1 directed….. There is simply too much evidence to conclude this investigation without waiting to turn over more stones (subpoenaing trump, Andrew Miller, mystery appellant).

    There’s strategy behind this. There has to be.

    Mueller is reporting “findings.” Those findings will have to include what we already know, in greater context. I suspect the report will give the American people the whole ugly story and it will be devastating.

    I don’t understand the lack of more indictments, but there’s a lot more to this story to come. It’s also very possible any additional indictments are being held for greater purposes, like a Trump exit strategy.

    One thing is for certain. Trump’s current silence is truly deafening.

  60. Frank says:

    Could the SC have a personal digital voice recorder to read the report into? Might be handy to answer the commitee question “What can you tell us about your investigation?”

      • Areader2019 says:

        Yeah…on the one hand I want to just delete these people.

        On the other hand, disinformation, spin, gaslighting is what they do. It is hard to know how to confront it without amplifying their message. I mean, swiftboating was a ridiculous tactic, but they have learned that with enough repetition it can work.

    • Rayne says:

      What a piece of crap that is. I’ve broken the link you’ve shared with blank spaces because none of our community should accidentally click on it and send traffic there. What an utterly stupid wasted of bits and pixels that ignores multiple speaking indictments and guilty pleas obtained by SCO and DOJ over the last two years.

      It’s so ill informed and deliberate in its ignorance it is nothing more than another propaganda salvo in the ongoing information war.

      You are not operating at the caliber of this site’s community. Stop embarrassing yourself and wasting your time.

  61. Fran of the North says:

    Amen Pablo.

    Thank you for your views and support. The military fraternity lives a different life which is little understood, and too easily vilified. Those that practice the combat arms are in and of the world, and yet they have an immense responsibility that is easily Monday morning quarterbacked.

    For too long, (that 50 year conflict that you reference) the easy analysis has been that any and all service members are nefarious and not to be trusted. The truth is that like all professions, there are both good and bad. The country losses when we ignore those who have difficult jobs and can contribute.

    Adding fuel to the fire, is that this is actually the second time we’ve been presented with a flag, the first being exactly 50 years ago when my biological father came home from South East Asia in a sealed glass box.

    To all of you below, thank you for your support. This community is amazing. Thank you to the mods for keeping this a place where real conversation take place.

Comments are closed.