Mueller report is all sound and fury signifying nothing

Pardon me for being a bit obtuse, but what is the point of the special counsel Robert Mueller’s report?

Attorney General William Barr quotes Mueller saying his report “does not exonerate” President Trump. Since when is it the job of a prosecutor to exonerate anyone? Prosecutors charge someone or don’t. Exoneration is up to juries and judges.

First, Barr states “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” Collusion is not a crime. People can combine their efforts to reach a mutually beneficial goal. That is not a crime unless one is breaking anti-trust law. It may be politically unwise, but it is not a crime.

Second, under the obstruction of justice part of the report, Barr states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” How can Trump obstruct justice if there was no crime to investigate in the first place?

After two years this all they’ve got?

36 comments on “Mueller report is all sound and fury signifying nothing

  1. Steve says:

    Yup, but, this is so several hours ago.
    Israel is bombing….again.
    From the “oh look! a squirrel” world we live in, comes Michael Avenatti with a bit of a stormy moment of his own, eh?
    Good thing he decided not to run.

  2. Bruce Feher says:

    You know Tom, I’m getting a little tired of you always making sense! 🙂

  3. ronknecht says:

    Spot on & very succinct.


    Sent from my iPhone


  4. Athos says:

    So when it comes to the 2016 elections, if it wasn’t Trump and his associates, I wonder who did collude with the Russians?


  5. Someone who paid for a dossier, perhaps?

  6. Athos says:


    And who would that be?

    Inquiring minds want to know!

  7. “Since it was disclosed last year that Steele’s dossier formed a central piece of evidence supporting the FISA warrant, Justice and FBI officials have been vague about exactly when they learned that Steele’s work was paid for by the law firm representing the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee (DNC).”

  8. Anonymous says:

    “WASHINGTON — The Washington Free Beacon, a conservative website funded by a major Republican donor, first hired the research firm that months later produced for Democrats the salacious dossier describing ties between Donald J. Trump and the Russian government, the website said on Friday.

    The Free Beacon, funded in large part by the New York hedge fund billionaire Paul Singer, hired the firm, Fusion GPS, in 2015 to unearth damaging information about several Republican presidential candidates, including Mr. Trump. But The Free Beacon told the firm to stop doing research on Mr. Trump in May 2016, as Mr. Trump was clinching the Republican nomination.”

  9. Anonymous says:

    Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Monday that he had told Sen. John McCain to give the FBI the dossier on the Trump campaign’s alleged ties to Russia, a revelation that comes after Trump repeatedly assailed the late Arizona Republican over the issue.

    Last week, Trump accused McCain of handing over the document “for very evil purposes.” McCain died of brain cancer in August.”

  10. Bill says:

    The only reason that I can think of for Mueller to make the unwarranted and gratuitous observation in his report that the report did not “exonerate” the President from possible allegations of obstruction of justice, is that Mueller wanted to zing the President for some of the criticisms Trump made of Mueller and the lawyers conducting the investigation. There is no other explanation.

    Mueller was a special counsel appointed (perhaps without any underlying legal basis) to investigate “collusion) by the President and his campaign with Russia. It should be noted that There is no such crime as “collusion”. There is only “conspiracy” not “collusion”. Conspiracy (criminal) In criminal law, is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime at some time in the future.

    Once appointed, Mueller e was an adversary of the President and those surrounding the President.

    After nearly 2 years and upwards of 35 millions of dollars, Mueller found no “collusion” or “conspiracy” by the President or members of his family or campaign. He did bring some indictments t and prosecutions against Russians and some Trump people that arose out of their previous dealings (not the campaign) and some “process” crimes such as lying to federal investigators. (Cautionary note to anyone to be interviewed, take a lawyer and a tape recorder, and answer, any question, “to the best of my recollection”.

    If any facts discovered by Mueller constituted any prosecutable offenses, then Mueller had an obligation to proceed against any such potential defendant(s) by charging any such person with a crime and bringing him or her to trial. He did not do so.

    The Mueller investigation is over. This particular “case” should be closed once and for all.

  11. Rincon says:

    The noise from this echo chamber is deafening!

    I’m suspect Al Capone, his lawyers, and associates had similar things to say when the ever obtrusive government harassed him mercilessly and then finally only got him on trumped up (no pun intended) tax evasion charges. I’m sure Al did nothing illegal. I can also imagine that Trump’s indicted and convicted aides lied under oath for no good reason other than to test Trump’s implicit promise to pardon anyone convicted, which in itself is clearly witness tampering.

    And of course, Conservatives never think to ask why Trump went so far as to concoct a lie for Donald Jr. and Jared Kushner regarding their meeting with Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya and 4 others (adoption of Russian children? Really?), or to fire Comey for something that Trump praised as a candidate as well as to claim that Russia never interfered with the 2016 election despite rock solid evidence to the contrary, etc., etc. I’m sure an innocent man would do everything possible to interfere with an investigation which would find nothing.

    Never mind the fact that many Constitutional experts agree that a sitting President cannot be tried in the first place, nor that the burden of proof for indicting a sitting President would be an order of magnitude greater than it is for us peons just because of the political and legal consequences of any failure to convict. Absence of proof is hardly proof of absence.

    It is true though, that lack of a conviction makes it harder to be sure that Trump has engaged in criminal or treasonous behavior. As a matter of fact, I might give him a clean slate, except for
    the Roger Stone things and the Manafort things and the Cohen things and the Flynn things and the Maria Butina / NRA thing and the NRA campaign contribution thing and the Tillerson thing and the Sessions thing and the Kushner thing and the Carter Page thing and the Felix Sater thing and the Boris Ephsteyn thing and the Rosneft thing and the Gazprom thing and the Sergey Gorkov banker thing and the Azerbaijan thing and the “I love Putin” thing and the Donald Trump, Jr. thing and the Sergey Kislyak thing and the Russian Affiliated Interests thing and the Russian Business Interests thing and the Emoluments Clause thing and the Alex Schnaider thing and the hack of the DNC thing and the Guccifer 2.0 thing and the Mike Pence “I don’t know anything” thing and the Russians mysteriously dying thing and Trump’s public request to Russia to hack Hillary’s email thing and the Trump house sale for $100 million at the bottom of the housing bust to the Russian fertilizer king thing 
    and the Russian fertilizer king’s plane showing up in Concord, NC during Trump
    rally campaign thing and the Nunes sudden flight to the White House in the night thing and the Nunes personal investments in the Russian winery thing and the Wilbur Ross with his Cyprus bank thing and Trump not releasing his tax returns thing and the Republican Party’s rejection of an amendment to require Trump to show his taxes thing and the election hacking thing and the GOP platform change to the Ukraine thing and the Steele Dossier thing and the Leninist Bannon thing 
    and the Sally Yates can’t testify thing and the Sally Yates firing thing* and the intelligence community’s investigative reports thing and Spicer’s Russian Dressing “nothing’s wrong” thing and Trump warning the Russians and Syrians before the Bombing thing* and the Trump refusing to provide Flynn’s foreign ties documents to Congress thing* and Flynn’s illegal Turkish lobbying was paid for the Russians thing* and Flynn’s illegal lobbying for Russia thing* and the Trump asking Comey for a “loyalty oath” thing* and Trump lying to the world about Comey saying he’s not being investigated thing* and the Trump firing Comey thing* and the Trump or stooges lying to the world about why he fired Comey with 3 different lies* and Trump hosting Russian foreign minister and ambassador one day after to demonstrate his authoritarian street cred* and the finding out that Trump actually tried to fire Robert Mueller in June 2017 thing and the lying to the American public during the campaign about have no business in Russia thing… and the Ivanka super-duper Moscow hotel spa thing…etc.

    Explain away all of these, and I would agree that Trump is clean.

    Don’t be too sanguine though. Mueller never subpoenaed nor indicted Kushner and Donald Jr., when they clearly attended a meeting with a Russian lawyer with the explicit purpose, confirmed by their own Emails, of colluding with Russia in the release of Clinton’s Emails. There’s no way Mueller would have just neglected this. There’s still and investigation in New York. Testimony or a conviction of either or both would not be touched by a Presidential pardon. Stay tuned folks.

    PS: The Steele dossier was properly entered and footnoted in the first place. There was no deception. Quit repeating lies.

  12. Anonymous says:



    Nicely done and worth saving as I did.

  13. Rincon says:

    BTW, am I correct that the report is still not public? If so, then all we know so far is that Trump will not be indicted for collusion and that Barr, in his inestimable nonpartisan way, has decided that there was no obstruction of justice, yes? So Republicans and those sworn to secrecy are the only ones who have seen the report?

  14. Anonymous says:

    Yes rincon:

    The report prepared at the instruction of a republican, about a republican, which investigation was initiated partially at least as a result of a conservative investigation done about Trump, has been kept from the country by a republican AG who was appointed by a republican president confirmed by a republican controlled senate but which republican AG did release his slant of what the republican special counsel reported.

  15. Bill says:

    The only appropriate response to irrational rants is a citation to McBeth, Act 5, Scene 5. All sound, and definitely fury, signifying nothing.

  16. Rincon says:

    What devastating logic! Thank you for setting me straight, Bill.

  17. Bill says:

    No logic involved. Just an personal observation. Just another observation of mine is that I was disappointed in the tirade and the response to me. I had come to think that your previous observations had some measure of rationality and objectivity to them.

  18. Anonymous says:

    I must say seeing a Bills response becomes even more humorous after reviewing his posts about Hillarys emails and her oh so obvious guilt in spite of the determination by responsible authorities that she didn’t do anything worth prosecuting.

    As funny almost as the putative president lavishing praise on the witch hunter himself after discovering that he wasn’t being prosecuted.

    These guys man.

  19. Anonymous says:

    I believe reviewing some of Bills previous work is illustrative and…funny.

    The fourth post here is his and boy is it a doozy. Especially relavant to what he’s says now.

    The internets are forever.

  20. Anonymous says:

    Glad that you reminded me of that tongue in cheek satiricc post of mine. I still like it and hope you enjoyed reading it as much as I enjoyed writing it.

    When I checked, I also noted on the same page an entry by Patrick which says: “I wonder how much money the far right wing has caused the American taxpayer to spend on these “investigations” of the Clintons since Bill first decided to run for Governor those many years ago?” I doubt that it was solely the “far right wing” (whoever or whatever that is) that caused the investigations and certainly don’t know how much the Clinton investigation cost but in case you or Patrick are concerned with the costs of Presidential investigations, sources say the final bill for the Mueller investigation is not in but it should be somewhere around 35 million dollars.

    By the way, Damn lawyers are expensive aren’t they?

  21. Bill says:

    oops….sorry…the last anonymous was me, just plain Bill.

  22. Steve says:

    The “real” anonymous currently posting is most likely the former Patrick.
    Now a bunch of us get to be temporary “anonymous”.
    Where’s my mask?!!!

    Funny stuff, huh?

  23. Rincon says:

    Tirade? Are you referring to my list of Trump’s alleged involvement with Russia?

  24. Athos says:

    Give it up, boys. Your Mueller hero has come up empty. Now we get to see the real fun (hello Loretta! Ready to give up Zero, yet?)

  25. Anonymous says:

    “Trump campaign pollster John McLaughlin has also demanded a probe into the efforts by the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton campaign to spy on the Trump campaign.
    “I’m very concerned that it’s becoming more clear that the Obama administration was able to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on our campaign based on phony opposition research from the Clinton campaign. Having federal law enforcement spy on a presidential campaign based on phony campaign research is really distressing and the true untold story,” he said.”

    Rand Paul is on board. Lindsey, too?

  26. Anonymous says:

    300 page report, by a republican who was appointed by another republican appointed by a republican president summarized by a republican appointed by a republican down to 4 pages and…”its over because “our” hero” didn’t come up with something?

    You guys man.

  27. TANDEMNZ says:

    Thank you for sharing great article to us. We are the best award winning web development company in New Zealand. Please Visit Tandem NZ

  28. Anonymous says:

    Hold the phone:

    Can it be that the same guy that covered up the crimes of the Reagan administration scandal Iran/Contra, and let’s face it folks, was “hired” for precisely this reason, has been caught doing it again?

    “WASHINGTON — Some of Robert S. Mueller III’s investigators have told associates that Attorney General William P. Barr failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry and that they were more troubling for President Trump than Mr. Barr indicated, according to government officials and others familiar with their simmering frustrations.

    At stake in the dispute — the first evidence of tension between Mr. Barr and the special counsel’s office — is who shapes the public’s initial understanding of one of the most consequential government investigations in American history. Some members of Mr. Mueller’s team are concerned that, because Mr. Barr created the first narrative of the special counsel’s findings, Americans’ views will have hardened before the investigation’s conclusions become public.”

  29. Bill says:

    Here we go again…”Some on Mueller’s Team say…”. Love the anonymous “some”. Just remember, “some” on the NY Times have been caught making stories and sources up in the past. The nice part about anonymous sources is that you can’t check because, all Reporters, whether there is shield law or not will not tell who their sources are. That is both a good and bad thing.

  30. HighflyinBrien says:

    The more things change…the more they stay the same! “Some on Mueller’s Team Say”…been there, done that…bought the T-shirt. I’d hold onto the farm though!

  31. Anonymous says:

    Sometimes a bumper sticker nails it down solid.

    Nice one, Brien. But still a bit early to say we have a new teflon prez, eh?
    I’m still not a Trump supporter but, I can see AOC and her extremists are going to reelect Trump if they keep laying on the thick layers of BS they are spewing with regularity.
    I say, egg’m on! They are chasing away their own core base.

  32. Athos says:

    Too many Anny Moss’s reply to this post!

  33. Anonymous says:

    I’m wondering how many posters here read the heavily redacted version of Muellers report?

    I bet not one of Atholes, Bill, HFB, or Thomas has.

    I usually win my bets.

  34. Anonymous says:

    At least some folks on the right weren’t so distracted by the lies proffered by Barr that they don’t realize how guilty this administration is.

    “Fox News legal analyst Andrew Napolitano on Thursday denounced Attorney General William Barr’s summary of special counsel Robert Mueller’s report as a “deceptive” and “foolish attempt to sanitize” the conclusions from Mueller’s investigation.

    “It is clear that Barr’s four-page letter, about which Mueller complained to Barr and some of Mueller’s team complained to the media, was a foolish attempt to sanitize the Mueller report,” Napolitano wrote in an op-ed published on

    “It was misleading, disingenuous and deceptive. Also, because Barr knew that all or nearly all of the Mueller report would soon enter the public domain, it was dumb and insulting.”

  35. […] March 25 4THST8 stated: “Attorney General William Barr quotes (Robert) Mueller saying his report “does not […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s