Cool your shit. That was the most epic mic drop I've ever seen from a prosecutor

[Recursion]

That was actually much more brutal and more confrontational than I thought Mueller would be when I heard he was talking.

Take-aways:

1. The OSC found evidence of a criminal cover-up by Trump

2. The DoJ rules the OSC operated under prevented them from charging Trump directly

3. The DoJ as a body is not competent to investigate and charge the President (in general I actually agree with this)

4. Congress is. Crimes were found and elucidated in the OSC's report, and that report could not predicate those crimes. Mueller made clear the only limit to their predication of crimes was that a sitting President cannot be charged. 2 + 2 = ?

5. This was, seriously, much harsher than I expected Mueller to ever be publicly. He has basically taken the mantle of an independent prosecutor rather than a special counsel, and has come as close as he can to formally recommending impeachment.

Don't let the blowhards fool you. This was a fucking devastating thing for Trump.

[Corgigal]

1. My take,

also do NOT count on the next election to fix this. Russia is still owning our President and will continue because no one is protecting the electoral process.

[triron]

2. I'm afraid you're correct.

[GusBob]

4. And, if a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime.......

they will do everything in their power to keep him in office

[gldstwmn]

9. You are correct.

[coti]

12. Correct. nt

[smirkymonkey]

17. +1000

It's doesn't really matter how "devastating" Mueller's words were. They weren't enough, and nothing is going to change.

[Brainstormy]

28. BINGO!

and that's why I say the whole, horrible thing was pointless. We're still nowhere and the Orange Anus is still in the Whitehouse.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

45. Never expected this though. Didn't expect the

whole thing to go down this way.
But he did hand it to us, and still not I word from our leaders. Sad

[CaptainTruth]

58. And sadly, the orange anus will still be in the White House after impeachment.

The only way to get rid of him & his regime is to vote them out.

[BlueJac]

96. exactly!

[Irishxs]

56. +1000

[MFM008]

78. Anything

That causes more heartburn for the maggot
Is a good thing.

[Ferrets are Cool]

86. Unfortunately, I must agree

And it makes me seriously sick.

[Mr. Evil]

50. And no one is checking Mitch McConnell.

Even with his obvious, in broad daylight, connections to corrupt Russian oligarchs. If anyone ever needed to have much more light shined upon them, it's him. I'm of the opinion that he is the proverbial 'finger in the dike' protecting all things criminal and corrupt regarding President Nazivomit and republican's dedication, determination and desire to completely ratfuck the USA.

In other words, politically neutering Mitch McConnell should be an extremely urgent priority.

[dem4decades]

79. If only the press had any balls and decided to ask Mitch and Lindsey

Questions about their refusal to hold the President accountable. No other questions just ask why they're traitors to the Constitution.

[tclambert]

87. Can the House of Representatives investigate a Senator for corruption?

[Stargazer09]

92. He definitely needs to be neutered

It would be awesome if a few GOP senators suddenly switched their party affiliation to Independent and caucused with the Democrats. Old Mitch would not be in charge any longer

[uponit7771]

93. +1

[dumbcat]

55. "... no one is protecting the electoral process."

The Electoral Process is run by the States, not the Federal Govt. Are you saying that no blue state governors, Secretaries of State, or Legislatures are doing anything to protect the process? Who do you think should be protecting the electoral process, and how?

[uponit7771]

94. Federal government makes it part of us infrastructure than its protected under federal government

[dumbcat]

98. And ........

What does that mean?

As I asked, are no blue state dems doing anything to protect the electoral process?

[uponit7771]

64. THANK YOU !!!

[sarabelle]

97. The Democrats need to do a better job of putting out there the significance of what Mueller said

Nancy is really disappointing me on this. She should want the Senate to on record as to what they stand for and who they support. If they refuse to charge this President, they should be forced to say so for prosperity. Their legacy should be forever enshrined in the acquittal of the most corrupt, indecent, immoral, fascist President in our history. McConnell already has the most sullied reputation ever for obstructing good governance and colluding with the enemy for personal gain.

[Nevermypresident]

3. I agree. He said everything but the "I" word. Now, Congress what say you?

[emmaverybo]

5. Yes. You listened. Without bashing Barr, he contradicted Barr's misrepresentation

of his findings. His message is also in what he didn’t say. He did not say that there were other considerations, lack of evidence, for instance, in his not charging Trump, than DOJ’s policy.

[Recursion]

15. In fact he affirmed that policy was the sole reason they did not charge (nt)

[Hortensis]

16. Not quite, but very, very close.

Policy that didn't allow them to indict is the big reason they chose not to make a "determination" as to whether a crime had been committed. "Determination," of course, meaning an official statement.

Of course, no way everyone down to the transcription clerks didn't arrive at their own conclusions.

[Recursion]

18. Ah, yes

Fair point.

That's a damned fine line, though

[Hortensis]

20. Yes, fine but deep. Imagine if they had

reported that a crime or crimes had been committed. We'd be in a whole different situation, with identified crimes for congress to investigate and act on.

It's big that inability to charge is obstructing the proper conclusion of the investigation, of course. But we want to know if crimes were committed -- THAT is the heart of this. Not whether the DoJ can indict.

[emmaverybo]

23. Right. You got right to it. I waffled around. nt

[uponit7771]

65. +1,

[spanone]

6. K&R...👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼

[Hoyt]

7. Seemed to me that Mueller did not say one thing that was not in Barr's letter over 2 months ago.

And he told Congress that if they call him, he's going to say the same thing he said today and refer them to the report. And that is the same thing Barr said 2 months ago in writing and on TV.

[emmaverybo]

24. He contradicted Barr's summary. He did not need to say "I am contradicting Barr's summary."

[Hoyt]

27. How did he contradict Barr's summary? Barr's summary specifically stated that

Mueller could not indict, but Mueller’s report did not exonerate trump on Obstruction. That meant it was up to Congress, and Congreve has punted so far.

[emmaverybo]

34. Here's how:

David Axelrod (@davidaxelrod) Tweeted:
Mueller directly contradicts Barr’s representation that DOJ rules were NOT the reason the Special Counsel decided to forego a prosecution of @realDonaldTrump.

[Hoyt]

36. Apparently, Axelrod is like many, hasn't read everything.

This is what Barr’s 3/24/2019 summary said:

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

Seems clear to me, both Mueller and Barr are saying it’s up to Congress. Barr even specifically states Mueller’s report does not exonerate trump regarding Obstruction.

[emmaverybo]

63. Back to your original comment:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212141252

[Hoyt]

70. I just provided an exact quote from Barr on 3/24/2019. Then, you send me to

somebody else’s post.

[emmaverybo]

80. Oh stop. The other post showed a side by side analysis of Barr and Mueller's statements. Double

down, don’t read, but the differences have been ably pointed out today, on numerous tweets, news shows, including on Fox, and by several DUers doing their homework.

[Hoyt]

81. And I just gave you an exact quote from Barr on 3/24/2019. I think you are the one doubling

down. Most of the people tweeting, etc., today act like what Mueller said today is a surprise. His comments about Obstruction are almost word for word what is in his March report:

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

He also said in his report, quite explicitly, that Russia interfered in our election. Finally, he said, they did not find sufficient evidence on collusion/conspiracy. All those things were repeated in Barr's summary, but people are acting like it's never been said before.

Point is, Mueller said nothing new today. Some people -- perhaps a lot of people -- totally missed it in a Report released in mid-April and a summary written over two months ago. Why it's just hitting people is beyond me.

In any event, I hope it leads to the right move in the House. I am not sure Obstruction is going to take trump down, but if the House wants to try -- and unlike Rep Clyburn has said, the House has the votes -- great. I hope we don't get shot down because 1.5 months after Mueller's report was released, the polls indicate significantly less than half the electorate believes Impeachment is warranted. I don't really think it will change much based on what happened today, since Mueller said nothing new for anyone who has read the Report and Barr's summary.

I want trump gone, but a failed effort -- and the failure may be in the House, not the Senate -- will be catastrophic.

[Brainstormy]

30. exactly. nt

[kentuck]

8. There are a lot of "nervous Nellies"..

That were not truly listening.

[ismnotwasm]

10. Agree.

I’ve never expected much out of the Mueller report, as a far as “getting rid” of Trump directly.

Mueller just had an epic “I said what I said” moment.

[Bradshaw3]

11. Far from it

I'm hearing lots of words like implicit, implied, infererred (just now from Kamala Harris) and "follow the breadcrumbs" in response to this. That's not the reaction to a mic drop. There was nothing new here. Mueller is now a private citizen and, like any private citizen, has the right to give his opinions, and a duty to do so. Not say I'm outa here and don't want to testify.

I don't who the blowhard shot was aimed at, but puffing this up to something it isn't doesn't make it any more devastating for trump than the orgiinal report has been.

[emmaverybo]

25. Well, the legal experts I am listening to today do find his statement significant. I defer to them.

[Bradshaw3]

39. They said the same thing after the report came out

It made no difference as far as moving the case forward, or convincing more than one repub, or affecting his poll numbers in any meaningful way. I'll quote you an expert. Historian Naftali is on CNN right now, saying that the Watergate legal team said that Nixon was indictble and impeachable. When we get to the point of actual indictments and Supreme Court rulings against trump and his fellow travelers that are then enforced by authorities then we can talk about mic drops and trump being devastated.

[Duppers]

59. +100

[Bernardo de La Paz]

13. Your title spot on. Mueller: "interference w our election deserves the attention of all Americans"

And I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interference in our election. That allegation deserves the attention of every American. Thank you.

[uponit7771]

14. Mueller called Bill Barr a bold faced liar about obstruction.

[emmaverybo]

26. Yes! nt

[ecstatic]

19. But if only lawyers get that it was devastating, it's not very useful

as far as shaping public opinion.

[Hekate]

37. That's not his job, is it? Call your Congresscritter.

[mcar]

21. Thank you

The negativity here is astounding.

[tavernier]

22. I believe Mueller just mentioned that as well.

Interference through social media.

[Hekate]

29. Yes. I can't believe the amount of whinging going on here from people who made up their minds...

...months ago that Mueller was "betraying" us because reasons (such as an alleged and unproven loyalty to the GOP).

People who are unhappy with Mueller's statement today want a circus put on for them, with Mueller as trained monkey. Well, this is Real Life, not a reality show, and he of all people operates in Real Life. He did his job, all of it. Now other people need to do theirs.

I heard what you heard. It was an epic mic drop.

[MineralMan]

31. I agree. There are many on DU who have very little actual knowledge

of how our government works. Despite that, they weigh in on every issue, from a position of major ignorance.

There are, in the House of Representatives, a number of legal minds who do understand constitutional issues along with the realities of the operations of government and the vagaries of politics.

I will defer to their judgment on this issue.

Mueller clearly passed the baton to the House today. He has done what he could do. Now, it is up to the next constitutional method. Decisions must be made by people who understand exactly how to run this race, now that it is their lap and they're holding the baton.

[StarfishSaver]

75. +1000

It would also be nice of they actually read the report.

One of my frustrations is how often people will post just blatantly wrong statements on the law or congressional procedure - they state it as declarative fact without bothering to do any research to confirm that what they're saying is true. And then when someone who DOES know it corrects them, they double down and want to argue, still without bothering to know what they're talking about.

[JI7]

35. +

[Dream Girl]

62. Agree. What the heck did they expect???? For him to come out with handcuffs???

[uponit7771]

68. I'm not impressed with " I would not provide information....in any appearance before congress.

The part where Mueller busted Barr in the jaw was good

[StarfishSaver]

73. Everything you said is dead on

They don't need Mueller to say anything to convince them Trump needs to go. They already are complete there. They just want a show. More than that, they want a show they can rate and cheer and boo.

[True Blue American]

32. Yes it was

And well done in a way that respects our agencies in a way that Bill Barr will never do. He made it clear what the situation is.

I admire Mueller for how he worded the take down of Trump and Barr.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

33. The other thing he said that can't be ignored is that the Russian election interference

is a Big Fucking Deal that has to be dealt with.

And even if there hadn't been those OLC memos saying a president can't be indicted, Barr would see to it that any indictment of Trump would not happen. It wouldn't get as far as the Supreme Court because Trump's Roy Cohn would be sure it wouldn't happen in the first place.

[Hekate]

40. That is the Alpha and Omega of his report and statement, isn't it?

Russia, if you're listening....

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

41. Exactly. I think he wanted to be damn sure that part doesn't get lost

in the controversy over whether Trump obstructed justice and what should be done about it - because Trump and the GOP are doing their damnedest to see to it that nothing is being done to stop the Russians next time.

[sop]

46. Trump is openly obstructing efforts to protect our elections from a foreign adversary

Mueller made it very clear Russia is subverting our democratic electoral process. Trump's (and the GOP's) refusal to take any action to prevent it is a violation of his (their) oath of office, it is also an impeachable offense.

[ScratchCat]

44. If there hadn't been an OLC memo

about indicting the sitting POTUS, the indictment would have been handed down long before Barr had been selected to be AG. Rosenstein would have had the authority.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

69. Rosenstein is weak, and he would have caved in to Trump's demand

that Mueller be fired and the indictment never sees the light of day.

[uponit7771]

66. +1

[StarfishSaver]

76. Wouldn't it be great if the press spent as much time badgering Trump, Barr and GOP

for failing to do anything about Russian interference as they do demanding Pelosi start impeachment?

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

77. I hope they start doing it. Mueller was pretty emphatic about how important it is

to pay attention to the Russians. On MSNBC, which I'm watching right now, John Heileman is doing exactly that.

[DeminPennswoods]

38. This is all found in the report, but Americans needed

to hear it spoken, out loud, by the lead investigator. I think it helps mitigate some of the political risk as to beginning an impeachment inquiry.

[Pacifist Patriot]

42. I agree.

While I'm disappointed he interpreted the scope of his authority so narrowly, I am not all that surprised he did.

However, my jaw literally dropped as I watched him speak. I did not think he was going to be so bold either. Clearly if he did not feel bound by DOJ regs, his inclination would have been to charge.

[Mr.Bill]

43. Congress can not be expected

to do their job properly until they see the unredacted report. Until that happens, evidence is being illegally withheld from them.

[Laura PourMeADrink]

47. Mueller did mention working on getting evidence?

underlying report.

[scarytomcat]

72. exactly we still don't know what it says

but by the amount of redactions it looks like more cases could be made against dump's associates but it is up to the congress to take the next move on dump

[zentrum]

48. Impeachment is too perilous. But

...the HUGE stink the Democrats should be making as of today is that our elections were clearly interfered with by a foreign government and our very own President (gag) continues to not do anything about it.

Continues to not address it. Said even, that he believed Putin.

Why? They should ask.

Because he doesn't want to jeopardize his chances in the next election. Period. Full stop. He still wants their help. He welcomed it last time. The American President.

The Democrats need to scream this to the rafters. And talk endlessly about how un-American and un-Presidential it is to have a President who is completely unconcerned with foreign actions against the country.

Democrats should ask if this is what the Trump red hatters themselves stand for?

Is this what Make America Great Again means?

Democrats should just keep driving this home.

[MBS]

95. Oh you are so right. n/t

[iluvtennis]

49. Joan Walsh:Mueller said "When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation..." Not, IF

@joanwalsh, 2h
This just jumped out at me: Mueller said: "When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrong doers accountable." Not "If a subject." Hmmm.

Link to tweet

?s=20

[Generic Other]

51. I am going to start making sure these folks stand by their words

[Eliot Rosewater]

52. So we are nOT allowed to know AnYthing else like did Barr cut it short?

He must testify, period

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

53. Pretty much everything Mueller said today was in his report...

so why haven't impeachment hearings started already?!?!


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[world wide wally]

54. Not to confuse the issue, but doesn't Mueller help those that help themselves?

[Kurt V.]

57. I'm not commenting on the subject today bc of things like 'cool your shit'. ppl are a bit excited

[Honeycombe8]

60. He just repeated his report findings, which were "no collusion," unfortunately....

but Mueller calls it conspiring...not enough to rise to the level of a crime, anyway. He did find evidence of obstruction of justice, but did not reach a conclusive finding on that because he can't indict, so not his job to find Trump guilty of a crime that can't be determined in Court, because that's not fair. But he can't find that Trump did NOT obstruct justice, either. If he could have, he would say so.

Same thing as the report said.

[Hoyt]

83. Exactly. The only thing new today is for people who haven't read the Report or Barr's Summary.

I'd be thrilled if Mueller TV announcement today -- summarizing his own summary of the Report -- causes enough people to scream for Impeachment. It's just amazing to me that anyone believes Mueller said one thing new today.


Truthfully, my takeaway from this whole election -- going back to 2016 -- is that our education system is a complete failure.

[Marie Marie]

61. And Trump says (to himself, wiping his brow) : "Whew - that was close!"

[scarytomcat]

74. dump is a fool if he thinks this is over

if he is lucky he will die in office in the next year and a half

[3catwoman3]

90. How about tomorrow for that?

[JAD]

67. Can Congress hire members of Mueller's team (private attorneys) for the Impeachment process?

Just wanted to know if this is possible.

[obamanut2012]

71. Also my take -- I was surprised Mueller was so direct

And harsh.

[ancianita]

82. It was the green light for Congress to follow through. They will. It will help them in 2020. Polls

are trending to endorse impeachment.

[MadDAsHell]

84. Mueller is a Rethuglican. Period. nt

[Politicub]

85. I think some people on here expect a tweet storm from Mueller

They won't stop complaining until he yells and throws poo, apparently.

Mueller said what he needed to say. It was nearly biblical in how it sounded. And devastating in its simplicity.

“If we had had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

The reason why I say it sounded biblical is because brought to mind this verse from the book of John in the King James version of the Bible:

"In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you."

I hear it in my mind in Samuel Jackson's voice from Pulp Fiction. But he would have appended motherfucker at the end.

Note: I'm an atheist but grew up in Pentecostal and Baptist churches. Jesus was on tap three times a week for more than 16 years. So I know my Bible and how people use it.

And Note 2: In all of my years interneting, I don't think I've ever quoted from the Bible. I should paste Mueller's head on dinosaur-riding Jesus with his quote and share it with my fundie family members on Facebook.

[EffieBlack]

89. Some folk want a show but let anyone ask what they're willing to do

and they get crickets and arguments.

[Heartstrings]

88. Here's my favorite analysis, from former Federal Prosecutor Barbara McQuade:

“I know we all compliment Robert Mueller on his eloquence, but I wish he were a little less nuanced. Key and Peele used to have this comedy bit where they did the Obama anger translator, and so, I’ll be Robert Mueller’s translator. Here’s what I heard him say: ‘There was NO HOAX! Russia interfered with our election. There was NO COUP! These people acted with integrity in their investigation. I CAN’T find obstruction of justice because the law says that I can’t charge a sitting president! But you know who can? CONGRESS CAN! It’s your turn. Read my damn report! It’s all there.’”

That's all he could do....he followed the law.

Sorry, I don't have a link to the quote.

[Tertullian]

91. It was devastating.

A sharp blow to Trump. Real political damage occurred.