Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Can I say "I told you so" now?

Apr 18, 2019 11:59AM PDT

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
So far
Apr 18, 2019 10:15PM PDT

We have Barr's opinion of what the report says.
I'm not going to buy into that until more people get a look at this report.

- Collapse -
OK, OK, you told me ...
Apr 18, 2019 11:19PM PDT

What exactly? That the government grinds slowly, but it doesn't grind much? That Trump dodged obstruction of justice by that much to delay an investigation he says now qualifies him for sainthood?

- Collapse -
I'm not sure
Apr 19, 2019 4:28PM PDT

he'll (Trump) get away with his "totally exonerated" claim, now that the report is out - even if it's redacted, as some say : "lightly". There is enough in it to show intent if not completion of very shady activities by his associates - and that's being cordial, as it were, to said actions. (!)

Hell, more than one commentator with extensive legal experience has said that one of the reasons Mueller was not able to come down harder on the administration was that Trump's aides refused to enact orders or accede to his demands. Also, his operatives were too incompetent to complete transactions for which they would have been charged with illegal activities !

It sometimes (actually, often) makes me sad the rest of the Republican leaders do not distance themselves more from this behavior. What are they thinking, or waiting for?

Rick

- Collapse -
Repubs
Apr 20, 2019 12:38AM PDT

Have got themselves in a box.

If they go against the Don they hand the dems a gift.

So they tolerate the Don's actions so as not to give the dems that gift.

- Collapse -
I was referring to the collusion charge.
Apr 20, 2019 8:17AM PDT

That would have major implications for the American system; something out of the Manchurian Candidate. Or Dr Strangelove without the humor.
IMO almost every president has pushed the envelope one way or another. See FDR vs. the Supreme Court for a major example. It's what type A people do when given power.
Trump is an outsider, so he's clumsy at it. The Clintons are much smoother.
Obstruction happens to be a crime, clumsiness isn't. There's a slim possibility he'll be called to account for that. Also IMO he's guilty of it, just because he's like that. 'I'm not obstructing it, I'm insuring it for Moi.' "No American President should have to go through this again."
Looking for non-shady goverment? Won't be found in those who are part of the system of shadyness. Can't be found ...

- Collapse -
Obstruction happens to be a crime
Apr 20, 2019 2:10PM PDT

You are correct; however, there has to already BE a crime in order to have some try to obstruct it, doncha think? Since he was found to NOT have committed the crime of conspiracy (there IS no such crime as 'collusion' which is why it isn't even mentioned in part 1 of the report) with Russia, there was nothing he obstructed. On the contrary, he, other than verbally and publicly showed his irritation, frustration, and anger over being accused of a crime he didn't commit, cooperated completely with the investigation.....not using Executive Privilege even once, sending over 1.5M documents and emails and texts, encouraging everyone in his administration including WH attorneys to cooperate and testify, telling even Cohen to tell the truth (even though he actually lied to Congress about everything EXCEPT saying Trump told him not to lie and that he had never been to Prague), and never fired anyone other than Comey (who the Dems wanted fired after July, 2017 statements about HILL) although he was constantly under fire by the media and Dems in Congress that he would fire Mueller and Rosenstein. Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, GWBush, and BO ALL fought special/independent counsels and Congressional investigations every step of the way during their terms.....so show me where Trump was anything other than more transparent than anybody else?

You say there is a 'slim possibility he will be held to account'...…..for WHAT? For beating the bulls... back at them?

You DO realize that Barr wasn't, under law, required to put ANY part of that Mueller report out there, don't you? He was ONLY required to give his summary. He has offered to the leading Dems and Republicans and the Gang of 8 the chance to go to a skiff and read the unredacted portions that they are ALLOWED to see that are confidential and they turned it down. Instead, they are trying to use a subpoena to see it ALL, including the documents, and made available to ALL of Congress to see, and a court will deny them that ability because of laws on the books that don't give them that authority. This is all just wasted press time for their base, as usual, because they'll go out there and complain that Trump is blocking it because there is 'something he's hiding' or that the judge who makes the decision is one that Trump must have appointed. It's just more crap coming from them for the next two years again....but they only have 18 months or so to figure out that going own this road is at their own political peril because they will lose the House again.

- Collapse -
RE:Since he was found to NOT have committed the crime
Apr 22, 2019 12:49PM PDT
Since he was found to NOT have committed the crime of conspiracy

It gives you joy to know that DJT didn't report that the Russians were doing something nefarious?

What's up with that?

RE:You are correct; however, there has to already BE a crime in order to have some try to obstruct it, doncha think?

If you (DJT) see something, you(DJT) should say something?

I hear THAT phrase a lot from police forces in the US.
- Collapse -
OK....splain your version of things to me...
Apr 22, 2019 3:58PM PDT

" DJT didn't report that the Russians were doing something nefarious".....What was he supposed to be reporting according to you?

Also, needing explanations on: 1. BO was warned in 2013-2014 by Nunes that the Russians were 'interfering' and needed to be watched (is this the time when BO told Putin to 'cut it out' and didn't do anything further to stop them?). 2. Comey didn't feel it was necessary to warn Trump that Russians were attempting to 'infiltrate' his campaign......why not? The FBI warned Feinstein that her 20-yr Chinese employee was a spy....but the President-elect doesn't merit the same courtesy?

- Collapse -
RE: BO was warned in 2013-2014 by Nunes that the Russians
Apr 22, 2019 6:55PM PDT
BO was warned in 2013-2014 by Nunes that the Russians were 'interfering' and needed to be watched (is this the time when BO told Putin to 'cut it out'

And yet DJT held meetings with the Russians....Go figure....
- Collapse -
No he didn't, and Mueller proved that...
Apr 26, 2019 2:55AM PDT

and yet you keep saying it...…..

- Collapse -
RE:yet you keep saying it...…..
Apr 26, 2019 9:07AM PDT

And YOU keep saying something else....

The president's supporters point out that interactions with foreign nationals are routine during any White House campaign, but three Trump associates have now admitted lying about these encounters..

interactions with foreign nationals are routine during any White House campaign?...

Why LIE?

interactions only became "routine" AFTER they got caught?

- Collapse -
"associates" is much different
Apr 27, 2019 3:28AM PDT

from "And yet DJT held meetings with the Russians"

and THAT's what you keep saying.

As for routine....it IS.....and those associates were not only blackmailed by Mueller into 'admitting' guilt but it appears that at least a few of them were actually set up by the FBI in order to start the 'investigation' and continue to spy that had started previously.  Even Sessions was forced into recusing himself because he had met with Russians in his SENATE offices AS a SENATOR and wasn't part of the administration yet and that meeting was just as routine for him as a SENATOR as every other Senator in Congress.

- Collapse -
RE:"associates" is much different
Apr 29, 2019 7:29PM PDT

HE was going to hire the "best people/associates".....

- Collapse -
And HE did...unlike BO's 'best people/associates"
Apr 30, 2019 4:03AM PDT

Who have been shown to be traitors, liars, and conspirators...….even by their OWN words/admissions on the public record. They just haven't gone to court yet to be sentenced for it all....but they will.

- Collapse -
RE:And HE did
Apr 30, 2019 5:12AM PDT

and THEN

List of Trump administration dismissals and resignations

Many political appointees of Donald Trump, the 45th and current President of the United States, have resigned or been dismissed. The record-setting turnover rate in the Trump Administration has been noted in various publications.

Can HE pickem' or what?

- Collapse -
(NT) Hey! splain is ©Doug!
Apr 25, 2019 8:39PM PDT
- Collapse -
That's your opinion.
Apr 22, 2019 6:28PM PDT

The opinion of the trained investigator, who put 22 months into it: Collusion, no. Obstruction, yes, short of indictment.
My take on the news I was able to stomach, Foolishness abounding.
The purpose of my post was to express amazement at the public reaction.

'Collusion not a crime'. No statute with that word in it? Possibly. Article II Section 4: "... high Crimes and Misdemeanors." Lots of wiggle room there, even before we get to the statutes.

Speaking of which, the Wikileaks guy is safe, then I guess. He never contacted any Godless Commies, not even for a hotel room. Or a hotel. Therefore the US is must NOT be moving heaven and earth to hang him for any "collusion" with the enemy. Assuming Russia is the enemy. An orange celebrity once expressed great admiration for its Leader-for-Life.
It's said that state secrets were put out there to be read by the G.C., and that makes him a bad guy. Not my concern. Most of the secrets seemed to be of the 'stay on Vegas' kind. Maybe they just want him for littering. They got Arlo for that.

Good thing Assange didn't make our Bible available to G.C. They know how to handle that kind.
I'm told he needs to bathe more often.

Your 'nonexistent crime' is a common enough word; IMO something no follower would want his leader to be found doing at all. That is why I said all patriotic Americans should have been rejoicing at the news.

- Collapse -
S/b "stays in Vegas" of course.
Apr 22, 2019 6:31PM PDT

IOW dangerous to the US, when revealed, only if pettiness and egomania are international crimes.

- Collapse -
You DO realize that the Mueller
Apr 23, 2019 4:25AM PDT

report AND investigation should have ended once he knew there was no 'collusion', don't you? He was tasked with two things by Rosenstein.....1. Did the Russians interfere with our election? (NO....they TRIED but not one vote was actually changed because of their intrusions and hacking so the results would have been the same outcome) and 2. Did Trump or any of his candidacy people conspire to help Russia interfere? (NO)

The ONLY candidate who DID conspire with Russia to change the outcome of the election was HILL and the DNC.....and THAT investigation is going on right now.

As for 'admiration' of the leader of Russia....if you look for the videos that are out there, you will fin the same types of remarks made by HILL and BO, including the one where BO tells Putin's 'wingman' that 'I'll have more flexibility after the election'.

BO ignored Nune's warning because he believed Putin was in the Dem's corner and that HILL would be elected.....if that had been the end result, NOTHING about what HIS administration was doing against Trump would have ever come to light. THERE is your 'coverup', people.

- Collapse -
RE:BO ignored Nune's warning
Apr 23, 2019 12:55PM PDT

And then Obama told Putin to 'cut it out' .

Well that's more than DJT did to/about Putin.....

DJT was like Shulltz of Hogans Heroes...."I SEE NOTHING...I KNOW NOTHING"....

At least Obama didn't send Malia or Sasha....Keep it "in the family" like DJT.....


President Schultz?

Post was last edited on April 23, 2019 12:56 PM PDT

- Collapse -
More than Trump did?
Apr 23, 2019 3:47PM PDT

Have you even bothered to find out all the things Trump has done TO Russia since he took office? Of course not.....you're still fixated on the BO/HILL incorrect translation of a plastic reset button that allowed Crimea to be annexed and wouldn't help Ukraine defend themselves against a second attack.

- Collapse -
RE: fixated on the BO/HILL
Apr 24, 2019 5:43AM PDT

ME?....fixated on BO/HILL?

More than you? IF at all?

NO WAY!!!!!!!!

- Collapse -
Also...BO was the one who
Apr 23, 2019 3:50PM PDT

stopped the Poland/Czech Republic missile defense systems as a favor TO Russia...that were negotiated by GWB....

- Collapse -
BO.
Apr 25, 2019 8:42PM PDT

Isn't he the one who knows?

- Collapse -
"not one vote"
Apr 23, 2019 3:49PM PDT

Really? How on earth could one tell? And, from what I recall and from what the security/intelligence agencies are saying *now*, the Russians _did_ influence the 2016 election. Their "Internet Resource Agency" made up fake posts and suckered people into believing crazy conspiracy theories. In my opinion they influenced quite a few people against H.Clinton and *for* D.Trump.

Just how much this swung the election may never be known, but to say it had no result is beyond laughable...

Rick

- Collapse -
If you believe that
Apr 24, 2019 5:24AM PDT

Russia was 'for' Trump then how do you explain the millions given by them to HILL and the smear crap in the Russian dossier that HILL and the DNC paid for? She and her team were working WITH Russia to get HER elected (or so she believed anyhow)...and with them hacking into the Dem server and handing it over to Assange (although he still denies it came from Russia) to smear her, it becomes obvious to anybody that they didn't care who won. They ONLY wanted to totally disrupt our elections period....by making BOTH look bad. The dossier was garbage that was made up....the HILL stuff SHE did to herself and made it easy for Russia to out her.

- Collapse -
Ok
Apr 24, 2019 2:01PM PDT

I guess it shows how little I know about Russia's true motivations.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-clinton-campaign-sought-dirt-on-trump-from-russian-officials-wheres-the-outrage/2018/08/02/dee4be12-9672-11e8-810c-5fa705927d54_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f5c437206262

^This pretty much verifies what you say, though a paragraph notes :

" Furthermore, none of this calls into question the intelligence community’s assessment that the Russians wanted Trump to win — something Putin publicly confirmed in his Helsinki news conference with Trump. But the intelligence community assessment also found that the Kremlin expected Clinton to win. The Russians are not stupid. They were preparing for the prospect of a Clinton presidency, and they played both sides. That’s why millions of dollars in Russian cash were sloshing around Clinton World — including $500,000 Bill Clinton received for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin."

Anyway, I still take issue with the "not one vote" conclusion. And Trump's encouraging the Russians to hack servers strikes me as very bad form, to put it lightly.

Rick

- Collapse -
If you go back and listen to the actual
Apr 24, 2019 2:52PM PDT

words Trump used during that debate he never encouraged them to hack servers....they had already been hacked and the Podesta emails were already being made public. What he said were (as close as I can come to exact wording) "If you have HER 33K emails, the news media would love to see them". That's a vast difference from encouraging a hack...….

- Collapse -
True
Apr 25, 2019 4:21PM PDT

But his whole relationship with Putin and Russia is suspect. Believing Putin instead of our own intelligence services - *** is that? And his personal lawyer/counsel Guiliani remarked that 'there's nothing wrong with taking info from the Russians, just depends on where it came from' .

Does this not bother you? It does to me.

Rick

- Collapse -
First....
Apr 26, 2019 3:09AM PDT

"Believing Putin instead of our intelligence services"...….If I knew my own intelligences services were literally spying on me, even though they KNEW I hadn't done anything because THEY were planting 'evidence', I wouldn't trust them either......would YOU? Plus, HILL PAID for that planted 'evidence' in order to win an election and those intelligence services KNEW it, and did NOTHING about charging HER with paying foreign entities which is against the law.

Second.....Guilliani is correct. Trump didn't break any laws and got NO information from the Russians anyhow. Ukraine has information and proof that they were ALSO working with HILL to get her elected and tried numerous times to get that proof to Mueller who didn't take it (surprise, surprise). Adam Schiff is on tape talking with who he believed was a Russian operative about pics of a 'naked Trump' and making arrangements for his staff to meet and collect that 'evidence'....isn't that 'collusion' in your opinion?

Doesn't ANY of the actual facts that BO, HILL, the DNC, and weaponized Federal agencies all worked against a presidential candidate to prevent him from being elected and then to take him down after he won bother YOU? It does to me...….