No, what I mean is, all his so-called supporters, mainly domestic, and the spineless, unprincipled lackeys in the House of Congress who won't stand up to him. Anyone, in brief, who thinks that he's actually capable, or who won't oppose him out of fear or greed.

sadly - i quite agree

According to my undercover secret sources, the Mueller report also contains video of Trump down on his knees giving Putin a blow job. You don't have to believe me, you'll be able to see for yourself. But, my God, who would want to do that???

Sanders may sound revolutionary from an American perspective but he's mostly advocating for things that most of the West is already doing. The problem is the way he is advocating for it doesn't appear to be as balanced or as sensible as what the other countries did, really focusing on the top 1% or .1% and not really being mathematically correct in his statements. I don't like his deviations from the norm, they range from bad to terrible.


Sure, I haven't noticed any problems of the same scale as the others with Biden but I am not as knowledgable of him as the others.

Sanders may sound revolutionary from an American perspective but he's mostly advocating for things that most of the West is already doing. — Judaka

Yes, agreed.

The problem is the way he is advocating for it doesn't appear to be as balanced or as sensible as what the other countries did — Judaka

But he's not running in those other countries. He's running in an insane nation which elected Trump.

If you look at Biden's voting record as a senator you'll find he is very bad.

Warren?

It's worth noting that the Mueller enquiry has already resulted in people being sentenced to jail, including Trump's lawyer and campaign manager, and that Cohen is going to jail for lying to Congress to protect Trump ('Individual 1'). — Wayfarer

All part of Trump's plan to drain the swamp. Now he can distance himself from those corrupt people, and claim credit for exposing and cleaning up all that corruption which was going on.

The OP asks, Q: "What will Mueller discover?"

A: Trump did not collude with the Russians.

Just that there's no good proof that he did. Can't say he didn't or isn't.

Just that there's no good proof that he did. Can't say he didn't or isn't. — Maggy

The same could be said of you.

:up:

The same could be said of you. — Hanover

You wrote that Mueller discovered that Trump did not collude with the Russians. In much the same way it was discovered that OJ did not kill his wife.

I'm voting for either Warren or Bernie in the primary.

Worth noticing what is being said about the Barr whitewash.

Not long now......

It reads as if you're anticipating some candy.

Well, the coverage is damning against Trump. No, Mueller didn’t find enough evidence for inditement against Trump, but the pattern of co-operation between the Trump campaign, Russian operatives and Wikileaks is clear, as is the evidence of attempts to obstruct the investigation.

The president's son, Donald Trump Jr, had direct contact with Wikileaks during the presidential campaign period, the report said.

Wikileaks sent Mr Trump Jr a password to access the website ‘putintrump.org’ and told campaign staff he successfully used the password.

Wikileaks asked Mr Trump Jr to tweet a link to Clinton staffer John Podesta's emails, and four days layer he tweeted the link.

The report determined there was a "reasonable argument" that Mr Trump Jr violated campaign finance laws, but special counsel did not believe they could obtain a conviction.

The Moscow Trump Tower meetings that Trump repeatedly denied, happened all throughout the campaign. The Trump Tower meeting for acquiring ‘dirt on Hillary’ occurred and was subsequently lied about.

And Trump repeatedly tried to thwart the whole investigation. Mueller leaves the door open to the possibility Trump might be prosecuted when he leaves office.

So Trump’s March claim of ‘total and complete exoneration’ is totally unfounded; the report stops just short of indictment but in no way constitutes an exoneration.

The Trump Tower meeting for acquiring ‘dirt on Hillary’ occurred and was subsequently lied about. — Wayfarer

I'm surprised that ignorance actually was a defense in this case:

Taking into account the high burden to establish a culpable mental state in a campaign-finance prosecution and the difficulty in establishing the required valuation, the Office decided not to pursue criminal campaign-finance charges against Trump Jr. or other campaign officials for the events culminating in the June 9 meeting.

...

The Office ultimately concluded that, even if the principal legal questions were resolved favorably to the government, a prosecution would encounter difficulties proving that Campaign officials or individuals connected to the Campaign willfully violated the law.

So they broke the law but they can't be prosecuted because it can't be proved that they knew they were breaking the law?

I've thought for a long time that the Trump-Putin connection has been one of the biggest intelligence coups of all time. Still, even if all the 'too-friendly-to-Russia' people were whisked away as fast as possible and Trump couldn't change truly the US foreign policy, this still makes truly the historical annals of intelligence operations.

The most outstanding thing was that the Russians got away with it and will get away with it. Putin is truly one of the greatest intelligence service masters in history.

Huh? Do you lot have any self-awareness? Don't you realise this only gives Trump more ammunition to blame "fake news"? It has been formally stated that there is no evidence for a Russian-Trump collusion in the elections, and therefore ending the conspiracy. This is Alex Jones level stuff. There is tons of material to shit on Trump without making yourself look dumber than he is, lmao.

So they broke the law but they can't be prosecuted because it can't be proved that they knew they were breaking the law? — Michael

Overall, Mueller was cognisant of the legal obstacles to prosecuting a sitting President:

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, 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. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him. — Mueller Report

According to Mark Joseph Stern, writing in Slate, this sentence is particularly important:

The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.

He says:

This sentence is, put simply, an impeachment referral to Congress. If Congress ignores it, it will have failed the special counsel and the American people. Mueller’s report is overflowing with proof of Trump’s criminality, including new information that confirms Trump’s efforts to hobble the investigation and tamper with witnesses. The president obstructed justice. And thanks to the restraints imposed on Mueller’s power, only Congress has the authority to redress this illegality by removing Trump from office. At this point, anything less than articles of impeachment would be an insufficient response to Mueller’s incriminating report.

(Absent a strong Republican voice in Congress, I still think impeachment is unlikely.)

I was referring to Don Jr. (and others at the Trump Tower meeting), not to President Trump.

‘ultimately, Mueller concluded that, despite "numerous" communications and links between the Trump campaign and Russia, there was no evidence likely to prove beyond reasonable doubt that campaign officials like Manafort, Papadopoulos and Carter Page acted as agents of the Russian government or in coordination with Russia.’ Same said for Don Jr. (But imagine the outrage if the Obama campaign had done anything like this.)

I was talking about the Trump Tower meeting which is concerned with campaign finance violations, not being an agent of the Russian government. Mueller stated that there's evidence that they committed a crime but because there isn't evidence that they knew it was a crime he can't prosecute.

‘The 9 June 2016 meeting, according to the report, raised “difficult statutory and constitutional questions” relating to “schemes involving the solicitation or receipt of assistance from foreign sources”. But the special counsel ultimately concluded that they could not prove Trump Jr or other participants were knowingly in violation of the law:

The Office ultimately concluded that, even if the principal legal questions were resolved favorably to the government , a prosecution would encounter difficulties proving that Campaign officials or individuals connected to the Campaign willfully violated the law.

~ The Guardian

Yes, that's what I quoted. The part that surprised me is this: "a prosecution would encounter difficulties proving that Campaign officials or individuals connected to the Campaign willfully violated the law.". It seems to be saying that they broke the law but because they didn't know they were breaking the law they can't be prosecuted. Ignorance is a defense.

Right. Vanity Fair basically says that Mueller decided that Donny was too stupid to be culpable. https://apple.news/AEE6iOkMfRWC27bcPjlRvnQ

Donny predictably regards this as vindication ;-)

I've seen a lot of reporting like that and I think it's pretty bad. There's a difference between being stupid and not knowing that something is illegal. It's not like campaign finance laws are something one should know as a matter of common sense.

House of Reps should move forward with impeachment. The report clearly demonstrated that Trump's behavior was unacceptable, and he doesn't belong in the White House. The Senate will very unlikely vote for impeachment, but the process itself has to be carried through, as we cannot sit by and accept that this is OK behavior for a sitting President.