[moose]

Seems likely; to mix metaphors, there will likely be no smoking gun for Trump, but probably a smelly miasma of white-collar criminality surrounding his associates.  At best, I hope for something substantial attaching to the likes of Jared Kushner or Trump Jr.

[Falling Down]

... and that Mueller has handed off a shitload of additional crimes for investigation by the SDNY and the DOJ. 

[Falling Down]

.... also, the phrase 'no further indictments' is an interesting one.  That doesn't discount that many sealed indictments may have already been filed.  John Dean (that John Dean of Nixon era) thinks that there may be another report that's subject to NatSec restrictions which doesn't have to go through the AG and will have landed on Adam Schiff's desk as chair of the House Intel Committee. 

[joel182]

.... also, the phrase 'no further indictments' is an interesting one. 

Also worth remembering that "Mueller has charged 34 people and obtained guilty pleas or convictions for seven" when Trump and allies present "no further indictments" as though the investigation found nothing

[andy popp]

I never expected the report to recommend indicting the President (the consensus seems to sitting presidents can't be indicted. Impeachment is a job for congress) but that doesn't mean it contains nothing; for example it could present a very clear case of obstruction of justice by the President. But even so, I'm not overly optimistic, whatever it contains. His blatant corruption seems to count for nothing with many people. A 2020 victory remains highly plausible.

[Offwidth]

Thought this was hillarious.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/apr/02/donald-trump-golf-28-club-championships

[Offwidth]

More worrrying news:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/09/dojs-new-stance-on-foreign-payments-or-gifts-to-trump-blurs-lines-experts 

[Mugabe251]

This situation reminds one of a quote by Robert Anton Wilson who once said, "The thinker thinks and the prover proves".

That is to say that, it seems that the consensus among you is that you've already made your mind up, as if: "The investigative report found no evidence to confirm my suspicions about Trump, therefore the team behind the investigation must be corrupt or withholding information". This is the power of the disconfirmation bias. The result is very disappointing and hard to swallow - so why swallow it at all?

[andy popp]

This situation reminds one of a quote by Robert Anton Wilson who once said, "The thinker thinks and the prover proves".

That is to say that, it seems that the consensus among you is that you've already made your mind up, as if: "The investigative report found no evidence to confirm my suspicions about Trump, therefore the team behind the investigation must be corrupt or withholding information". This is the power of the disconfirmation bias. The result is very disappointing and hard to swallow - so why swallow it at all?

This in no way represents the thinking of any the liberals/progressives that I know here in the US. For one thing, we as yet have extremely little idea of what the report actually says.

Nice try though.

[Mugabe251]

But my completely anecdotal evidence about liberals/progressives attitudes towards the investigation is contrary to yours.

[andy popp]

Except that your anecdotal evidence (whatever it is) cannot prove that your blanket "you" is correct, whereas my anecdotal evidence (which I also suspect is more robust) can prove that your blanket "you" is incorrect. I thought my point was obvious?

[Oldmanmatt]

But my completely anecdotal evidence about liberals/progressives attitudes towards the investigation is contrary to yours.

Interesting.

What do you consider a “Liberal/Progressive”?

Do you feel that all “Conservatives” should be Trump supporters and that anyone who is not such a supporter, must be a Liberal?

Asking for a friend, obviously.

[tomtom]

So redacted Muller report is out.

Would I be right in saying it shows he’s pretty much guilty of loads of bad stuff - but not guilty enough to be done for it?

(I don’t have the heart to dig into it in detail - it really depresses me reading about it..)

[moose]

this seems to be a pretty representative excerpt from the Guardian coverage:

“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,” the report continues. “However, we are unable to reach that judgment.

“The President’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests,” the report says.

[largeruk]

As Hugo Rifkind says: "Mueller's report is basically "it's not for me to say he tried to strangle a dog but here are at least 10 incredibly detailed accounts of him putting his tiny hands round a dog's throat and squeezing it in a manner clearly designed to make it die"."

Mueller effectively also adds: "He did try to get me fired twice though so you know..."

[tomtom]

As Hugo Rifkind says: "Mueller's report is basically "it's not for me to say he tried to strangle a dog but here are at least 10 incredibly detailed accounts of him putting his tiny hands round a dog's throat and squeezing it in a manner clearly designed to make it die"."

Mueller effectively also adds: "He did try to get me fired twice though so you know..."

Excellent summary.... but he’ll probably get away with strangling the dog. Unfortunately.

[andy popp]

This from the report:

“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.”

The report is damning and effectively invites Congress to consider to impeachment. But the "total exoneration" narrative may well prevail.

[Oldmanmatt]

I’m wondering, if an Un redacted version isn’t about to drop; in the event of things “going quiet”.
Mueller must be close to retirement, already as tarnished as he could be and more than clever enough to find a way to drop the lot; whilst keeping his hands fairly clean...

[Oldmanmatt]

So..
 That last post, was me sitting down for cuppa at work and scrolling UKB, because it was too hot to down.
Opened up my news feed straight after posting.
Reckon the Spunk Gibbon, has his incontinence panties in a right wad (he’s obviously not as upset as Mugabe251 (and a 1/4)).
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/politics/trump-tweets/

[andy popp]

I don't think the redactions were that heavy in the end and relate to ongoing investigations - at least a dozen I believe (some of which are potentially more damaging for Trump). Incidentally, I don't think anyone sees Mueller as tarnished - at least I've never really seen that expressed.

The really interesting question is why, in the end, its possible none of this will matter. A report like this would probably have been enough to end any previous presidency. What has changed in society's norms such that they will be able to convince enough people that their lies are the truth?

Anyway, I've long thought that they only sure way to defeat him is at the ballot box.

[Mugabe251]

Except that your anecdotal evidence (whatever it is) cannot prove that your blanket "you" is correct, whereas my anecdotal evidence (which I also suspect is more robust) can prove that your blanket "you" is incorrect. I thought my point was obvious?

Neither us of 'proved' anything (a bit like this investigation really) and there's nothing robust about an anecdote, whoever your circle of friends are. And I'm not attacking you Andy, or anyone - just putting an idea across.

*farts*

[Oldmanmatt]

I don't think the redactions were that heavy in the end and relate to ongoing investigations - at least a dozen I believe (some of which are potentially more damaging for Trump). Incidentally, I don't think anyone sees Mueller as tarnished - at least I've never really seen that expressed.

The really interesting question is why, in the end, its possible none of this will matter. A report like this would probably have been enough to end any previous presidency. What has changed in society's norms such that they will be able to convince enough people that their lies are the truth?

Anyway, I've long thought that they only sure way to defeat him is at the ballot box.

You asked a question, Mugabe answered.

[Oldmanmatt]

This seems pertinent.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/no-one-listens-to-the-president/587557/?utm_term=2019-04-19T10%3A00%3A58&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=the-atlantic&utm_content=edit-promo&fbclid=IwAR0cbo42fWAWYLDWXQCGSd0m_G-m9m0-LqW-M09FRGk3xXusO4t5S3VOD4M

[SA Chris]

Didn't know Dave Graham wrote that well (actually looks like him too!).

[mrjonathanr]

Ouf! Here’s a writer who really doesn’t mince her words:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/trump-regime-america-insurrection