The Mueller Report thread

[Dill]

(04-22-2020, 07:10 PM)hollodero Wrote: I don't really think that's what Mueller said... I might admit that this is a matter of interpretation perhaps.

To underline my stance though, the Muller report did find that Manafort gave polling data to a Russian spy, it did state that Kremlin operatives gave the campaign some sort of preview of the Hillary email distribution timetable, also there's the whole Roger Stone/Wikileags saga and this Trump Tower/dirt saga, so I couldn't go as far as to say "Mueller found no American was part of the collusion". It rather stated that there was not sufficient evidence to establish actual coordination and support for these Russian efforts. Which, to me, is not the same.

There are other things like Flynn and Papadopulos and that Mueller did not delve into counterintelligence matters in the first place... and there is some kind of evidence, just not sufficient to indict. In case of Don jr. specifically, only the assumption of utter naivité saved him from that. He did not "willfully" coordinate, and the offered dirt might maybe not be a "thing of value", it's these kinds of considerations that lead to de-facto exonerations, not the lack of any evidence. Imho, just imho.

My only disagreement with this is that I don't think there is much "interpretation" going on.

You have a lot of guys who state their receptiveness to Russian help and act on it opportunistically.

What saved them is the difficulty proving "coordination" among people acting on instinct and impulse without any central control.

It's not like the Russian ambassador called Flynn about ending sanctions and Flynn reminded him that OBama was still president and hung up. It's not like Don jr replied "Dirt on Hillary, sorry, that's illegal."

Seems like the Russians were MUCH MORE careful about where these contacts could wrong than the Trumpsters.