Team Mueller (and Their Report)

Throughout 2016, IRA accounts published an increasing number of materials supporting the Trump Campaign and opposing  the Clinton Campaign.  For example, on May 31, 2016, the operational  account "Matt  Skiber"  began to privately message dozens of pro-Trump  Facebook groups asking them to help plan a "pro-Trump rally near Trump Tower."55

To reach larger U.S. audiences, the IRA purchased advertisements from Facebook that promoted the IRA groups on the newsfeeds of U.S. audience members.  According to Facebook, the  IRA  purchased  over  3,500  advertisements,  and  the  expenditures  totaled approximately $100,000.56

During the U.S. presidential campaign, many IRA-purchased  advertisements explicitly supported or opposed a presidential candidate or promoted U.S. rallies organized by the IRA (discussed  below).   As early  as March 2016,  the  IRA purchased  advertisements  that overtly opposed  the Clinton Campaign.    For example, on March 18, 2016, the IRA purchased an advertisement depicting candidate  Clinton and a caption that read in part, "If one day God letsthis liar enter the White House  as a president -that  day would be a real  national tragedy."57

Similarly, on April 6, 2016, the IRA purchased advertisements for its account "Black  Matters" calling for a "flashmob" of U.S. persons to "take a photo with #HillaryClintonForPrison2016 or #nohillary2016."58       IRA-purchased   advertisements   featuring  Clinton  were,  with  very  few exceptions, negative.59

IRA-purchased   advertisements   referencing   candidate   Trump   largely   supported   his campaign.  The first known IRA advertisement explicitly endorsing the Trump Campaign was purchased on April 19, 2016.  The IRA bought an advertisement for its Instagram account "Tea Party News" asking U.S. persons to help them "make a patriotic team of young Trump supporters" by uploading photos with the hashtag "#KIDS4TRUMP."60    In subsequent  months, the IRA purchased dozens of advertisements supporting the Trump Campaign, predominantly through the Facebook groups "Being Patriotic,""Stop All Invaders," and "Secured Borders."

In the  morning  on May  10, 2017,  President Trump  met  with  Russian  Foreign  Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in the Oval Office.468    The media subsequently reported  that during  the May  l 0 meeting  the President  brought  up his decision  the prior day to terminate Corney, telling Lavrov  and Kislyak:  "T just fired the head of the F.B.I.  He was crazy, a real nut job.  I faced great pressure because of Russia.  That's taken off. . .. I'm  not under investigation.'>469  The President never denied making those statements, and the White House did  not  dispute   the  account,   instead   issuing  a  statement   that  said:  "By   grandstanding and politicizing the investigation  into Russia's actions, James Corney created  unnecessary pressure on our ability to engage and negotiate  with Russia.  The investigation  would have always continued, and obviously, the termination  of Corney would not have ended  it.  Once again,  the real story  is that our national security  has been undermined  by the leaking of private and highly classified information."470  Hicks said that when she told the President about the reports on his meeting with Lavrov, he did not look concerned  and said of Corney, "he is crazy."471   When McGahn asked the President  about  his comments  to Lavrov,  the President  said  it was good  that  Corney  was fired because  that took the pressure  off  by making  it clear that  he was not under  investigation  so he could get more work done.472

That same  morning, on  May  I 0, 2017, the President  called  McCabe.473   According  to a memorandum  McCabe wrote following the call, the President  asked McCabe  to come over to the White House to discuss whether the President  should visit FBI headquarters and make a speech  to

Ill.  RUSSIAN HACKING AND DUMPING OPERATIONS

Beginning in March 2016, units of the Russian Federation's Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (GRU) hacked the computers and email accounts of organizations, employees, and  volunteers  supporting the  Clinton  Campaign,  including  the  email  account  of campaign chairman John Podesta. Starting in April 2016, the GRU hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic   Congressional  Campaign   Committee   (DCCC)   and   the   Democratic   National Committee (DNC).   The GRU targeted  hundreds of email accounts used by Clinton Campaign employees, advisors, and volunteers.  In total, the GRU stole hundreds of thousands of documents from the compromised  email accounts and networks.109  The GRU later released stolen Clinton Campaign and DNC documents through online personas, "DCLeaks" and "Guccifer 2.0," and later through the organization  WikiLeaks.   The release of the documents  was designed and timed to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election and undermine the Clinton Campaign.

The next paragraph is heavily redacted and because of formatting issues, won't display properly like it does in the Team Mueller Report. I've typed it verbatim, indicating the redactions and their reason below:

"The Trump Campaign showed interest in the WikiLeaks release and, in the summer and fall of 2016, (HOM). After (HOM) WikiLeaks's first Clinton-related release (HOM), the Trump Campaign stayed in contact (HOM) about WikiLeaks's activities. The investigation was unable to resolve (HOM) WikiLeaks's release of the stolen Podesta emails on October 7,2016, the same day a video from years earlier was published of Trump using graphic language about women." (bold is my own)

Team Mueller was "unable to resolve." What? 5 HOMs in one paragraph regarding a very key event in the whole impeachable offense. Further, Harm to Ongoing Matter may relate to Rodger Dodger Stoned and his upcoming trial or it may involve others, like Jared Dear Boy and Donny Jr. CYA Barr put the kabosh on Team Mueller and the dems in Congress need to follow up and inform the American people of what happened and who was involved. In light of "Russia if you're listening," what we now know of The Ukraine and the Whistleblower and the arrests of Ruddy Ghouliani's goons, who were funneling foreign campaign contributions in the lead up to the election. It would be irresponsible of both political parties not to do so. But you know, go RED team. 

During the course of our discussions, the president did agree to answer  our written  questions  on  certain  Russia-related  topics, and he provided  us with answers.   He did not similarly agree to provide written  answers to questions  on obstruction  topics or questions on events during the transition.   Ultimately, while we believed that we had the authority and legal justification to issue a grand jury subpoena to obtain the President's testimony, we chose not to do so.  We made that decision  in view of the substantial  delay that such an investigative step would  likely produce  at a late stage  in our investigation.  We also assessed that based on the significant  body of evidence we had already  obtained of the President 's actions and  his public  and  private statements describing  or explaining those actions,  we  had sufficient evidence  to understand  relevant  events  and to m ake certain  assessments with out the President's testimony.    The  Office's decision-making process  on  this  issue  is described  in more  detail  in Append ix C, infra, in a note that precedes  the President's written responses.

In assessing  the evidence  we obtained, we relied on common  principles  that apply in any investigation.  The issue of criminal  intent  is often inferred  from  circumstantial evidence.   See, e.g., United States v. Croteau, 819 F.3d  1293,  1 305 (IIth Cir. 2016)  ("[G]uilty knowledge can rarely  be established  by direct evidence.... Therefore, mens rea elements such as knowledge  or intent  may  be proved  by circumstantial evidence.") (internal  quotation  marks omitted);  United States  v.  Robinson, 702   F.3d   22,  36  (2d  Cir. 2012)   ("The  government's  case rested on circumstantial evidence, but the mens rea elements of knowledge and intent can often be proved through  circumstantial  evidence and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom.")  (internal quotation  marks omitted).   The principle that intent can be inferred from circumstantial evidence is a necessity in criminal cases, given the right of a subject to assert his privilege against compelled self-incrimination under the Fifth Amendment and therefore  decline  to testify.   Accordingly, determinations on intent are frequently reached without the opportunity  to interview an investigatory subject.

gimmesometruth27 said:

mickeyrat said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

Someone gonna be making love to Richard Nixon soon. Deserves everything he gets and then some. Appeal or pardon?

appeal for sure.

pardon isnt a good look for what he was convicted of. but its trump so who knows.....

trump will pardon him. he pardoned 3 fucking war criminals today.