• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

FUll Redacted Mueller Report RELEASED!!! Neogaf first exclusive! (PDF in thread )

infinitys_7th

Member
Oct 1, 2006
4,556
4,538
1,265
Mueller theorizes that Trump wanted it stopped due to discovery of crimes other than a Russian conspiracy, or discovery of other personal failings.
So what? Unless he has evidence, that is just opinion without weight.

Maybe Trump just got tired of being called a traitor and Russian agent by all the people Mueller's people illegally leaked misinformation to?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickFire

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
13,184
23,908
1,260
USA
dunpachi.com
Trump should have just sat back and took it. He shouldn't have been so upset he was being falsely accused of fucking treason with an ongoing ridiculous investigation and a nonstop out of control media running 24/7 coverage portraying him as a Russian puppet for two years.

Nah, all fine and dandy.
Yeah. He's standing up for himself, so he must have something to hide! The eyes of the righteous are never wrong in their inquisition.

Like I said here, Kavanaugh getting smeared for his emotional reaction was a preview of what they're attempting to do to Trump now.

"He got angry! Wow, sounds like he was secretly guilty all along"

There's some genuine brain-damage in the heads of people who try to destroy their opponents by smearing them and then condemn them if they react angrily. It's a reflection of their deep self-righteous faith. 1980s Evangelical Christians all over again.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
13,184
23,908
1,260
USA
dunpachi.com

A redacted person said "Putin has won!" when his sworn enemy Hillary Clinton wasn't elected obvious puppet Trump was elected.

The proof has been right in front of our faces all along! Trump is guilty of collusion because Russia liked the results of the election.
 

Ixiah

Member
Feb 16, 2018
303
286
270
So....CNN is gonna be like:
"Well it doesnt say hes NOT innocent, see we were right all along !"
Remind me again, what type of People view you as Guilty until proven innocent ?
Oh right.....
 
Last edited:

ilsayed

Member
Nov 7, 2018
174
94
180
So it was an investigation in search of a crime. Not that we didn't already know that or anything.
Obstruction is a crime. One that both Clinton and Nixon also committed and were / were going to be impeached for. Trump obstructing justice in fear of some of his other crimes being discovered isn’t exactly great news.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
23,156
21,950
1,045
So it was an investigation in search of a crime. Not that we didn't already know that or anything.
Anything, anything to stick to the wall. Using letter agencies and tax dollars for a partisan led agenda. This is not a precedent they want to set going forward for all candidates or presidents. They themselves won’t be free from the same scrutiny when it comes around their way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatLady and dolabla

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
4,009
2,180
880
Bitcoin will likely take a further hit with this report.

Also the whole lying about who ordered the comey firing is likely going to be the main media talking point along with trying to get Meghan to fire sessions and only saving Trump from obstruction because he didn't take the order.
 

dlauv

Member
Apr 6, 2014
3,956
32
370
Texas
Mueller states that the obstruction of justice charges should be left in the hands of congress, basically alluding to impeachment. Also,

 
Last edited:

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,753
488
790
Anything, anything to stick to the wall. Using letter agencies and tax dollars for a partisan led agenda. This is not a precedent they want to set going forward for all candidates or presidents. They themselves won’t be free from the same scrutiny when it comes around their way.
How was it partisan if a bipartisan Senate initiated the counsel in the first place?
 
  • Fire
Reactions: <+)O Robido O(+>

RokkanStoned

Gold Member
Jan 14, 2018
1,923
1,971
565
Norway
I have read a mostly a lot of the obstruction bit (the conclusion on collusion itself makes it clear, so felt pointless to read into it, unless you want to go conspiracy theorist), but in general it made me far more sympathetic to Trump and also to those around him. I understand why they wouldn't rule on obstruction reading it and honestly, if democrats want to go down that road it will cost them so much politically that it will definitely lose the 2020 election, but it might affect congress as well, which would be even worse for them. Since I kind of want someone like Sanders to win, I'd rather not have that pollute the campaign. Having been "meh" on Trump, other than laughing at the memes, as a layperson it just seems like a big nothing and just made me sympathetic to Trump's feelings of people undermining his presidency.
 

Teletraan1

Member
May 17, 2012
6,048
2,631
670
Canada
How was it partisan if a bipartisan Senate initiated the counsel in the first place?
I think they were referring to the underlying investigation of Donald Trump. Not the special council. To your point. Did the bipartisan Senate choose the members of the special council? If they did, they were retarded because appointing Clinton Foundation lawyers to investigate Trump should throw up some serious red flags.
 

Trey

Member
Mar 3, 2010
27,753
488
790
And where did that “dossier” come from again?
It...began as Republican opposition research. Then it got picked up and expanded upon by Clinton. Then when it crossed the longtime Republican McCain's desk, he promptly forwarded it to the DOJ and FBI. And a few months after that, a Republican majority Congress impaneled the special counsel.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
23,156
21,950
1,045
It...began as Republican opposition research. Then it got picked up and expanded upon by Clinton. Then when it crossed the longtime Republican McCain's desk, he promptly forwarded it to the DOJ and FBI. And a few months after that, a Republican majority Congress impaneled the special counsel.
Ah yes, McCain. :messenger_smirking:
 
  • Like
Reactions: danielberg

dolabla

Member
Oct 9, 2013
3,696
3,976
660
Obstruction is a crime. One that both Clinton and Nixon also committed and were / were going to be impeached for. Trump obstructing justice in fear of some of his other crimes being discovered isn’t exactly great news.
It's a good thing he didn't commit obstruction..... on a crime that didn't exist.
 

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
4,009
2,180
880
One thing about this is the reaction by Trump toward the appointment of Mueller at Sessions being "OMG my presidency is fucked I will get nothing done)" actually shows that he really had nothing to do with the whole Russian thing, he became incredibly upset and reckless and tried in a fit of range to get it past him firing all those who didn't immediately remove the Russian hoax from him because he had no clue what to do.

Also while not entirely, it did block him from making certain moves and getting certain things done. So it was definitely something that clearly hurt him emotionally and would explain why he was asking anybody in any position, even unrelated ones, to do something anything, while he was actually panicking in the background trying to figure out why he was being accused of something he honestly never did and terrible biased media coverage for two years.

I mean if he were to randomly decide in the next few months not to run again I wouldn't even blame him, but there's so much vitrol he basically has to run again to show the media up and remove the stench because this report isn't going to clean the entire farm by itself at this point and that's just sad. It's one of the reasons Carson is running again. Most people don't know because the media doesn't cover it by Carsons been bashed weekly this entire time on RUssia and the President, as well as people trying to sabotage his administration in housing.
 
Jun 26, 2018
2,028
1,288
380
Milwaukee, WI
Odd how that part is always left out.
Because it isn't really the truth. The Free Beacon stopped funding the research in May of 2016 when Trump became the nominee. It was Clinton who separately contacted Fusion in April of 2016 who then subcontracted Steele's firm. The Free Beacon requested oppo research on all Republicans. Clinton requested research solely on Trump.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,863
2,769
1,520
Best Coast
Clinton's impeachment charge of obstruction was bullshit too. Twice now in the span of only 4 administrations, it's been used as a tool against a political opponent instead of an actual argument for justice. It's gonna fail again, and it'll have only served the purpose of wasting everyone's time when we could have been concentrating harder on the country's problems instead.
 

i_am_ben

running_here_and_there
Feb 5, 2008
8,551
389
1,085
If I recall correctly the FBI investigation was not started due to the dossier but rather George Papadopoulos revealing to the Australian Ambassador to the UK that Russia had thousands of Clinton emails weeks before they were released.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Madonis

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Dec 3, 2013
23,156
21,950
1,045
Clinton's impeachment charge of obstruction was bullshit too. Twice now in the span of only 4 administrations, it's been used as a tool against a political opponent instead of an actual argument for justice. It's gonna fail again, and it'll have only served the purpose of wasting everyone's time when we could have been concentrating harder on the country's problems instead.
Could not agree more.
 

finowns

Member
May 10, 2009
3,256
852
890
Obstruction is a crime. One that both Clinton and Nixon also committed and were / were going to be impeached for. Trump obstructing justice in fear of some of his other crimes being discovered isn’t exactly great news.
Murder is also a crime. Trump didn't do that either or at least it wasn't proven. Trump doesn't need to prove himself innocent.
 

Paracelsus

Member
Jun 24, 2007
9,194
727
1,165
This reads exactly like #metoo shenanigans
"Cavill is afraid to date women because of false rape claims"
"twitter: #cavillisarapist"
Except replace that with #trumpcolluded
 

dolabla

Member
Oct 9, 2013
3,696
3,976
660
Trump's only crime was............................................... he won the 2016 election. It was her turn! And he ruined it!

Dude worked his ass off to win by having rallies constantly, actually visiting places like Michigan, Wisconsin, etc. The night before the election he was in Michigan holding a rally after midnight.

This political novice took a shit on two political dynasties along with a highly partisan media who did everything they could to derail his campaign to get Hilldawg elected. And the Orange Man prevailed against all odds. The asshurt this has caused is off the scales.
 

danielberg

Member
Jun 20, 2018
2,533
2,940
385
Stephen Fry as usual with the common sense. I'm guilty as well. All of us are.

being a grandstanding social media lime light chaser like stephen ala "l...look at me! i am neutral! both sides are wrong in this conspiracy sold by only one side!" is a rather easy way out i guess.
 
Last edited:

strange headache

Fluctuat nec mergitur
Jan 14, 2018
1,835
7,624
775
So, is there anything of substance in there, or is it 448 pages of what basically amounts to...



...this?
 
Last edited:

Zangiefy360

Member
Aug 30, 2018
874
1,473
375
I have been reading some reactions around the internet and everyone is just picking out sentences they like and spinning things to fit how they feel. Conversation on this seems useless.
This is exactly what the Dems wanted. They own the media, so with this being 448 pages, they knew there would be a thing or two they could have their media lackeys foam at the mouth about.

Again, this was publicly funded opposition research, nothing more at this point.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,863
2,769
1,520
Best Coast
I would also like to see the Venn Diagram of those who want to see the full unredacted report released vs. those who think Julian Assange and Wikileaks were irresponsible by not redacting Chelea Manning's leaks more.
 

NickFire

Member
Mar 12, 2014
4,961
3,777
625
1) The evidence related to obstruction did not lead to a recommendation to indict. That's (in a normal world) the beginning, middle, and end of the story. The prosecutor either has evidence and recommends charges, or they don't. Our law is not guilty until proven innocent. It is innocent until proven guilty. If you could show me evidence that he bribed Mueller, or that Mueller really loved the guy personally for some reason, I might question his lack of a charging recommendation. But there is no such evidence, and the fact is a team of 20 paid investigators with an unlimited budget / access, failed to uncover enough evidence to warrant a charge in their recommendation. They can spin the reason why they did not such thing anyway they want, but at the end of the day they did not charge a crime!

2) Unless someone really hates Trump, they are not likely to think its fair to prosecute someone for obstructing an investigation into a fabricated crime made up by the person's political opponents. As if any of us would smile if our name was trashed for 2 years (based on nothing at all) because they think the truth will come out
 
Last edited:

pimentel1

Midas Member
Jul 22, 2018
1,423
1,063
695
Stephen Fry as usual with the common sense. I'm guilty as well. All of us are.

No, some of us knocked on both sides. Some took critical stances of the GOP and DNC. Some saw positives in each side. You didn’t, and when we asked you to, like Fry mentioned, you ignored us/it, repeatedly. Pathetic that we are here now. Maybe in the future you’ll heed your own words. Seriously, seriously doubt it.
 
Last edited:

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
615
314
255
While he didn't necessarily lie in the four page summary, Barr definitely downplayed what was the in the actual report, particularly regarding the obstruction matter, but that's to be expected given what he had done before during the first Bush administration. He's inaccurately represented official documents in the past.

After reading the redacted document, it seems clear to me that Trump definitely attempted to obstruct justice. Even if there was, as far as we know, no Russia collusion, he still wanted to shut down the investigation by any means necessary, including ones that most reasonable people would agree as standing somewhere been unethical and outright illegal. The report describes behavior by Trump that, even in the best case scenario, isn't what someone who is truly respectful of the law and of the institutions of the U.S. should be expected to do. It's closer to what you would expect from corrupt businessmen or a mob boss.

Fortunately for Trump, it does seem his team was smart enough to disobey him at least a few times in that regard, which prevented the most gross obstruction attempts from achieving success, such as firing Mueller, but it wasn't for lack of trying or lack of intent on Trump's part.

The logic that if Trump is innocent of Russia collusion then he can obstruct justice...is BS. There's a difference between defending yourself, which Trump should obviously be allowed to do, and the kind of behavior described in the report.
 
Last edited:

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
Jun 26, 2007
36,863
2,769
1,520
Best Coast
While he didn't necessarily lie in the summary, Barr definitely downplayed what was the in the actual report, particularly regarding the obstruction matter, but that's to be expected given what he had done before during the first Bush administration. He's wrongly represented official documents in the past.
Does your sins of the past argument apply to Mueller as well?

 

Zangiefy360

Member
Aug 30, 2018
874
1,473
375
While he didn't necessarily lie in the four page summary, Barr definitely downplayed what was the in the actual report, particularly regarding the obstruction matter, but that's to be expected given what he had done before during the first Bush administration. He's inaccurately represented official documents in the past.

After reading the redacted document, it seems clear to me that Trump definitely attempted to obstruct justice. Even if there was, as far as we know, no Russia collusion, he still wanted to shut down the investigation by any means necessary, including ones that most reasonable people would agree as standing somewhere been unethical and outright illegal. The report describes behavior by Trump that, even in the best case scenario, isn't what someone who is truly respectful of the law and of the institutions of the U.S. should be expected to do. It's closer to what you would expect from corrupt businessmen or a mob boss.

Fortunately for Trump, it does seem his team was smart enough to disobey him at least a few times in that regard, which prevented the most gross obstruction attempts from achieving success, such as firing Mueller, but it wasn't for lack of trying or lack of intent on Trump's part.

The logic that if Trump is innocent of Russia collusion then he can obstruct justice...is BS. There's a difference between defending yourself, which Trump should obviously be allowed to do, and the kind of behavior described in the report.
You're seeing what you want to see and you're really bending over backwards on that last paragraph. Whatever makes you sleep at night, I suppose.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
13,184
23,908
1,260
USA
dunpachi.com
While he didn't necessarily lie in the summary, Barr definitely downplayed what was the in the actual report, particularly regarding the obstruction matter, but that's to be expected given what he had done before during the first Bush administration. He's wrongly represented official documents in the past.

After reading the redacted document, it seems clear to me that Trump definitely attempted to obstruct justice. Even if there was, as far as we know, no Russia collusion, he still wanted to shut down the investigation by any means necessary, including ones that most reasonable people would agree as standing somewhere been unethical and outright illegal. The report describes behavior by Trump that, even in the best case scenario, isn't what someone who is truly respectful of the law and of the institutions of the U.S. should be expected to do. It's closer to what you would expect from corrupt businessman or mob boss.
I think this is a hard position to defend, now that we know more about the situation. Consider:

1. Russiagate was a hoax and Trump (obviously) knew it. Yet he was accused of being a traitor on the national scene. Is there anything more important to Trump than his business image? I don't think even Democrats will disagree with me here. Trump naturally responded very aggressively for what he viewed on an attack on himself and his brand.

2. Hopefully more investigation will bear this out, but it appears this was a directed effort to smear Trump with this lie, concocted by his political opponents. As I mentioned earlier, if the Captain suspects mutiny, it would be in no way unusual to restrict those officers while the Captain tries to figure things out. All the jeering about Trump being paranoid and a conspiracy theorist has vaporized with the Mueller report being closed and released. Trump was actually right about quite a few things regarding the Russiagate coverage.

3. Democrats have been using this "he didn't respond emotionally. He didn't respond presidentially" has been used in their other attempted smears to force political outcomes (Kavanaugh). While it is clear the president freaked out and blasted through procedure and decorum, in light of the accusation (treason) we can at least empathize with the president's reaction from a moral perspective. How would you reply to a false accusation like that?

4. Trump has repeatedly stood his ground while being jeered at by politicians and the media. Democrats obviously want to take a "it was just a job interview" sort of cowardly stance now that their lie was exposed, but this should also absolve Trump of his reaction to it.

How can folks so easily absolve the media and the Democrats for their direct role in this hoax while at the same time scrutinizing Trump for how he reacted to it?
 

hollams

Member
Dec 12, 2007
145
53
840
While he didn't necessarily lie in the four page summary, Barr definitely downplayed what was the in the actual report, particularly regarding the obstruction matter, but that's to be expected given what he had done before during the first Bush administration. He's inaccurately represented official documents in the past.

After reading the redacted document, it seems clear to me that Trump definitely attempted to obstruct justice. Even if there was, as far as we know, no Russia collusion, he still wanted to shut down the investigation by any means necessary, including ones that most reasonable people would agree as standing somewhere been unethical and outright illegal. The report describes behavior by Trump that, even in the best case scenario, isn't what someone who is truly respectful of the law and of the institutions of the U.S. should be expected to do. It's closer to what you would expect from corrupt businessmen or a mob boss.

Fortunately for Trump, it does seem his team was smart enough to disobey him at least a few times in that regard, which prevented the most gross obstruction attempts from achieving success, such as firing Mueller, but it wasn't for lack of trying or lack of intent on Trump's part.

The logic that if Trump is innocent of Russia collusion then he can obstruct justice...is BS. There's a difference between defending yourself, which Trump should obviously be allowed to do, and the kind of behavior described in the report.
What it seems to me is that a person who is not a career politician acting like an average person would act when told they did something "wrong", I think the word treason was spoken. when they knew it was a lie. Now Trump isn't just a normal person and has his own outspoken ways, but i don't think anyone knows how they would react when they've been accused of Treason.

Once again I'll refer to the Wrongful conviction podcast where if you are accused of something you didn't do and you just sit there doing nothing but keep thinking surely the truth is going to come out everything will be fine, then you are living in a delusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NickFire

#Phonepunk#

Gold Member
Sep 4, 2018
5,470
6,638
615
What I don't get it, if Russia used Facebook and Twitter to dastardly swing our pristine, untouched electoral system, how come those sites are fully operational and not under investigation for treason? Why are we not declaring Wikileaks an Enemy Combatant for destroying our precious, unsullied democracy? Twitter was used as part of an international conspiracy three years ago but every newsperson is fine with using it constantly anyways lol.

It is funny, the whole thing hinges on an absurd, unprovable notion that just a few sites on the internet are responsible for the voting habits of ~200 million people, yet nobody really seems to care to do anything to those sites. You would think if Trump took advantage of all these corrupt systems, we would look into the systems themselves, but nope, i guess not. In fact the new media themselves is just going to keep using Twitter and reporting stories that break on Facebook cos they have no self control. We are just going to, I guess, hope, that nobody in 2020 does what Russia apparently did in 2016 to overwhelming success, which is spend a couple thousand to defeat a 2 billion dollar campaign.
 
Last edited:

hollams

Member
Dec 12, 2007
145
53
840
“On June 17, 2017, the president called [White House Counsel Don] McGahn at home and directed him to call the Acting Attorney General and say that the Special Counsel had conflicts of interest and must be removed. McGahn did not carry out the direction, however, deciding that he would resign rather than trigger what he regarded as a potential Saturday Night Massacre,” the report stated, referencing the Watergate scandal.

Meuller did have conflicts of interest and should have recused himself. One of his best friends was Comey who's firing prompted the obstruction investigation so how was this not something you should recuse yourself for. It's just weird how certain rules and laws are followed at different times.
 

infinitys_7th

Member
Oct 1, 2006
4,556
4,538
1,265
Even if there was, as far as we know, no Russia collusion,
This alone makes me takes the rest of an otherwise well thought out post less seriously. Double negative bullshit.

Mueller's team leaked misinformation and lies to make Trump look bad. They need to be investigated for it, as there is such a thing as malacious prosecution. If there was malicious intent, then there is no obstruction by that fact alone. You cannot obstruct an illegitimate use of law.
 
Last edited:

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
6,153
6,573
880
What I don't get it, if Russia used Facebook and Twitter to dastardly swing our pristine, untouched electoral system, how come those sites are fully operational and not under investigation for treason? Why are we not declaring Wikileaks an Enemy Combatant for destroying our precious, unsullied democracy? Twitter was used as part of an international conspiracy three years ago but every newsperson is fine with using it constantly anyways lol.

It is funny, the whole thing hinges on an absurd, unprovable notion that just a few sites on the internet are responsible for the voting habits of ~200 million people, yet nobody really seems to care to do anything to those sites. You would think if Trump took advantage of all these corrupt systems, we would look into the systems themselves, but nope, i guess not. In fact the new media themselves is just going to keep using Twitter and reporting stories that break on Facebook cos they have no self control. We are just going to, I guess, hope, that nobody in 2020 does what Russia apparently did in 2016 to overwhelming success, which is spend a couple thousand to defeat a 2 billion dollar campaign.
Its almost as if none of this was about protecting "democracy" and just getting Trump. No one will care about what Russia did with FB/Twitter going into 2020 unless it can be used as a weapon against Trump.

I mean this whole thing was started because HRC was grossly negligant with her emails and she got off scott free and in turn that snowballed into a 2 and a half year witch hunt.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
6,153
6,573
880
Can you blame Trump for wanting this faux investigation to go away. He knew that they would come after his family and try to pull any dirt they could on his son or daughter.

Look what happened with his associates. A guy like Cohen who he was close with for 10 years was forced to call Trump a racist lieng piece of shit and throw away their 10 year relationship. How many more lives did Mueller have to destroy for a crime that never happened?

And to top it off when we have the FBI/DOJ/HRC and Obama all working together on this hoax of course Trump is going to be suspiciouse and rightly so. It was an entire counsol set up on partisan crap meant as an "inusrance policy" against his presidency that was going to smear and ruin anyone in his orbit.

I wonder how we would react if we were being investigated for a crime we never comitted, and in the process we would lose our friends, lovers, children etc because of it?