The Mueller Report

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rubio says hackers penetrated Florida election systems in 2016. Didn’t Nelson get pilloried for this last year?

“Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) told The New York Times on Friday that hackers penetrated a Florida county's elections system in 2016.

Rubio's comments come a week after special counsel Robert Mueller's report revealed that Russians sent malicious software to Florida county government officials overseeing the 2016 election.”

https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/440924-rubio-says-hackers-penetrated-florida-elections-systems?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Pretty sure that had already been acknowledged. It was one county.

Who has acknowledged it? The GOP is out there saying all Russia did was spend a few hundred bucks on Facebook ads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rubio says hackers penetrated Florida election systems in 2016. Didn’t Nelson get pilloried for this last year?

“Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) told The New York Times on Friday that hackers penetrated a Florida county's elections system in 2016.

Rubio's comments come a week after special counsel Robert Mueller's report revealed that Russians sent malicious software to Florida county government officials overseeing the 2016 election.”

https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/440924-rubio-says-hackers-penetrated-florida-elections-systems?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Pretty sure that had already been acknowledged. It was one county.

Who has acknowledged it? The GOP is out there saying all Russia did was spend a few hundred bucks on Facebook ads.

Google is your friend.
Feb, 2018
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/u-s-intel-russia-compromised-seven-states-prior-2016-election-n850296

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rubio says hackers penetrated Florida election systems in 2016. Didn’t Nelson get pilloried for this last year?

“Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) told The New York Times on Friday that hackers penetrated a Florida county's elections system in 2016.

Rubio's comments come a week after special counsel Robert Mueller's report revealed that Russians sent malicious software to Florida county government officials overseeing the 2016 election.”

https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/440924-rubio-says-hackers-penetrated-florida-elections-systems?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Pretty sure that had already been acknowledged. It was one county.

Who has acknowledged it? The GOP is out there saying all Russia did was spend a few hundred bucks on Facebook ads.

Google is your friend.
Feb, 2018
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/u-s-intel-russia-compromised-seven-states-prior-2016-election-n850296

So why was Nelson ignored when he said that last year? And why is Jared saying all the Russians did was buy Facebook ads? And what is the administration doing to keep it from happening again?

[Anonymous]

For those who haven't actually read the Mueller report and think it exonerates the president and believe there was no "collusion" or Obstruction of justice, please read this:

https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/guide-to-the-mueller-reports-findings-on-collusion/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those who haven't actually read the Mueller report and think it exonerates the president and believe there was no "collusion" or Obstruction of justice, please read this:

https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/guide-to-the-mueller-reports-findings-on-collusion/

Unless there is a segment on FoxNews played repeatedly they won’t ever get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rubio says hackers penetrated Florida election systems in 2016. Didn’t Nelson get pilloried for this last year?

“Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) told The New York Times on Friday that hackers penetrated a Florida county's elections system in 2016.

Rubio's comments come a week after special counsel Robert Mueller's report revealed that Russians sent malicious software to Florida county government officials overseeing the 2016 election.”

https://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/440924-rubio-says-hackers-penetrated-florida-elections-systems?amp&__twitter_impression=true

Pretty sure that had already been acknowledged. It was one county.

Who has acknowledged it? The GOP is out there saying all Russia did was spend a few hundred bucks on Facebook ads.

Google is your friend.
Feb, 2018
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/u-s-intel-russia-compromised-seven-states-prior-2016-election-n850296

So why was Nelson ignored when he said that last year? And why is Jared saying all the Russians did was buy Facebook ads? And what is the administration doing to keep it from happening again?

Still waiting for answers on these.

[Anonymous]

Mueller report reveals Kushner's contacts with a ‘pro-Kremlin’ campaign adviser
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/29/mueller-report-jared-kushner-dmitri-simes-russia-1291392

Jared Kushner needed help.

It was March 2016 and Kushner’s father-in-law, Donald Trump, was steamrolling to the Republican presidential nomination. But the businessman-candidate was taking heat for his campaign’s lack of foreign policy expertise, something Kushner was trying to remedy.


That’s when he found a Russian willing to assist.

On March 14, 2016, according to special counsel Robert Mueller’s report, Kushner attended a lunch in Manhattan in honor of Henry Kissinger. Also in attendance was a tall, bearded Russian émigré with a booming voice. His name was Dmitri Simes, and for nearly 20 years he had been president and CEO of the Center for the National Interest, a Washington foreign policy think tank.

Simes had been a Washington fixture since he left the Soviet Union in the early 1970s, obtained U.S. citizenship, and served as an informal foreign policy adviser to President Richard Nixon. A longtime advocate of warmer U.S.-Russia relations, he was also dogged by criticism that he was notably sympathetic to Moscow’s views.

Kushner and Simes met at the lunch and began communicating, including in a meeting at Kushner’s office later that month. Although the Trump campaign never identified Simes as an adviser, he provided counsel to the Trump team, particularly with regard to Russia. In June 2016, Mueller found, he sent a memo to then-Senator Jeff Sessions, who headed up Trump’s foreign policy team, offering several policy recommendations, including “a new beginning with Moscow,” and in August he would send Kushner himself a “Russia policy memo.”

[Anonymous]

I am on Part 2 and hot damn, doesn't it say over and over that the President obstructed justice?

This section; Factual Results of the Obstruction Investigation...
I"m on section "g" and I'm shocked.

Also, as a non-lawyer, I really appreciate how the report is written.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am on Part 2 and hot damn, doesn't it say over and over that the President obstructed justice?

This section; Factual Results of the Obstruction Investigation...
I"m on section "g" and I'm shocked.

Also, as a non-lawyer, I really appreciate how the report is written.

Yup. And with the implication being that if Trump weren't President they would have indicted him.

[Anonymous]

31% believe Trump is exonerated after Mueller report. Even his base doesn't believe him!
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/31-trump-exonerated-mueller-report-56-oppose-impeachment/story?id=62659425

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am on Part 2 and hot damn, doesn't it say over and over that the President obstructed justice?

This section; Factual Results of the Obstruction Investigation...
I"m on section "g" and I'm shocked.

Also, as a non-lawyer, I really appreciate how the report is written.

Yup. And with the implication being that if Trump weren't President they would have indicted him.

No. It is clear they did not have the evidence or a solid case for indictment.
His being president had nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those who haven't actually read the Mueller report and think it exonerates the president and believe there was no "collusion" or Obstruction of justice, please read this:

https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/guide-to-the-mueller-reports-findings-on-collusion/

Obstruction relates to an underlining crime. Where is the crime of collusion?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those who haven't actually read the Mueller report and think it exonerates the president and believe there was no "collusion" or Obstruction of justice, please read this:

https://www.justsecurity.org/63838/guide-to-the-mueller-reports-findings-on-collusion/

Obstruction relates to an underlining crime. Where is the crime of collusion?

No, it relates to an investigatipn, not a crime.

[Anonymous]

Can't imagine why....

Mueller Objected to Barr’s Description of Russia Investigation’s Findings

Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, wrote a letter in late March to Attorney General William P. Barr objecting to his early description of the Russia investigation’s conclusions that appeared to clear President Trump on possible obstruction of justice, according to the Justice Department.

The letter adds to the growing evidence of a rift between them and is another sign of the anger among the special counsel’s investigators about Mr. Barr’s characterization of their findings, which allowed Mr. Trump to wrongly claim he had been vindicated.

It was unclear what specific objections Mr. Mueller raised in his letter. Mr. Barr defended his descriptions of the investigation’s conclusions in conversations with Mr. Mueller over the days after he sent the letter, according to two people with knowledge of their discussions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can't imagine why....

Mueller Objected to Barr’s Description of Russia Investigation’s Findings

Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, wrote a letter in late March to Attorney General William P. Barr objecting to his early description of the Russia investigation’s conclusions that appeared to clear President Trump on possible obstruction of justice, according to the Justice Department.

The letter adds to the growing evidence of a rift between them and is another sign of the anger among the special counsel’s investigators about Mr. Barr’s characterization of their findings, which allowed Mr. Trump to wrongly claim he had been vindicated.

It was unclear what specific objections Mr. Mueller raised in his letter. Mr. Barr defended his descriptions of the investigation’s conclusions in conversations with Mr. Mueller over the days after he sent the letter, according to two people with knowledge of their discussions.

Link for the above:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/30/us/politics/mueller-barr.html

Barr is full of BS.