In late March with the news that the Mueller report was finally finished but with no Russia collusion finding and when even Obstruction of Justice had not been proven against President Trump or his team, many might have wondered how the Trump/Russia Collusion meme got such a long run. The hysteria with which certain legacy media and many in the left/ Democrat/ Progressive/ Never Trump/ NeoCon political grouping went on Russia, Russia, Russia over 2 years, it was always going to be interesting to see how they responded to the release of the actual report itself. Multiple Democrat congressional members had claimed publicly that they had seen “evidence” of Russia collusion and their tame media went for it big time – and often. The findings of the report left them with red faces – until their fightback kicked in, that is
On the 18th April the redacted, 448 page Mueller report was finally released and there has been a massive reaction as you would expect. Those media political commentators who had lived off the collusion Narrative for years had to fight back or surrender their reputations forever.
Australian Perspectives has been watching this American situation for some years now and in 2 years of great change and threat to the whole US governing system, it has taken that time for some of the propaganda and spin to make way for actual facts. The Mueller report was one major roadblock to clarity, due to it being used as a very effective tool to avoid some investigations by Trump office holders. It will take a while to clear away the clutter and to zero in on an administration which is free from what already looked like a clear case of sabotage of the Trump campaign by the Obama administration office holders. That sabotage continued (continues?), seemingly led by part of the permanent and appointed political class remaining in power after their former leader left office, aided by the cluster of anti-Trump movements who had most to lose in his victory.
The Mueller report had to be cleared away for any action or full investigations against the plotters to commence. It is also vital that lessons learned were also needed, both to clear up the facts of the sabotage and then (hopefully) to ensure that nothing like this would ever happen again. It was far bigger than Watergate and post-Watergate action, similar to the 1970’s Church committee, is surely needed to make that a reality.
It will take some days for full and considered analysis of the Report to be made (and this will be done in a series of posts), yet already some major facts are in evidence.
One is to give some clarity as to what role Mueller was actually playing. Was he a prisoner of his past, as an insider of the so-called Deep State, a player associated with all the powers in the political class which are so clearly against Trump at all or seemingly any cost.. Or was he man who could turn his back on all conflicts of interest and just look and apply the facts. Could his long time friendship with James Comey be put aside in the interests of justice When questions were asked about the Mueller FBI under his watch, when it habitually abused prosecutorial discretion, botching the anthrax killer case, “incompetent supervision” and many other cases to call into question both his competence and even his integrity. More on that at a later date.
The Mueller team
Then there was the team he chose to investigate Trump and the Russia collusion allegation. Every single one of his team was a democrat-linked lawyer; one had actually represented the Clinton Foundation and many had donated to Hillary Clinton or the democrats. Generally.
The lead investigator was a very well-known person, Andrew Weissmann, a man with a long record of questionable and unethical conduct over decades, including prosecutorial misconduct, threatening witnesses, withholding exculpatory evidence and so on. He was also a Clinton/Democrat donation giver, attended the Clinton “victory” party on the night of her loss and publicly congratulated ex-Deputy Attorney-General Sally Yates when she refused to carry out lawful directions of the new President Trump. For more on Weissmann, see Sidney Powell.
Preliminary observations on the Mueller Report itself.
Mueller only got to the “fail to determine obstruction” conclusion by completely reversing the onus of proof of that obstruction, from proving a positive case against a person – who is always presumed innocent under Anglo-American law – to the Mueller claims on page 2 of his Volume II of the report, a prosecutor “conclusively determining that no criminal conduct occurred”, an onus of proof which is unknown to our law.
Trump lawyer Rudi Guiliani also made a strong comment on that aspect of the report
Rudi Guiliani on Fox
So one can get a preliminary sense of how the issue of exactly which “Mueller” wrote this report will probably be decided by certain facts contained within and without the report.
Kimberley Strassel of the Wall Street Journal is a brilliant journalist and has been one of dozens of great reporters covering the Mueller movements and watching the conspiracy/coup allegations carefully over many months. She has already published a critical summary of the Mueller report to date. Because it is behind a paywall, I will offer some paragraphs from it to give a sense of the analysis due to the report. Over days and weeks I will be adding much more analysis of the report but this is a very good start, especially as it sheds much light on the question of whether Mueller was a prisoner of his past or a truly “evidence without fear or favour” writer on this occasion.
Volume I of the Mueller report, which deals with collusion, spends tens of thousands of words describing trivial interactions between Trump officials and various Russians. While it doubtless wasn’t Mr. Mueller’s intention, the sheer quantity and banality of details highlights the degree to which these contacts were random, haphazard and peripheral. By the end of Volume I, the notion that the Trump campaign engaged in some grand plot with Russia is a joke……
Note as well what isn’t in the report. It makes only passing, bland references to the genesis of so many of the accusations Mr. Mueller probed: the infamous dossier produced by opposition-research firm Fusion GPS and paid for by the Hillary Clinton campaign. How do you exonerate Mr. Page without delving into the scandalous Moscow deeds of which he was falsely accused? How do you narrate an entire section on the July 2016 Trump Tower meeting without noting that Ms. Veselnitskaya was working alongside Fusion? How do you detail every aspect of the Papadopoulos accusations while avoiding any detail of the curious and suspect ways that those accusations came back to the FBI via Australia’s Alexander Downer?
I will close off this preliminary summary by allowing Kimberley Strassel to conclude her review:-
He was the wrong man to provide an honest assessment of the 2016 collusion dirty trick. And we’ve got a report to prove it.
I will follow up with much more on the whole Mueller Report and many other aspects as to whether a serious assault on the Trump administration is a valid description. Remember, now that the Mueller report s finalised with no charges recommended, there seems to be no hindrance to Trump exercising his powers to declassify and release reams of documents which have so far been hidden on that basis or being needed for “Mueller”.Follow