The Democrats won't get much political traction out of the Mueller report except among their hardcore strategically oriented base. For most ordinary folk who are not obsessed with politics the whole business is not sufficiently clear and has a slightly conspiratorial flavor to it. Although the evidence may be completely and plainly on one side of the argument to the person who takes the time to read it carefully and is able to properly contextualize it (that is understands the sorts of people involved and how they behave, and the sorts of institutions involved and how they behave - something most of us are not really prepared to judge well as most of us do not move in these contexts), to many it's hard to differentiate the Mueller report from stories about Vince Foster. There's not something there that makes people already voting for Trump feel disillusioned, and there's not enough there to convince people already disillusioned with the political process. Those fed up with the lying, cheating, miscreant political class just see more political strategy shenanigans from both sides; the clarity isn't there for this to do much more damage to Trump than it already has, which isn't that much.

Before nprandomnumbers pulls you up on this, this is not actually true. Flynn was convicted of lying to the FBI about having discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador. Stone was indicted for lying and witness tampering but has not been convicted.

We don't know for sure that Trump didn't know about Flynn's conversation with the ambassador, but it appears he didn't, because:

This is the problem with having a moron at the helm. Trump was not in control of the particulars of what was going on. His campaign staff were frequently acting unilaterally.

Even if Flynn was on his own there, Trump hired Flynn after Obama among others expressly advised him not to, citing security concerns.

How about this? On July 27, 2016, Trump said this in a public speech:

The 2018 indictment of 12 GRU agents alleged this:

Is that illegal from Trump? No. I mean there's no quid pro quo there and he's not helping them do it. But he's asking them to illegally get him information, right out in the open, and they're doing it! If that's not "collusion" (which is not a crime) then the word has no meaning.

I already answered this. Mueller’s investigation proved that there was a massive effort to influence and undermine the US election and get Trump elected. While that effort was ongoing, the Trump campaign had over 100 contacts with Russians connected to the effort. Several of the Trump campaign members involved were indicted and convicted of crimes related to those activities. There are many more who were clearly involved in illegal activities, detailed in the report, that weren’t indicted for technical reasons. There was plenty of collusion. Just because you are too stupid to realize it or too sorry of a human being to admit it doesn’t make it any less true.

This was a dumb thing to write, he has no idea what happened, he doesn't care.

They were coordinating with Russia on the campaign’s behalf. We are talking about collusion, which isn’t a legal term, whether Trump personally issued some direct explicit order is irrelevant here.

Exactly.

So you didn’t actually read it, you just regurgitate the right wing talking point memo sheet which is painfully obvious to people who have actually gone through the document.

Mueller pretty clearly layed out why he could not indict the president and it had nothing to do with a lack of evidence. In fact the opposite is the case where Mueller definitively said that he could not clear Trump based on all the evidence.

Everyone knows Trump publicly asked Russia to help him. The investigation determines that started various machinations. I am not sure why people want to act because trump asked for Russia to help him in such a public manner that it somehow doesn’t count, which is absurd. We have the Don jr. nonsense. You have several people in the campaign convicted of crimes related to Russia.

There are only another dozen undisclosed cases still ongoing.

But yeah trump was totally vindicated [by people who didn’t actually read any of it, which includes Trump himself]

Another giveaway to not understanding what is going on but just regurgitating right wing memo notes is not understanding how/what/why “collusuion” is as it relates to Donald Trump and that it is some sort of gotcha that there is not an arrest warrant labeled “Collusion”.

Nah I think a lot of the 2016 thing was politicians ****ing suck let’s see if the non politician can shake it up a bit. Well those voters have seen the ****show that turned into and they ain’t gonna vote Trump again. All trump has are the racists and the ****s who think it’s funny to watch the world burn. The only way he gets a second term is if the election is totally rigged. Something not, unfortunately, beyond imagination.

There are certain floors for certain things


Probable treason is here
.
.
.
.
Trumps campaign activity with Russians is here
.
.
.
.
The floor of what is collusion with Russia.


The fact they didn’t find enough evidence they felt could stand up in a court of law for treason does not mean they didn’t find any evidence.

Your gotcha statement or “no indictment no collusion” is not based in logic.


If you read the mueller report you can see they probably have enough evidence to indict JR on finance campaign laws but chose not to because he is the presidents son

In all honesty. Read the first 15-20 pages of the report today. It won’t take long.

If you read that and still conclude that the trump campaign didn’t collude with Russian, you aren’t a smart person.

You know, perhaps feeding the troll isn't the best way to use one's time.

Smart doesn’t have anything to do with. Honest is the word.

Mueller found none of this

you have that wrong

Just remember, this is all a branding exercise gone horribly awry.

BTW, while Trump's judicial appointees are "Trump judges", they were basically appointed by McGann as part of a bargain between Trump and the conservatives. McGann spilled the beans on Trump, and most of the Trump judges have no particular interest in protecting Trump (except when their deplorable views intersect with his). This extends to Gorsuch and Kavanaugh. They would happily throw Trump under the bus in exchange for a shred of credibility.

also the numbers aren't random--235711 are the first 5 indivisible numbers.

This is a good point. Glad you are back posting.

Here we go lol

And Barr was a lifelong straight shooter more interested in the integrity of the Justice Department than in protecting Trump.

How can we possibly not be past the point of waiting for the super duper hidden good nature of the right to save us all?

I mean Jesus, I’m probably the most delusional West Wing lefty itt and I’ve given up on that a year ago.

This isn't correct. There are more paths to Trump's second term.

For example, screwing Bernie out of the nomination in favor of Biden despite getting more delegates. Or a high profile terrorist attack.

Also, Trump could just win without a lot of shenanigans. Remember, his approval is still around the low 40s. People point to 2018 (which wasn't even that good), but remember that the Democrats were way more motivated to vote. The Rs will be a lot more ready to fight in a presidential year.

Don't get me wrong, Trump is still an underdog to win. But not by nearly enough to make me comfortable.

This is to say nothing about the senate, where the Democrats are massive underdogs.

Odd tweet this morning. I thought it was Game Over.

He's watching Morning Joe.

I'll dispute the 1st part that Barr was a straight shooter Lmao, com'on be real, he's always been a piece off **** Saul Goodman Lawyer with an Ivy education.

And agree with your assessment off the GOP that not 1 off them will break off and try to stand up for what's right, they passed that Long Long ago possibly before my lifetime.

And that's why a Biden ticket get Trump reelected because the general public also knows that the Dems are weekass and complicit.