Showing posts with label Mueller report. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mueller report. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 22, 2020

Senate bi-partisan committe: Russia did interfere in 2016 to help Trump

From Axios the bipartisan Senate Intel Committee unanimously found that that the Russians, directed by Putin, indeed interfered with the 2016 election to help Trump get elected, overturning the House findings to the contrary. Trump has spent his entire term of office so far denying this and when he controlled the House, his loyalists there supported his view. The Intelligence services he so condemned were correct. The accusation he and the GOP promoted against the intelligence service findings was BS.  

The Mueller Report, first 150 pages detailed how they did it and what they did.
Given the closeness of that election and how the Russians targeted the key swing states, we are not sure that their efforts dictated the outcome of the 2016 election, but it raises the suspicion that Trump owes a bunch to Putin.


https://www.axios.com/senate-inteligence-committee-russia-trump-b2f29fe2-4373-4cb5-9bc6-0f071a0be544.html

Saturday, December 7, 2019

Conspriacy theories: plausibility, ignorance,and debunking

Revised and updated 12/10/19
A version of this was published in the Winter Park Times, Dec. 13, 2019
https://winterparktimes.com/opinion/columnists/conspiracy-theories-debunked/

Two conspiracy theories promoted by Donald Trump, CloudStrke and "deep state" got debunked lately, but if you listened to him or his Congressional supporters, and only supportive media, you may have missed it. Conspiracy theories can only take root if a number of people think something sounds plausible and it supports their preconceived notions or it serves their political agenda. Usually, if conspiracy theories are challenged and investigated, and the theory falls apart, people who once believed it, move on.  It is different from Donald Trump's s loyal followers. They declare evidence they do not like as fake news, simply disagree with conclusions without reason or presenting countering evidence,  or dismiss the findings as tainted because the accusers and investigators are motivated by some hatred or organized resistance. 

Announcing an investigation into CloudStrike" is one of those "favors" Trump asked of  Ukraine President Zelensky in the infamous July 25  telephone calls that did kick off the impeachment process. The CloudStrike theory is that Ukraine interfered in the 2016 US elections on behalf of Hillary Clinton instead of, or just like, Russia did. Ukraine persons may have expressed publicly their preference, but they did not conduct activities in the US like Russia’s. Trump and followers continued to tout the theory even after it was debunked by US intelligence and an NSC expert, Fiona Hill,  called a talking point Putin, a lie,   advanced to deflect Russian blame for active measures in 2016 to  Ukraine. FBI Director Christopher Wray was quick to verify they found no evidence Ukraine interfered in 2016. Trump and his supporters ignore the evidence and still promote the legitimacy of the theory as a way to justify the favor he asked of Ukraine.

 The investigation into Russian interference as detailed in the Mueller Report is still haunting Trump. While he was exonerated of collusion with the Russians because of a lack of evidence, he was not cleared of obstructing justice, regardless of how AG Bill Barr twisted the report. Mueller declined to indict him because of department rules. Trump and his advisors concocted another conspiracy theory to explain it away.  His response is that the "deep state" conspired to "get" him because they were politically motivated. Therefore, his logic follows, their claim of any evidence of Trump’s wrongdoing was suspect and tainted.

The Department of Justice's Inspector General released a report this month that shot holes into the"deep state" conspiracy theory. A two-year investigation found the FBI had not acted to start the Russian connection investigation because of political bias. In fact, there were those in the FBI who were very supportive of Donald Trump, thought Hillary Clinton was a crook, and also those who had opposite views. However, none had acted on their political beliefs. The IG reported the FBI  did not bug Trump's phones, did not launch the Russian investigation in 2016 without good cause, did not "spy" on the campaign, and the investigation was authorized in compliance with Department rules.  They opened up the investigation because of DNC being hacked, intelligence reporting frequent staff contacts with Russians, and the tip-off by an Australian diplomat.


The investigation began two months before the FISA warrant flap over Carter Page, who was never charged, and months before the Steele Dossier, neither of which affected the investigation. If there was no "deep state", the FBI was no angel, either, but what they did wrong was not politically motivated nor did it affect the final FBI findings on the Russian connection. That a lower level FBI agent had indeed misbehaved was not the reason the FBI opened the Russian investigation. However, department rules and the FISA warrant process were flawed. Trump's loyal Attorney General, Bill Barr, said he disagreed with the IG's conclusions (no specific reason was given). and he was quick to distort some results. and cherry-picked others. 

(added 12/11/19) I am listening to the Senate Judiciary Committee and Lindsey Graham try to hit back on the Department of Justice Inspector General report that knocked holes into GOP conspiracy theories: This is the same FBI staff in place when the FBI's publicly announced on again and off again criminal investigations into Hillary's scuttled Hillary Clinton's campaign while keeping the investigation about Trump's et al, contacts with Russians. The GOP had no problem with the FBI then...but when the same FBI finds negative stuff on Trump, we have Lindsey Graham banging the table trying to taint any negative evidence that hurt Donald Trump. What this is is a smokescreen to divert attention from the substance of the part of the IG's findings that hurt Trump. The smoke the FBI found fire justified opening the investigation. Their investigations resulted in Trump's associates landing in jail or pleading guilty and indictments of 12 Russians and identifying ten instances of Trump's obstruction of the FBI's ability to investigate the Russian meddling. .. However, IG found that the department had poor regulations and fault in the FISA process and a low threshold for opening investigations. That needs pursuing, but it should not drown out the findings that Trump did not like, which is what Graham is trying to accomplish.

That the Western leading Ukraine regime would want Hillary  Clinton to win in 2016 is understandable. That does make Cloud Strike sound plausible. Russia had grabbed their Crimea and invaded an eastern province in 2014. Russia was the enemy of the western leaning Ukraine government. In 2016 Donald Trump's campaign chair Paul Manafort was a close advisor of the ousted pro-Russian Ukraine president and his close business associate, Konstantin Kilimnik was suspected of being a Russian intelligence trained agent. Trump's foreign policy had taken a sharpened pro-Russian issue focus soon after Manafort joined Trump's campaign in the spring of 2016, including lifting promoting sanctions against Russia for invading and grabbing eastern Ukraine and weakening NATO, the main barrier to further Russian aggression,  calling it obsolete.   Fiona Hill, the NSC Russian expert testified in the inquiry hearings that the theory Ukraine interfered in the 2016 U.S. elections was a “fictional narrative” fueled by Russian intelligence because Putin wanted to get the heat on election interference transferred to another country, hoping to get sanctions levied against them for the meddling lifted.  Further ignorance upon which the supporters of the theory-based their belief was that the IT security company involved, Cloud Strike, was owned by a US-based Ukrainian, except the owner, was a Russian immigrant and not from Ukraine.

The attack on Joe Biden by Trump supporters hinges on their report that Biden got a prosecutor fired in Ukraine in order to protect his son Hunter. That makes no sense since Biden and the entire European Community and the Obama administration withheld an IMF loan because the prosecutor did not pursue corruption, not because he was not prosecuting Hunter.  https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/10/03/what-really-happened-when-biden-forced-out-ukraines-top-prosecutor/378562


https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/read-full-text-doj-ig-michael-horowitz-s-report-origins-n1098431

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/09/us/politics/barr-durham-ig-report-russia-investigation.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/12/09/fbi-director-wray-says-no-indication-ukraine-interference-2016-election/4380050002/


https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2019/12/impeachment-republican-party-russia/603088/?fbclid=IwAR2A7S1tYYqBAn65vUkG9SxIIjPKbSXlw3UbdAOkLk9t5hzClIS2qY0tuUE

 https://theweek.com/speedreads/882443/doj-inspector-general-horowitz-reportedly-shot-down-another-gop-theory-about-russia-probe

https://www.axios.com/impeachment-hearing-fiona-hill-trump-ukraine-testimony-49fbce41-bf1c-4b02-964c-701196d30d5c.html

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/sondland-trump-only-wanted-ukraine-to-announce-investigation-into-biden-not-a-real-inquiry

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/02/trump-followers-believe-lies-wall.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/trump-thinks-his-supporters-are-the-most-gullible-people-on-earth-are-they-really/2019/03/07/1e79a4c4-41
 Cloudstrike:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/02/not-enough-pinocchios-trumps-crowdstrike-obsession

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/republicans-turn-gaslighting-response-justice-dept-report?cid=sm_fb_maddow&fbclid=IwAR3I509xX3alDX30zcXZ0Ce0LK8diBRYMs6RyvwpNCFpvF6rjFCdchhXi9E

Thursday, December 5, 2019

Putin's winning strategy: the duping of the GOP

Update December 10, 2019 to reflect the articles of impeachment and the DOJ Inspector General Report on the FBI activities in opening and conducting the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

Putin's  strategy to shape US policy for Russia’s benefit is to attempt to dupe American voters and their government representatives.  It appears some have fallen under their spell.
On December 3, 2019, the House of

 Representatives voted on a resolution that opposed Russia's being readmitted to the G7. Russia had been kicked out of that prestigious group of world leaders for their grab of Ukrainian territory. There is an ongoing hot conflict there in which 13,000 Ukrainians have died .and for which the western leading government had sought critical anti-tank missiles, Javelins, to thwart further aggression.    Seventy-one Republicans voted against that  G7 resolution, including Colorado's own Rep. Ken Buck. That is a sad indication of how some in the GOP are becoming a supporter of Donald Trump's pro-Russian policies, a party that used to be firmly against Russian aggression. The resolution passed handily but in past, similar resolutions, including maintaining sanctions against Russia,  had received greater bi-partisan support. The seventy-one GOP votes in opposition on December  3 are a disturbing measure of how far the Russians have made inroads into the views of some voters and their representatives in Congress.  The Russian influence has also been felt in the issues surrounding impeachment, such as Cloudstrike and support of lethal military aid for Ukraine against Russian aggression.

That Russian influence and Donald Trump inviting them into the American system is a subject that appears throughout the articles of impeachment that will be voted upon in the House within a week or two. Within the same week, the long-awaited Inspector General report of the origins of the FBI's investigation into Russia's interference and active measures in the 2016 election verified the justification of the issue on its merits and that it was not done because of some "deep state" partisanship.  The GOP had tried to brush off and deny the Russian meddling as some conspiracy cooked up by Trump's opponents to unseat him. In a stunning role reversal, the once anti-communist GOP became an unwitting supporter of Russian activities and policies promoted by Trump and Democrats became the defense and Russian hawk party.  

It is likely those who used to be Russia hawks and now have flipped are also taking their cue from their leader, Donald Trump.  The mystery is Trump's Make Russia Great Again foreign policy. Why? Whatever the issue, Crimea, Syria, NATO, interference in the 2016 elections, he apologizes or supports Putin's policies and takes his word for Russian intelligence over his own US intelligence services.

The Mueller investigation found  widespread  Russian interference  in 2016 elections  and Special Counsel Robert  Mueller warned us that Russia is planning to do likewise in 2020. Constitution  law professors dominated the first day of the House Judiciary Committee impeachment hearings Dec. 4, citing the deliberations of the writers of our Constitution in formulating impeachment clauses.  The reason it was included in the Constitution, our founders  feared the re-establishment of a monarchy, a king,  by foreign influence, negating what the American Revolution.had accomplished. They also feared that waiting for the next election for the president to be disciplined for this might be too late  because the wrongdoing  practices of the chief executive could continue to get more foreign intervention to help get himself re-elected and perpetuate his ability to become a king, an autocrat.
That Russian influence and Donald Trump inviting them into the American system is a subject that appears throughout the articles of impeachment that will be voted upon in the House within a week or two. Within the same week, the long-awaited Inspector General report of the origins of the FBI's investigation into Russia's interference and active measures in the 2016 election verified the justification of the issue on its merits and that it was not done because of some "deep state" partisanship.

A propaganda initiative conducted by Russians has become central to the impeachment actions in the House. One of the two favors Donald Trump asked of the Ukraine president  was for him to open investigations of Cloudstrike in order to get an oval office visit, and later, to get the anti-tank missile aid Trump had frozen released.  The  Cloudstrike theory, that Ukraine, not Russia, hacked the DNC server is a conspiracy theory that contradicts the findings of the US intelligence services who traced it to a propaganda initiative of Russian intelligence. Both GOP Trump Congressional supporters and Trump himself have fallen for the conspiracy theory hook line and sinker, even after they were briefed by our intelligence services.

Putin  may be a younger generation than the Soviets,  but he was still trained by them as  KGB operative. The propaganda methods developed in the USSR were some of the most effective skills in modern history. I have seen them work from the inside, too, from my student days in Berlin as Communists consolidated control of their German zones. Putin has harnessed modern IT communications as his weapons to shape the minds of those he is trying to control. He is appearing to be succeeding.

______________________________________________________________________________


Wednesday, October 2, 2019

So what's wrong with Trump using military aid to shake down Ukraine?

Updated October 5, 2019 and revision.

A version of this was published in Winter Park Times as Whose side is Trump on anyway?  10/11/19
https://winterparktimes.com/opinion/columnists/whose-side-is-trump-on-anyway/

So what is wrong with withholding military aid from a foreign country to get them to do your bidding? President  Donald Trump asks. If it serves our national interests, no problem. If it does not, what then?  Late last month a whistleblower stepped forward to complain that Trump's use of withholding military aid to Ukraine was for Trump's own self-serving political benefit. The second whistleblower coming forth it appears has the first-hand knowledge of Trump's pressuring the Ukrainian government.  With the late September White House release of a memorandum of a telephone call on July 25 between Trump and the newly elected president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky,  it was revealed Trump tied denial and granting of military aid to promote his personal domestic political advantage in his campaign for reelection in 2020.  The week before the call Trump had frozen the military aid. President Zelensky said he was ready to get the aid needed to fight a hot war with Russia within their borders.  Donald Trump immediately replied," I have some favors to ask, though.." Those favors Trump asked included finding evidence Ukraine, not Russia, interfered in 2016 elections and for Ukraine to provide dirt on Hunter Biden, Joe Biden's son's business dealings in Ukraine. Trump viewed Joe Biden as his most likely challenger for his re-election in 2020.   The result was that the House of Representatives with Democrats in the majority opened a formal impeachment inquiry to see if there was cause to impeach President Trump for compromising US  national security by seeking dirt from a foreign leader on a political rival for his own domestic political benefit. In depositions in the House committees, just resigned US envoy to Ukraine, Kurt Volker, provided a series of emailed conversations with fellow US diplomats that verified  withholding military aid and an invitation for Zelensky to  visit the White House were used as sticks and carrots  to get  a reluctant  Zelensky to reopen a previously dead-end investigations into Hunter Biden's business dealings with a Ukraine energy company. Trump also asked Ukraine to open an investigation to blame themselves for foreign interference in the US 2016 election instead of Russia. The Senate Intelligence committee chair released their findings that it was indeed Russia, not Ukraine, that did the meddling in 2016.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate-intelligence-committee-report-on-2016-russian-election-interference-offers-roadmap-for-2020-meddling/

 None of this happens in a vacuum. A reason Trump may be  did not care much if Ukraine was weakened for lack of military aid  fits into Trump's questionable  bromance with Russia's President Vladimir Putin and his seeming support of Putin's foreign policy goals  of expansion into their former  Eastern European USSR satellites,  most of whom were protected by a mutual defense treaty by virtue of their membership in NATO. One member gets attacked, and all come to its defense.  Stopping Russia in Ukraine upfront would prevent another war from spreading to the rest of Europe.  Ukraine is not a  NATO member, but its western leaning government is dependent on US aid since Russia took over Crimea and conducted hot warfare to grab  Ukraine's eastern Donbas region. 13,000  Ukrainians had already died in the conflict.  As the result of Russia's interference in the 2016 elections exposed by US intelligence agencies and a special counsel investigation, western democracies and the US  had slapped economic sanctions on Russia that hurt their economy and Putin's oligarch pals.  Rarely have both political parties been unanimous about anything, but Congress has had a full bi-partisan agreement that it is in US security interests to help Ukraine fight off the Russians and they had approved and funded military aid.   From his 2016  campaign and into his administration, Trump had tried to weaken NATO. He called NATO's mutual defense mission obsolete. He threatened to withdraw using the European lack of promised funding as an excuse. He has also tried to lift sanctions on Russia and has sought to get Russia off the hook for their active measures to help him get elected in 2016 and shift blame to Ukraine. This would provide Trump with an excuse to end Russian sanctions. This summer Trump diverted money allocated by Congress for improving NATO's defense to funds to build his wall. He froze funding to Ukraine for anti-tank weapons to use in this latest shakedown and extortion of Ukraine.  This begs the question: Whose side is Trump on, anyway.

___________________________________________________________________

Trump helps Russia be great again again. Trump gave  green light to Turkey to invade northern Syria to hit the Kurds .  The winner: Russia


https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a29365548/trump-ukraine-texts-diplomats-smoking-gun/    /Writer calls Trump's attempts John leCarre meets the Marx Brothers and the
evidence a smoking arsenal.  It puts things in perspective in a way only humor can do.



      and threatens to pull out of NATO





...the newly released emails presented by Kurt Volkertale.https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/03/politics/chairs-on-volker/index.html Pay attention to page 9 and 10.

History and timelines of sanctions against Russia for Ukraine incursions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_sanctions_during_the_Ukrainian_crisis










Friday, September 27, 2019

The Whistleblower/ Ukraine matter and an epic political miscalculation

Update Oct. 9, 2019
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/09/trumps-very-inaccurate-claim-whistleblower-is-very-inaccurate/?fbclid=IwAR2SFfbw0EdQtnDY-h0rM1f2DokONywWvDi5AU6Kxe0eaI8IQcY7gHDrlHs

Update: Oct. 1, 2019: Rep. Ro Khanna (D-CA) on Morning Joe this AM stated the reason the President should be impeached in one sentence; President Trump compromised national security by seeking dirt from on a political rival for his own benefit from a foreign country.'s leader.

Update: October 4, 2019 Amb. Kurt Volker who resigned recently as an envoy to Ukraine provided the House committees conducting the impeachment inquiry with emails that show before the July 25 phone call and after, military aid and the Bidens were subjects on the table in an attempt to get the President of Ukraine to commit in writing he would look into the Bidens as a condition of even meeting with Trump and the military aid was linked. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/03/politics/chairs-on-volker/index.html

Update: Oct 2, 2019:  Pompeo lies to press.  timeline and his denial he even read the whistleblower complaint and finally admits he was listening to the July 25 conversatio. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/10/03/pompeos-four-pinocchio-spin-trump-ukraine/?fbclid=IwAR0dJpvFXyY3_6qdBb_8C2jP7DTJKch9MW1PgWDtKumA4pmkrOD_PUjZyy4

Update Oct.3, 2019:  https://www.apnews.com/560b20b139d943969e17c82eda77ca8d  for a discussion on whether just asking a foreign government to provide something of value to help the asker in a political campaign breaks the law. So now Trump is asking China to investigate the Bidens...in short, he is defying the law again after he asked Ukraine. . The major difference between Mueller and this regarding collusion, Mueller could find no evidence that Trump and friends actually and intentionally beyond reasonable doubt collaborated with Russia to interfere in the election. In this case, just initiating the ask puts Trump in violation, especially when he did it 8 times. Quid pro quo is not needed to make this a violation of the law...just doing it in private or in public t is enough to break the law. That dirt on an opponent is not a thing of value is a losing argument, but expect the GOP to offer that as a defense anyway. The real court of public opinion and impeachment do not depend on a guilty finding or a criminal prosecution. It can be what the House defines it. Is there a requirement in impeachment that the same standards for charging a crime..proof beyond a reasonable doubt of intent... Nope. The task of those seeking impeachment is providing convincing proof..or the accused's admission of doing it , as in this case.,.that the impeachment is justified and that the proof will stand up in a trial..or the Senate, in this case. Public sentiment is important, but not necessary. or a requirement. It is good political sense, though, to provide credible evidence and to get the public sentiment behind them to avoid a backlash in the next election


No excuse. Here is the whistleblower complaint you can read yourself. Whistleblowers do not need to have first hand information, but document their sources, which he/she did. They can operate on the "hear something, say something" principle...but they should also present their evidence, which both the IG and the DNI found credible and urgent. The text of the 25th telephone conversation was the same that Trump verified...to the point he asked was this whistleblower a spy he had it so right?



NYTIMES.COM
The complaint filed by an intelligence officer about President Trump’s interactions with the leader of Ukraine.


On September 24 the Senate on a  bipartisan 100-0 vote urged the President to release the Whistleblower complaint text. On September 25 the President also released a report of his July 25 conversation with the Ukrainian president and on September 26 the White House released the text of the Whistleblower complaint. Trump must have been thinking this would put the matter to rest since the magic phrase smoking gun: "I'll release the military aid if you dig up dirt on the Biden family". .did not appear in the telephone conversation narrative readout. It may have been the largest political miscalculation in the history of US politics.  Trump had dodged the Mueller bullet, but something was different this time, and the President did not see it.

The GOP answer to the whistleblower is that it was just hearsay. Unfortunately for them, Trump and Guilliani have publicly stated they did ask Ukraine to re-open the investigation into Hunter Biden Unfortunately for them, the released transcript of the July 25 did condition release of military aid on a favor, to open the investigation into Hunter Biden. "I have a favor to ask, though". In addition, Trump et al are amazed the whistleblower got the telephone call transcript right and theorize he was a spy (against Trump, we note, not the United States) No hearsay, GOP. Your leader himself verified the whistleblower complaint.https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-admits-asking-ukraine-to-investigate-bidens-son?fbclid=IwAR18tgLFkorqTqEv9EgE5k8DV21VRKkkNdomcyK3NZF5hMn4JRhOpJFQeDk and so did his personal attorney, Rudy Guilliani:https://www.politico.com/…/giuliani-biden-ukraine-trump-150…

That Hunter Biden should be investigated for being on the board of a Ukraine energy company and Joe Biden tried to get the  Ukraine prosecutor fired to protect his son has some fatal flaws:
1. Hunter Biden was not on the board of directors of that company then at the beginning of the 2012 Ukraine investigations into corruption and the company Hunter later jointed was not an object of those investigations. .Hunter did not join until two years later.
2. Biden's urging the firing of the prosecutor was to find a more active prosecutor.  His intervention would have hurt Hunter, not help him.Biden and the entire western world asked the prosecutor to be fired because he was a pro Russian holdover himself being charged of corruption. In fact, the whole western world, every international loan agency and the EU demanded that he be fired and, including Biden, urged more vigorous prosecution of corruption, not less.  Biden's "invervention " would have hurt Hunter Biden

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-whistleblower-ukraine-buris/ukraine-agency-says-allegations-against-burisma-cover-period-before-biden-joined-idUSKBN1WC1LV


If the public confessions of Trump and Guilliani are not enough to verify "the hearsay" as they did, and we can expect the witnesses the whistleblower named refused to come forward...and stonewall the subpoenas,,the most important public witness should be the Inspector General who did interview the witnesses and verified the whistleblower was credible...and what he alleged was urgent. A bit of dates: if the military aid to Ukraine was not given to them by Sept 30, the aid was "dead". A few days before the July 25 conversation, Trump froze the aid. On Sept 13, he released the aid...about the time the whistleblower became known. The date we do not know is when the tape or actual transcript of the Jul 25 telephone call was put in the ultra-secret server reserved for national security matters...not political ones.

I have some theories of why the reason the GOP and White House thought the releases would not hurt the President that much. Their experience with the Mueller investigation confirmed a belief that the bulk of the American electorate would give them a pass since Americans really did not care if foreign powers interfered in US elections since either it helped Trump, their candidate, get elected,  or they were not sure it made a difference in the election outcome. It was just dirty politics as usual even if it involved a foreign adversary. The Mueller Report ended in a political fizzle in spite of the overwhelming evidence that the Russians conducted effectively targeted social media and advertising measures on behalf of Trump.  The only ones who thought the Mueller Report provided a reason for impeachment were some members of the opposition party. Even the majority of Democrats did not think it was worth the pain of impeachment and they feared a voter backlash in swing districts.  That the Mueller Report provided plenty of evidence the White House obstructed the investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 elections, Mueller also gave the President a pass because of a Department of Justice policy not to indict a sitting president.  Public opinion polls backed up Democrats' fears that the public was not with them in impeachment. The President thought he could get away with any similar action in the future since he got away with the issue of foreign interference revealed in the Mueller Report.  Overnight with the release of the report of the telephone conversation between Trump and the Ukraine president and the Whistleblower complaint text, public opinion in favor of an impeachment inquiry increased by 13 points, though public opinion was still split 50-50 and hearings and testimony bringing the issue to more public attention and verification just begun.

What was different this time? Why did this complaint and telephone call did not have the same anemic impact that followed the Mueller report? Unlike the Mueller report which dwelt on the 2016 campaign, the sitting president himself is the active perpetrator now, not just a passive and arms-length beneficiary of foreign election interference. The smoking gun implicating the President 's collusion was never found by Mueller. This time the gun revealed in the released documents had enough smoke to implicate the president. To force an unwilling foreign country to interfere in an upcoming election on behalf of his political interest, Trump applied a strong-arm tactic using a  bargaining chip of a policy that ran counter to US national security interests.   While the exact magic words of a quid pro quo did not appear in the ill-fated telephone conversation notes,  the report readout did show the sequence and the condition attached.  It was  "though, we ask a favor "that immediately followed the Ukraine president asking to release military aid the president had held up. That was evidence enough of Trump's actions and intent to indicate that needed military aid would be released if Ukraine "played ball" by providing dirt on the Biden family.  Earlier the Wall Street Journal documented eight attempts by Trump and his personal attorney Rudy Guilliani and even a public TV admission by Guiliani that indicated that the request to find dirt on the Bidens was the issue between Ukraine's newly elected president and Trump.  This ill-fated telephone call further left no doubt of Trump's motivation. The conditional withholding of military aid to force Ukraine to re-investigate the Bidens was the new public element in the saga. Perhaps Trump thought he could divert attention from his actions by making noise about Biden's son's wrongdoings as if two wrongs made Trump's wrong a right.  Perhaps he could blame a partisan Deep State again. It worked for him in the Mueller investigation.

What was also different was that US policy toward Russia, to arm Ukraine to stop Russian attempts to take back USSR's former satellites, had strong bipartisan support in the Senate which had appropriated the military aid to the western leaning Ukrainian government. GOP sentiment toward Russia had hardened while Trump continued licking Putin's boots with his public pronouncements. Even Republican  Senators believed it was in US security interests to stop Russian aggressive designs on  Eastern Europe.  Both Senate Republicans and Democrats agreed in voting 100 to 0  for military aid to Ukraine. Using the big stick of withholding military aid to Ukraine for Trumps's personal political advantage is no small matter.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/26/tech/what-is-crowdstrike/index.html



Thursday, July 25, 2019

No, Mr. President, the Mueller hearing was not the final chapter


The significance of Mueller's testimony yesterday is that Democrats got the sound bites they sought. Those damning sound bites will be replayed again and again that exposed the Trump party line relaying Mueller's findings as lies and deception to non-Trump media viewers and listeners. The proceedings and House Democrats reading directly from the Mueller report and Mueller's oral verification and confirmation are now part of the Congressional record forever available to the public and future historians.
The fat lady has not sung on this chapter of the Trump era. Mueller revealed FBI investigations into Trump and his circle concerning financial crimes and other counter-intelligence issues are still ongoing. House Democrats have already seen legislation to improve security measures against foreign nations attacking voter systems defeated by Senate stonewalling, but they may yet double down on their efforts to craft more legislation. House Democrats are weighing options about launching an impeachment inquiry in order to force key administration officials to obey their subpoenas. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi believes there is still a need to develop an even stronger case for impeachment than just relying on the evidence of the Mueller report. As it stands now, any impeachment referral to the Senate dominated by the GOP would find a dead end with votes along party lines.
The GOP House members in the July 24 hearing failed to contradict the facts and evidence of the Mueller report, but they tried to paint a picture of an anti-Trump bias of Mueller's staff that portrayed the negatives and neglected offsetting information,. They were attempting to "kill the messenger", if not the message. The GOP will be diverting attention from the substance of findings via Senate probes into the origins and bias of the Mueller report. Given the credibility of Mueller himself as just the facts person and his 400 plus pages of well-documented evidence, the GOP approach will appear as self-serving if they fail to find substantive evidence to show how any bias affected Mueller's fact-finding.
That Fox listeners will get these damning sound bites is yet to be seen, but for viewers of other media who may be fence-sitters and still questioning who is telling the truth, this may have some impact in helping them realize Trump and his supporters have misled or lied to them about what was in the report. Mueller directly contradicted the White House party line in six critical areas:
Mueller, a reluctant and no-drama witness, answered most questions in monotonous tones and one syllables as the Democrats read passages from his written report .and asked if Mueller agreed with his own words contained in the report. Mueller, when he did not confirm those contents with a yes or no, avoided drama by referring the questioner to the written version or refused to answer within the muzzled boundaries of the Attorney General's edicts. The advantage of one-syllable answers, though, is that there were no shades of gray and few modifiers attached to the answers. However, confirmed much which contradicted what Trump and his devoted followers have been told. Chief among them1) Trump was not exonerated of obstruction; 2) Per Mueller, the investigation into Russian active measures in 2016 was no witch hunt or a hoax; it was sweeping and systematic; 3) The Russians could do it again in 2020; 4) there were many examples of Trump and his cohorts lying about contacts with Russians, evidence and facts that went unchallenged by the GOP; 5) Russians interfered on behalf of electing Trump; 6) Examples of Trump's attempts to obstruct justice and the facts and evidence were not challenged by the GOP, but Trump was never indicted due to a rule against indicting a sitting president.

Wednesday, July 24, 2019

Robert Mueller sets off alarms for 2020 with his truth telling

The July 24, 2019 House hearings featuring Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his report gave Democrats a chance to push back against the Administrations' twisted spins. 1) Trump was not exonerated of obstruction;  2) Per Mueller , the investigation into Russian active measures in 2016 was no witch hunt or a hoax; it was sweeping and systematic; 3) The Russians could do it again in 2020; 4) there were many examples of Trump and his cohorts lies about contacts with Russians, evidence and facts  that went unchallenged by the GOP ; 5) Russians interfered on behalf of electing Trump; 6) Examples of Trump's attempts to obstruct justice  and the facts and evidence were not challenged by the GOP, but  Trump was never indicted due to a rule against indicting a sitting president.
Update: immediately after the hearings, the Senate GOP blocked bills protecting us from Russians and other foreign actors from hacking and sabotaging election results.  The message to Russia et al? Bring it on in 2020. The door is open.  https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/454742-mcconnell-blocks-two-election-security-bills?

Some wag called Mueller's afternoon testimony before the House Intelligence Committee as his "red bull moment" and he seemed to have a bit more passion and was quicker to understand and respond to questions than in the morning House Judiciary committee which focused on "obstruction". The headline phrase is that the Russian interference in 2016 was no hoax and no witch hunt. It was sweeping and systematic, causing long term damage to the US that must be addressed. and "they are doing it in the next campaign". He agreed with a questioner that he feared other candidates would work with foreign hostile forces to get help in a campaign and this could be "the new normal" Rep. Adam Schiff , Intelligence Committee chair, concluded the session with "accepting foreign help (in a campaign) is unethical, disloyal..and a crime." A point made was that it opens up the candidate to blackmail,..
. While Mueller claimed he did not investigate the term "collusion" because it was not a term in criminal law., as was "conspiracy", he affirmed numerous contacts and coordination with Russians by other Trump associates.
The most damning to the Trump administration was Mueller's confirmation with his findings that Russia intervened to help Trump (not Clinton), and that Wikileaks was indicted as a hostile foreign intelligence operation. Mueller verified findings that Trump and Don Jr welcomed the leaks and boosted Wiilileaks's dumping stolen hacks of the DNC. He called Trump and Don Jr.'s actions on this "problematic...an understatement". The GOP's main defense was regarding the Steele Dossier as an origin of the Russian investigation.. This was not a refutation of Mueller's findings, but an attempt to try to divert attention to the Steele Dossier as the reason for the investigation into Russian active measures., which Mueller refused to "speak to the Steele Dossier" because other agencies are looking into it. Another point made in the afternoon intelligence committee session by Trump was that Trump was seeking a lucrative deal in building Trump Tower. even as Trump was the party nominee in June and that numerous lies were made by Michael Cohen, Trump's personal attorney.. Mike Flynn and others in Trump's orbit also discussed sanctions relief with Russians, Mueller confirmed. Trump's party line had been he had nothing to do with Russia. .What was instructive was Mueller's affirming his report of the numerous contacts of Trump's associates with Russians: Manfort sharing polling data with  a suspected Russian agent, the Trump Tower meeting to get dirt on Clinton, various emails by Don Trump Jr. with Wikileaks and Trump's strategy to make use of Wikileaks dump of DNC emails, and mysterious meetings with Russian oligarchs in the Seychelles..Also, Mueller revealed that the FBI counter-intelligence investigations are on-going, including money laundering and blackmail and more.


Initial reaction to Muelle.r's testimony in the morning on obstruction issues was really sad: Democrats did get Mueller to state  Trump was not exonerated from the charge of obstruction. He either refused to answer questions or appeared to either have a hearing problem or was stalling to make sure he understood the question. If he had read his own report, it was not clear because evaded so many questions and appeared to fumble page references in spite of being told page and volume cited by the Democrats. His most frequent response was to refer to the report, while not reading the words of his own report aloud. What the Democrats did establish was that the President was not exonerated of obstruction of justice, a violation of law which included attempts to fire and influence witnesses, even if they were not executed. In the afternoon session, the GOP tried to claim Mueller did not have the power to exonerate anyone because exoneration was not included in the DOJ rules or legal interpretations or was a legal term. Trump was not charged because of a legal opinion and Department of Justice policy that a sitting president cannot be charged. However, Mueller clarified later that the investigation did not even determine if a crime had been committed because of that rule. The facts and evidence in the Mueller report of attempted obstruction were not attacked in any substance or with counter-evidence or counter-arguments by the GOP but they based their attack that the DOJ was full of anti-Trumpsters and Democrats so the findings were tainted.. The GOP failed to dent the evidence that Trump did indeed attempt to obstruct justice with corrupt attempt, regardless of whether he carried out his orders. If the few basic exchanges between Democrats and Mueller on these key points are highlighted, Democrats can make lemonade of this lemon.
The reason Mueller never interviewed the President was addressed by Mueller in the afternoon session when he insisted it would take too much time to fight his subpoenas so the investigation could not be brought to a quick close.

Friday, June 14, 2019

So what's so wrong with colluding with the Russians?

A version was published in the Sky Hi News, June 17, 2019
https://www.skyhinews.com/opinion/opinion-muftic-so-whats-so-wrong-with-colluding-with-the-russians/

So what's wrong with collusion? President Trump just spent two and a half years afraid he would be accused of colluding with the Russians to help him get elected. Trump must have assumed " to collude "was against the law earlier, but after crowing he was cleared of collusion by special counsel Robert Mueller, Trump threw his gears in reverse to claim there was nothing wrong with collusion and he would do it again in 2020. In effect, he laid out the welcome mat for foreign interference from any foreign adversary in future American elections. If he tries to do what he did in 2016 inviting Russian interference and receiving dirt on opponents, he could be accused of a crime, whether or not he conspired or colluded.

Also for the past two and a half years. Donald Trump has been endeavoring to subvert the investigation by firing and attempting to fire the investigators and impugning the integrity of the FBI as some deep state out to get him. Per the Mueller report, there were a dozen incidents of obstructing the investigation, including recruiting subordinates and supporters to fire Mueller, and Mueller could not find evidence to clear him of obstruction. Because of the Department of Justice rules, he also could not indict a sitting president for the crime of obstruction of justice. Trump has continued with his oft-repeated line:" no collusion, no obstruction" and his supporters believe him.

The collusion reference defends on a definition or by whom or by what law defines it. He was pointedly not cleared (exonerated) of obstruction by Robert Mueller.
"Collusion" was not investigated by Special Counsel Mueller. Collusion is a broad, popular term. However, "conspiracy", the actual criminal act named in the criminal code Mueller did investigate. Here is how Mueller defined it in his report: "In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of collusion...Collusion is not a specific offense ..found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law..taking actions that were informed by or responsive to the other's actions or interests" in election interference. Mueller then cleared Trump of violating his (Mueller's) narrow definition of the "conspiracy" statutes for lack of evidence.

Trump's then tried narrowing the definition of legal collusion was just receiving dirt, opposition research, from anyone (foreign or not) on an opponent. and that was OK. It is not and there was much more contained in the definition of such activities. Oops, President Trump. “It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election.” per the Federal election laws. Now you know, Mr. President, so if you intend to accept dirt from Russia or anything else of value in 2020, you are committing a crime.

 Certainly, dirt about a political opponent is of value to a candidate. In fact, if it is intentional, it can be referred to the FBI for criminal prosecution. If it is by accident or unaware of the law, the penalty can be fines.

When Donald Trump on the stump at a campaign rally famously called on the Russians to find Clinton's missing emails, "Russians, are you listening if you can find Hillary's emails", he was soliciting Russia to get him something of value. If he would have accepted the missing emails, which did not happen, he would have also broken the law by receiving something of value from the Russians, but being a political novice, his ignorance of the law could be excused. After this flap last week, he is no longer ignorant of the law.

Why object to foreigners influencing American elections? Foreign interference in elections harms the sovereignty of the nation, shaping American citizens' opinion and hacking and controlling election results so that citizens are discouraged from voting or being registered or actually changing the votes. in 2016, Russians demonstrated they could hack election tallies in a few counties though there was no evidence they changed voters votes. In 2016 those Russian measures were geared to electing a president who had better and kinder views of their foreign government's policies than Hillary Clinton, even though Trump's policies might be contrary to American national interests. In the case of Russia, candidate Trump favored lifting sanctions, called NATO's mutual defense clauses obsolete, and generally admired Putin so ardently, his relationship with Putin was termed a "bromance". Russia's use of social media was targeted to hurt Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump, per Mueller. How and who did it was also laid out in detail in Vol 1 of the Mueller report. In fact, twenty-five Russian spies, hackers, and GRU military intelligence operatives, and two Russian companies were indicted by the Grand Jury and the vivid details of how they did it were laid out in the Mueller report and in earlier court filings of indictments. In short, Americans who fell for the bots, ads, and social media postings that intensified mistrust and hatred of Clinton while extolling the virtues of Bernie Sanders, and the Green Party, stayed home or voted Green with an "I don't like either Trump or Clinton" rationale. Post-2016 studies by PEW concluded that the non-voters in the key industrial states actually were decided by potential Clinton voters who did not vote.

In retrospect, many marveled of how sophisticated the Russians were in targeting their social media to suppress the particular potential Clinton voters. In the Mueller report, we learned that campaign manager Paul Manafort had been sharing Trump internal campaign polling data with a business associate in Ukraine, Konstantin Kilimnik, who had training by Russian intelligence and had close connections with Oleg Deripaska,. an oligarch and friend of Putin, one of many oligarchs the Obama administration had sanctioned in 2014 for Russian incursions into eastern Ukraine.

Trump and the FBI got into a quarrel last week about whether in a political campaign, any foreign national attempting to influence an election had contacts with a campaign had to be reported to the FBI. Mueller in over 100 pages of his report had documented over 272 contacts by Trump or his campaign associates with Russians during the campaign. To clarify the requirement, Sen.Mark Warner (D-Va) immediately introduced a bill requiring such reporting which was immediately blocked by the GOP in the Senate.

_______________________________________________________________________

Mueller came to the conclusion that Donald Trump Jr was unaware of the law so he did not intend to break it when he was lured to the Trump Tower to meet with some Russians who, in a chain of emails with him, hinted they had dirt on Hillary Clinton. Trump from Air Force One lied when asked about it, saying he thought the meeting was about Russian adoptions.

This is what set off this recent firestorm.
"Asked by ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos in the Oval Office on Wednesday whether his campaign would accept such information from foreigners -- such as China or Russia -- or hand it over the FBI, Trump said, "I think maybe you do both." "I think you might want to listen, there isn't anything wrong with listening," Trump continued. "If somebody called from a country, Norway, [and said] ‘we have information on your opponent' -- oh, I think I'd want to hear it."  FBI Director Christopher Wray told Congress that a candidate should offer that kind of information to the agency, but Trump responded: “The FBI director is wrong.”https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/id-exclusive-interview-trump-listen-foreigners-offered-dirt/story?id=63669304
. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/id-exclusive-interview-trump-listen-foreigners-offered-dirt/story?id=63669304

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/paul-manafort-shared-2016-polling-data-with-russian-employee-according-to-court-filing/2019/01/08/3f562ad8-12b0-11e9-803c-4ef28312c8b9_story.html?utm_term=.3b6e2a102999

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/paul-manafort-shared-2016-polling-data-with-russian-employee-according-to-court-filing/2019/01/08/3f562ad8-12b0-11e9-803c-4ef28312c8b9_story.html?utm_term=.3b6e2a102999

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/05/trump-declines-to-affirm-natos-article-5/528129/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2019/01/31/the-strange-places-trump-gets-his-intelligence-from/#ee93b17312a9


https://www.npr.org/2017/07/11/536670194/donald-trump-jr-s-emails-about-meeting-with-russian-lawyer-annotated

Trump at Helsinki: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44852812

Friday, May 24, 2019

GOP and Democrats switch roles in the Trump era

A version of this was published in the Sky Hi News, June 5, 2019
https://www.skyhinews.com/opinion/democrats-and-gop-switch-roles-in-the-trump-era/


Watching an interview with the new Democratic Congressman Jason Crow from Colorado's 6th, a Denver suburban district that flipped from red to blue in 2018, brought home how strange life has become in the Trump era. The Democrats and the GOP have reversed their traditional roles in many ways.

  Crow,  an army ranger combat veteran who rose from a private to a captain with multi tours of duty in Iraq and Afghanistan is no oddity in the Democratic House caucus. Now, Congress has many Democrats, ten of the 67 elected in 2018,  men and women, who have had combat experience or who were intelligence officers, and who have brought their views to Congress of respect of the military and wisdom about war.  Once respect for the military was a GOP patriotic thing, salute the flag, patriotism,  and honoring those who sacrificed their lives to keep America free. All of those traits were a  guaranteed flag waiver.  Democrats after Viet Nam were less supportive of the military and were skeptical of sentiments hyper-patriotism.   The generals who had joined the administration's White House staff are long gone after daring to advise the President in ways that were contrary to his misconceptions.   However, Democrats have been the ones who now have their ranks including military veterans and who often cite departing, disillusioned military advisors like the ones who represented forces keeping the President's worst impulses in check.   How times have changed as Democrats view military brass and veterans as forces for good as Trump sheds or fires his military White House advisers.

Once upon a time not so long ago Conservatives and the GOP were seen as defenders of the original intent of our founders in writing the constitution. The executive powers were checked and balanced by the legislature and the Supreme Court in sheer fear some future politician would rise to be King not subject to the same laws as those he governed, free to undermine and trample and interpret laws to promote his retaining power.  Now the Trump administration is the one advocating a "strong" leader and stonewalling and subverting the attempts of Congress to hold him accountable. Through appointments of federal and supreme court judges and an attorney general who has a record of advocating the supremacy of the presidency, the Trump administration is proclaiming its power to be above the law and above the ability of Congress to hold the president accountable. On the other hand, it is the Democrats who have become the champion of the original intent of our founders and the constraints on the executive branch as they interpret the meaning of the provisions of the Constitution. It is the Democrats who are supporting the mantra that no one is above the law and upholding the separation of powers as they rail against Trump's tendency to act like an imperial president.

Once upon a time, the FBI was seen as the ultimate law and order enforcer in the US, admired as macho heroes who went after terrorists and mob bosses with dogged devotion to acting on behalf of the rule of law and order, saving our freedom from the USSR aggression. Now, the integrity of the FBI is under attack by the President, who is engineering a special counsel to investigate the investigators, claiming their Republican-affiliated staff leaders were out to get him. The FBI was the GOP's good guys in the months leading up to the 2016 campaign when they announced on again and off again criminal investigations into Clinton's alleged misuse of emails and possibly disclosing classified information.  Their actions may have been the ultimate factors in her defeat though Russian interference that painted Clinton in a bad light via bots and disinformation may have played an equal role. That GOP love affair with the FBI went south in 2017 when it became common knowledge the FBI was looking into the Russian connections of Trump and his campaign associated and Donald Trump fired James Comey, the former admired FBI chief whose actions helped Trump get elected.  The Democrats emerged as the champion of the FBI and US intelligence services and the rule of law.

Upside down and changing places are partisan attitudes toward Russia. The FBI and our intelligence services kept us safe from the Soviets in the Cold War, when Russians were viewed as our sworn enemies.  The Democrats are now the ones viewing Russia as an enemy and the GOP is either in denial the Russians interfered with the 2016 elections or asking, so what is wrong with that?  In spite of the post-Soviet era thaw, the rise of former KGB operative Vladimir Putin to near dictatorial control of Russia and looking to reassemble the former Soviet influence in East European border states, has resulted in the US intelligence agencies considering Russia an adversary. On the other hand,  Donald Trump sees Russians as a trusted ally with their foreign policy goals worthy of his support. Trump in Helsinki publicly has proclaimed he trusted Putin and Russian intelligence services over our own and after other secret meetings with Putin, he took Putin's word for it that denied Russians interfered in the 2016 elections. Trump has taken actions to lift sanctions on Russians for their expansion into Ukraine, Crimea, and interference in the 2016 elections and advocated measures to weaken NATO's mutual defense function that is keeping Russians from advancing their control of NATO members. Turning a blind eye to any evidence of Russian interference presented by Mueller, the GOP seems not to care that Russians attempted to twist the minds of US voters with their use of social media and advertising, subverting US democracy's purpose of our freedom to reflect the will of our own citizens and to destroy our trust in democratic processes.


____________________________________________________________________________

Donald Trump's strategy to protect his presidential power is to investigate the investigators.  His goal is to destroy the credibility of the Mueller report without having to provide evidence refuting its findings. He wants voters to consider the motivation of the investigators as disloyal to him and to ignore the facts and conclusions. To rationalize his goal, his view is that law and order mean whether the enforcers and the intelligence services are loyal to him instead of whether they are loyal to the United States and to the Constitution to which they swore to defend when they took office. These intelligence and law enforcement agents did not pledge allegiance to the president,  or the institution of the presidency.  A dictator demands loyalty to himself, not to the impartial rule of law.  Once the GOP were the law, order, and strict  Constitution folks. How times have changed with Democrats as the ones citing the original intent of the Constitution, assuming the mantle of defenders of the rule of law, and opposing the expansion of executive powers over the legislative branch.

 Last week Trump accused those investigating him as committing "treason" against him.  He has claimed the FBI was engineering a coup against his presidency.  He believes he is the person to whom we pledge allegiance, not the United States and the democracy for which it stands. He is above the law, he thinks. Those are the words and thoughts worthy of a dictator. Treason is an accusation Trump has recently been throwing around as a way to charge his enemies with not pledging allegiance to him. Treason has two elements: working with a foreign enemy against the interests of the United States with a foreign power with which we are at war. .That definition does not include working against the interests of the president in power.

 Even more frightening, Trump is ordering all of the US intelligence services and federal law enforcement to cooperate with an investigation to see if "treason" was committed against him by beginning the investigation into Russian interference in 2016. Trump's loyal Attorney General Bill Barr has appointed a special counsel to investigate the investigators and the president granted him powers to declassify classified information, possibly exposing to our adversaries sources and methods. At the same time, the Trump administration is stonewalling sharing with Congress all of Mueller's underlying evidence and the unredacted version of the redacted report and forbidding across the board any of his administration testifying before House committees.  Last week two separate federal judges ruled against Trump's stonewalling tactics, as the conflict between Trump and the House now moves to the courts.

 Since Mueller found no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt the Trump campaign intentionally coordinated or conspired with the Russians to fix the 2016 campaign, Trump himself was exonerated of criminal conspiracy. The service to US security the Mueller report and the text of indictments provided was to lay out measures the Russians conducted to shape the 2016 election to serve their national interests, not ours.

  However, Robert Mueller cited ten examples with evidence Trump endeavored to obstruct justice ( aka the investigation) including ordering his subordinates to lie and cover-up.  Mueller also wrote he could not indict a sitting president of a crime per department rules and he plainly wrote he did not exonerate him of those violations. Trump's lawyers tried to contend that Trump failed in executing obstruction so he committed not a crime, but federal statutes only require that he ""endeavored, not that he had to succeed.   Trump's loyal AG Barr tried to deceive the public by claiming Trump was exonerated of "collusion". Mueller never looked at the more passive campaign actions of publicly encouraging, ignoring or denying, aiding and abetting,  and receiving information and intelligence, popularly called "collusion", because there is no such term in the criminal code or a provision to prosecute collusion as a crime.

 ________________________________________________________________________________
More on treason From the US Federal code: "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason".  If there were suspicions anyone was working on behalf of a foreign government, it was Trump himself and the over one hundred contacts of his campaign and White House associates had with the Russians.  Little did Donald Trump know until later that the FBI had launched a  secret counterintelligence investigation a July 31, 2016, alarmed by the frequent contacts Trump's campaign staff had with Russian operatives and evidence of advance information a campaign official had of Russian hacking.   All of the upper echelons of the FBI were registered  Republicans and of the law and order traditions, and many were veterans of the Cold War, aware that Russia was an adversary, not a friend, of the United States. In early January 2017, US intelligence agencies warned Trump of Russian activities in the 2016 election, which he questioned and then ignored. That was even before Trump demanded loyalty from FBI Director Comey and fired him over "this Russian thing", later firing Flynn.  Trump even fired Sally Yates, the acting attorney general who warned him of the  Russian connections of Mike Flynn, his national security advisor, who was vulnerable of blackmail. Flynn later "resigned" and pled guilty of lying to the FBI. That was even before Trump demanded loyalty from FBI Director Comey and fired him over "this Russian thing".



________________________________________________________________________________



18 U.S. Code § 2381.Treason "Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 807Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(2)(J), Sept. 13, 1994108 Stat. 2148.)

https://www.npr.org/2018/04/03/599120190/madeleine-albright-warns-dont-let-fascism-go-unnoticed-until-its-too-late?

fbclid=IwAR35fL5KyaCKmm12Y1TFgdMsNGQstMobekUoHIp0xqCAFdrkb4oM2jT2GZA
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/acting-attorney-general-fired-trump-set-testify-russias/story?id=47263460

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/06/us/politics/russia-hack-report.html
__________________________________________________________________________________
           .

.