Quite frankly, I don’t like doing this, but I’d be VERY interested in comments from my readers and followers that were made by a blogger on this post.
Just a couple of excerpts:
Mueller made legal history by changing the Rule of Law from “innocent until proven guilty” to “guilty until proven innocent.”
Mueller didn’t interview her (Natalia Veselnitskaya) because, if she had told the truth, she would have had to testify that she was part of a Fusion GPS effort to entrap Donald Trump Jr.
One thing I think many fail to remember is the only access the public has to the Mueller Report is a redacted version. In other words, we only know part of the story. But even so, what we DO know leaves little doubt that there are questionable actions on the part of Trump and/or his family and/or his campaign in his efforts to become POTUS. Simply put, contrary to his tweets, his hands are not lily white.
Further, Mueller was quite clear, not only in his report but also in his responses to Congress, that Russia did most certainly interfere in the 2016 Election. That conclusion can be interpreted however you want, but considering several actions on the part of our current President, it would be difficult to deny Mueller’s findings.
In any case, the floor is now open …
Nan's Notebook 
I was not aware of that blog you linked. So thanks for the link (or maybe not). But it completely discredits itself in the first few sentences.
LikeLiked by 5 people
I haven’t read Mueller’s report but in the case of everyone I know who has read it there has been Universal disappointment that Trump was not actually named as guilty. There were times when his guilt shone though but it’s either been left without use of the word because Mueller believed in the DoJ note that a sitting President can’t be charged or he’s left it up to Congress to bring the ‘i’word forward to prosecute them.
It sounds like your man forgot that Mr Mueller is a Republican and is making a very unfair accusation against him. Trump and at least part if the family have betrayed the USA on all sorts of levels and The Senate majority don’t have a backbone to stop him.
Huge Hugs
LikeLiked by 4 people
I’ve noticed on several occasions that this blogger has a, shall I say, rather unique outlook on events.
One of his claims re: the “Clinton tapes” has, to my knowledge, never been fully established one way or the other, but from my research, most sources seem to lean towards the Russians. I guess, like so many other “questionable” things, it depends on which side of the fence you’re on.
To me, your last sentence sums up the entire situation. If things were allowed to be brought out into the open, there might not be so much “speculation.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
I HAVE read Mueller’s very redacted report. Whomever is behind that blog you shared is full of shyte.
LikeLiked by 6 people
I am disappointed in the handling of the investigation overseen by Mueller. The general public needed to know more about the progress of the investigation into Trump and the Russians, not just who in his sphere was being found guilty of crimes. That a sitting president can’t be indicted is absurd, if he is committing crimes from the White House, no one is about the law quote unquote only apparently that’s not the case. Mueller did not interrogate the Trump or Trump Jr. Why? We need the answers. The report has cast doubt in the effort to get to the source , Trump and his family. That leaves us with a big question mark. Was this investigation thorough , obviously the answer is no.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Again and again I must go back to the point I made in my last post — that tRumpsky has considerable power “behind the scenes.” I can’t help but think there’s much, much more than meets the eye. And yes, I totally agree, although it’s said no one is “above the law” … it certainly doesn’t seem to ring true in this administration.
And most of all I agree with this … WE NEED THE ANSWERS! Not just what certain people want us to know, but the TRUTH! Even if it may not be what we think it is, at least we would know without the many shadows of doubt that now exist.
LikeLiked by 4 people
I wonder why Mueller did not investigate the source of the note? Being told that a sitting president cannot be indicted is a total copout. The investigation was slanted right from the start. Mueller knew he was not giving a result, so he found as many facts as he could about everyone else, and them he prosecuted. But Trump was untouchable, and that was not about to change.
Mueller was and is a Republican. He walked the line as close as he could “for show,” but he never once crossed it for real. He is a sham investigator, his orders were to “NOT FIND THE PRESIDENT GUILTY” and that is exactly what he did. He was always an EMPLOYEE, and he did not disappoint his BOSS.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You may be partially correct in your analysis, but I think you’re pushing the envelope.
Too many have praised Mueller as being “stunningly bipartisan” for him to be called a “sham investigator.” And yes, although he’s essentially a “Republican,” I tend to believe he tried to give an honest report. However, I also believe his hands were tied … which goes back to what I’ve repeatedly said about tRumpsky’s behind-the-scenes power and influence.
Also, it’s been reported that he TRIED to interview tRumpsky on several occasions but was thwarted each time by his attorneys (all he ended up getting was a written interview). Why do you think our esteemed leader avoided talking to Mueller?
One area in which you’re probably correct. Mueller worked under a man that blatantly supported the POTUS and this undoubtedly played a role in how much information he could provide. Yet those who have read the FULL report seem to feel he provided solid information on guilt.
LikeLike
I’m not sayting he did not do a wonderful job, Nan, but as a special prosecutor he needed to make a statement: Guilty! or Not Guilty!
He did not do this which is why I call him a sham.
He obeyed the rules set out for him even though they were not trustworthy rules. That is why I call him a sham.
To be bipartisan is to work for the good of the nation, not any particular party, yet he toed the republican party line in the end. That is why I call him a sham.
He had the evidence, as you say. But he did nothing with it. You the people were counting on him, and he defied what needed to be done. THAT IS WHY I CALL HIM A SHAM.
Remember, I am an outsider, I get to take an unbiased look at your country’s politics, and I get to call an appleseed an appleseed. Mueller played the American people–would you rather I call him a con?
LikeLike
I totally agree, I had high hopes, but was dumbfounded by the lack of any word coming during the investigation. I have lost confidence in Mueller and the report.
LikeLike
I would love to have a one-on-one with him, but I’m a nobody, and I’m not an American. I’ll never get to ask what was in his heart!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I suspect that there would have been no point in “interrogating’ Trump or Jr, judging from the kind of behavior we have seen in other instances, and any attempt on Mueller’s part would have been a walking breathing disaster. sometimes it’s best to just work around the flaming sack on the doorstep, rather than try to put out the fire with your bare hands.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Haha! Love this, thank you!
LikeLike
Regarding the blogger, his “opinion” isn’t worth addressing. However, Mueller is not above reproach. Here’s the gist of my somewhat controversial comment posted last week on another blog:
While I do appreciate the difficult position Mueller was in, not just recently in his congressional testimony but also in his role as Special Counsel, he does deserve some criticism. Let me explain.
The parallels to Watergate have been well covered, and rightly so. However, there is one huge difference today compared with 45 years ago – that is, the viability of impeachment. Back then, when Nixon’s crimes were publicly exposed, Republicans could no longer politically support him; and, that’s why he resigned. Now, after Trump’s egregiously worse crimes were at least partially exposed, Republicans saw more political risk to themselves if they didn’t continue to politically support him; and, that’s why he’s still in office. This difference relates to the much more intense cultural polarization in America today. Trump supporters see him as some sort of ideological messiah, a champion for all their angers and fears. Nixon, even at the height of his popularity, never was seen so loftily. The typical Republican of the 1970s was much more level-headed, objective, and duty-bound than the rabid version of the 2010s.
For this reason, the responsibility of holding Trump accountable fell squarely on Mueller regardless of how unfair such a position might be. I always believed that he understood this, and his testimony before Congress has confirmed my suspicions. If Mueller had accepted that responsibility to first and foremost uphold the U.S. Constitution, uphold the rule of law, and uphold the nation’s democratic principles, then he would’ve pursued his investigation and prosecutions much more vigorously and without apprehension. He would not have bypassed attention on Trump and Trump’s family. He would not have skirted around the very serious Russia collusion problem, and he would not have acquiesced to the DOJ’s arbitrary internal policy prohibiting the criminal prosecution of a sitting U.S. president. Such a heavy burden of responsibility would be unbearable for most people, and we now know that it was too much for Mueller to bear. Therefore, he is no “hero” in my view – just a relatively honorable official whose shoes were too big for him to fill.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Good analysis. You do have a very “intellectual” way of viewing things whereas many of us (me included) are more ruled by our emotions. However, in mine and perhaps others’ defense, it’s difficult to maintain stoicism when the man sitting in the Oval Office gets away with so much!
LikeLiked by 2 people
I completely understand.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Well Nan, to start… (the blog-writer) offers nothing on his blog of his own personal background, education, or political-legal experience to justify any of his viewpoints about the Mueller investigation as anything OTHER THAN his personal opinion, or a novice’s (skewed? biased?) Op-Ed. And labeling his blog-post that might be too kind. Eh, that’s social-media isn’t it? It isn’t too far removed from Twitter or Facebook posts. LOL 😉
That said, what I find utterly alarming and un-American is that there is NO DEBATE that Russia and its allies attacked mechanisms of democracy and our elections! It wasn’t a military attack, but nevertheless it was unequivocally an attack! Period!
Yet, our POTUS and his Administration are more bent on reacting to secondary, minor issues of politics and what Democrats are up to… than protecting one of our nation’s most sanctified processes: free and honorable elections and campaigns! Their explicit avoidance/denial of that fact deeply disturbs me and irritates the FIRE out of me!!! What sort of leader does absolutely NOTHING in response to a clear and blatant attack on our nation’s elections!?
Not an American who truly loves and protects the pillars and mechanisms of a Constitutional democracy, clearly. 😡
But then again, tRumpsky has a long established history of Mob-like ethics and divisive, insulting, empty rhetoric… much like one news network panders to hot-tempered consumers. 😉 😛
LikeLiked by 2 people
One other thing too… this precedence of way too much secrecy, power and leverage to the Executive Branch — and less to Congress and the Judicial Branch — was set at least back during Reagan’s presidency with the Iran-Contra scandal and people like Oliver North who would do ANYTHING the party expects and President commands whether legal or not, ethical or not, or humane or not (ala Nazi-like obedience?) — but in many other ways it was started with Nixon. Fortunately, Richard could NOT escape the balance of powers and proper Checks-n-Balances. But that was the 1970’s. Our current pseudo-democracy and our institutions for the public are WAY DIFFERENT now and under constant threat. 😦 tRumpsky doesn’t have the intelligence at all to see that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
To quote a Trump supporter I know, “Trump ain’t did NUTHIN’ wrong! You libtards gotta just git over it! Time to indict Hillary Clinton for HER dealings with Russia and lock HER up! It’s a game all rigged by the deep state, libtards, and socialists! MAGA, baby! MAGA!!! Trump 2020!” With clear-headed, warm, loving, well-informed, non-biased folks like this voting for him, how can Trump not win in 2020 and beyond? We’re effed, people. We are effed. Big time.
LikeLiked by 5 people
😆 Um, there is no way that Rump-supporter had that many words in their vocabulary Jeff, let alone be able to grammatically construct that many sentences!!!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Well, to be honest, I cleaned it up..A LOT. He used the eff word about 30 times during the tirade of how evil the libtards are and cruel they’re being to God’s son, Trump. 🙂
LikeLiked by 4 people
🤣🤣🤣 …because otherwise your quote would’ve been about 10,000 middle school words, huh? 😉
LikeLiked by 4 people
I read the Mueller report. It is my sincere belief that nobody supports the president after they read it. If you support the president, you haven’t read the report, pure and simple.
I absolutely laugh at the unfounded insinuation that the Hillary campaign spent money trying to discredit itself. This doesnt even make sense, but here come the MAGA nut jobs pretending it is so. They also haven’t actually read the Mueller report.
It’s a witch hunt, but 45 was exonerated? Make up your mind. It was either one or the other. Only a MAGA hat wearing imbecile could bend logic to make both so. They haven’t read the Mueller report either.
LikeLiked by 5 people