I've read most of the Mueller Report that was released today. As the Attorney General previously reported, the Report concludes that neither President Trump nor anyone associated with his campaign conspired with the Russians with regard to the 2016 election or even coordinated their activities to help Trump win. In prosecutor speak it's a total exoneration on the collusion claims. Then there's the obstruction stuff, but as Barr said, Mueller doesn't come to a conclusion on that, so the Attorney General and his deputy made the determination.
I have to say that I am surprised by the Report in one major way. The Report discusses certain matters as if they were established when it's rather obvious that they haven't been. Let me give you a good example: the Report states as a fact that the Russians hacked the Clinton and DNC computer systems. It explains what sort of computer attacks were launched and give all sorts of details about the attack. But the FBI and the government never had access to those computers. The Report doesn't contradict that as far as I can see from my first reading. The Report even talks in some places about things being publically reported in the media or the DNC and its expert concluding that the Russians hacked the DNC computer systems. It just isn't possible to conclude authoritatively that the Russians did the hacking without actually having access to the DNC computer systems. This is truly shoddy work by the Mueller Team especially since the hacking by Russia is a necessary fact for nearly all of what they were supposed to investigate. Unless there is detailed backup about the hacking somewhere that was redacted (which doesn't seem to be the case), the Mueller Report is just taking the word of the DNC (a very interested organization that would love for there to have been proof of collusion) and the media (who also would love to get Trump). It's incredible that this could be the end product of a two year investigation.
I have to say that I am surprised by the Report in one major way. The Report discusses certain matters as if they were established when it's rather obvious that they haven't been. Let me give you a good example: the Report states as a fact that the Russians hacked the Clinton and DNC computer systems. It explains what sort of computer attacks were launched and give all sorts of details about the attack. But the FBI and the government never had access to those computers. The Report doesn't contradict that as far as I can see from my first reading. The Report even talks in some places about things being publically reported in the media or the DNC and its expert concluding that the Russians hacked the DNC computer systems. It just isn't possible to conclude authoritatively that the Russians did the hacking without actually having access to the DNC computer systems. This is truly shoddy work by the Mueller Team especially since the hacking by Russia is a necessary fact for nearly all of what they were supposed to investigate. Unless there is detailed backup about the hacking somewhere that was redacted (which doesn't seem to be the case), the Mueller Report is just taking the word of the DNC (a very interested organization that would love for there to have been proof of collusion) and the media (who also would love to get Trump). It's incredible that this could be the end product of a two year investigation.
No comments:
Post a Comment