(01-10-2019 07:45 AM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  Yeah, and the original mandate here was *solely* "any links and or coordination between the Russian Government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump" and "any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation." *After* it was revealed that possible crimes had been committed by numerous campaign associates of the President (i.e. perjury, obstruction of justice, money laundering, etc.), it was clear that investigating these items fell under the second item of Mueller's investigatory authority, without need of any "expansion" of Mueller's authority. It is also clear that if Mueller had not assumed the investigation of these items, a separate prosecuting entity (the U.S. Attorney, perhaps) would have done so, as has happened with a number of items already.

My problem is with the idiots who claim these "second item" results show first item relevance, as in "they have found plenty of witches".

If you investigate any group of people, from the Trump campaign to the Clinton Campaign to the ASPCA, you will find people who will tell untruths under pressure or who have committed infractions in the past. No group can withstand this type of scrutiny and avoid "second item" problems, especially when the counsel uses these second item infractions to apply pressure in their search for first item infractions.

I long ago predicted this investigation would result in lots of little fish being caught for little crimes, and no collusion found. Looks that way still to me. But every time somebody is indicted for unpaid parking tickets or for lying about paying them, there is a certain segment of the population that goes all aquiver with the anticipation that now we are getting somewhere.

Collusion is a stupid thing to be investigating. If the Russians had altered the emails to make Hillary or her staff look culpable of crimes, that would be more credible. But they didn't. The worst revelation, AFAIK, is that the DNC helped her with debate questions - a crime against liberal Democrats, but not one against the country. So why collude and then do nothing? Also, nobody can come up with any quid pro quo. The collusion theory is a house of twigs, but evidently a lot of people think twigs are bricks. Democrat people.

Did Russia interfere? Almost certainly yes, in minor and ineffectual ways. Did they do so with guidance and help of the Trump campaign? Almost certainly no. Was their interference totally against Hillary? No. Did it change one vote in ANY direction? None are alleged, none are demonstrated. There is no way that Trump is so dad gum smart that he could foresee that publishing Hillary's yoga schedules would sway Wisconsin a year later. Or maybe you guys think he is that smart, that prescient, that brilliant. I don't.

And maybe, also, you think that Putin did his ineffectual interference in hopes of a reward - or with a predetermined reward. If so, what was it? Why would the author of the The Art of the Deal make such a bad one, that he got some FaceBook ads and gave up...what? why would Putin make such a deal? why would anybody?

Collusion is a fantasy, created by a shocked and butt hurt bunch of losers to explain how they lost a race they thought was in the bag. Nothing could be the fault of them or of Hillary, and since many of them don"t believe in God, it also could not be an Act of God. Must be the bogeyman, must be something rotten, let's investigate and string up the MFers, we know they're guilty, what else could it be?

Amazing how many Rice grads will subscribe to this conspiracy theory. Aren't we supposed to be smart and analytical? The hysteria to find these imaginary colluders reminds me of the McCarthy era fever to find and root out the communist sympathizers.