14 new indictments from the Mueller investigations. What do you think so far?

Yes. Most of the 14 are foreign nationals. And they determined that the “interference” made no impact on the election. All of this could and should have been done at the time it was occurring. Had the FBI and NSA actually been watching after things the way they should have been, none of this would have happened. Obama himself identified that there may have been some attempts, but that they made no effect on the outcome of the election. Of course that was his story before Trump won…I suspect it changed afterward. So let me expand on your question: For all of you that swore up and down that Trump was elbow deep in this, how do you feel now? Care to recant your accusations?

That might be satisfying, but IT AINT OVER YET.

It’s a start. Gates’ close. Manfort’s next. The indictment points a nice big finger at Manafort. Lots of interesting bits in the indictment. Good reading so far.

Additionally, Rothenstein put out in his official statement that no Americans were involved in the attempts to interfere in the election. That really does sort of point to Trump being clear.

Mr. Rosenstein phrased things very carefully. No one is in the clear.

“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity,” he said. “There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.”

That pretty much says that no Americans were knowing participants to the illegal activity. It also tells us that the attempts at interference being covered by the indictments didn’t alter the outcome of the election. So it would seem that the entire “Russia-Trump” connection is being tossed aside. The election was clean and clear and Trump did not cheat to win. It is time to stop wasting millions of our tax dollars to continue this charade at justice.

Now…if you wanted to make the argument that this might be a way to try taking the spotlight off the FBI and the FISA courts and that Trump may not actually be in the clear…I might give you that argument. But what these statements by Rothenstein have done is to give any American charged with any interference an out. Kinda hard to say no Americans knowingly participated and that the election was not altered by the efforts and then try charging someone with participating and altering the outcome. And that includes Trump.

It’s a start, not an end.

distraction

“There is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity.”

@seawulf575 From a legal perspective, the key phrase in that sentence is “in this indictment.” This is not the first indictment that has been generated by the investigation, and it may or may not be the last. The previous indictments did include Americans, and the next indictment—if there is one—may or may not include one or more Americans. So I agree with @BellaB that the statement was very carefully phrased.

And let us note that the careful phrasing worked exactly the way it was presumably meant to: the wording allows Trump’s supporters to fool themselves into thinking that Trump is off the hook while not saying anything blatantly false for Trump’s opponents to seize on (once again demonstrating that Rosenstein is one of the savvier members of the current administration).

“There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election.”

Again, this statement is very carefully phrased. You have chosen to read it as saying that the interference covered by the interference didn’t alter the outcome of the election, but the sentence in fact says no such thing. There’s a huge difference—both logically and legally—between a positive declaration that something did not alter the outcome of the election and a mere lack of any declaration one way or the other.

To give an example: nowhere in this answer have I made any declarations one way or another about the color of my wife’s eyes. But it cannot be concluded from that fact that I do not know the color of my wife’s eyes or that her eyes are colorless. It just means that I have refrained from saying anything one way or another about the matter. People have a tendency to hear more than what was said, however, and that tendency is something lawyers and politicians alike have been taking advantage of from time immemorial.

The fat lady hasn’t sung, yet!

Mueller’s doing great. Worth every penny to eventually impeach this sicko clown in the White House.

It is a good start.

and it’s JUST the start.

Keep in mind the timing. Just a few weeks ago, Trump started squirming, and the Nunez document poofed up out of nowhere. It suggests that, like I said, Trump is feeling the heat…

It was pointed out that, although Trump claims vindication, if he really believed it he would be crowing big time and would not have avoided reporters on the way to AF-One for his Florida trip but would have stopped and gloated and rubbed it in.

^Well. Trump claimed that the whole Russian thing was “fake news.” So. He’s at least wrong about that. And I agree. I think Trump would throw a I’m innocent parade, if actually vindicated. Keep in mind that he claims vindication frequently though. He claimed that the Nunez document vindicated him. Now this. I’d hate to be one of his underlings, constantly trying to put out Trump’s fires. I hope those spin doctors are paid well…