Robert Mueller Delivers Report to Attorney General

 

According to news reports, Robert Mueller has delivered a report to Attorney General Bill Barr. Fox News:

Special Counsel Robert Mueller has submitted to Attorney General Bill Barr his long-awaited report on the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race and possible collusion with Trump associates — marking the end of the politically explosive probe and the beginning of a new battle over its contents and implications. Mueller is “not recommending any further indictments,” a senior DOJ official told Fox News.

Published in Politics
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 213 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Can’t disagree with this.

    This will be the end of the Republican Party, and will lead to the loss of the Senate, more Governors, more House members and maybe another 400 legislators.

    Explain.

    We lost the House of Representatives in 2018. We lost 7 governorship’s. We have lost 400 legislators in Trump’s first two years.

    If Ned Ryun follows through on his tweet, that is what will happen. Good to know. I never would’ve thought of that.

    In 2016, we won the gross House of Representatives vote 49.1% to 48.0% for a 1.1% advantage.

    In 2018, we lost the gross House of Representatives vote 53.4% to 44.8% for a 8.6% deficit. The 2018 election was a referendum on Trump. We lost women, the educated, the young and the suburbs.

    This was a 9.7% swing between 2016 and 2018! We cannot survive as a party with Trump as our leader.

    I see. Better to bring back Obama as a leader because we won historic victories during that time.

    No. I am suggesting that Trump is a massive albatross around our necks.

    I’d rather debunk the Trump is a racist traitor charges and see how that affects our chances.

    What if there is an element of truth about Trump being a racialist, and the whiff of kompromat? That would make it much harder to debunk.

     

    Yes, and what if the moon were made of cheese? It’d be much harder to clear it of rats.

    This is fun! Do another.

    • #151
  2. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    What if there is an element of truth about Trump being a racialist, and the whiff of kompromat? That would make it much harder to debunk.

    Gary is still pining for that long form birth certificate.

    I wonder what will happen when he reads it?

    Will Gary’s birtherism continue?

    • #152
  3. EDISONPARKS Member
    EDISONPARKS
    @user_54742

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    We lost the House of Representatives in 2018.

    You wanted Republicans to lose it. That’s the sort of Republican you are.

    It does defy logic that the guy can openly campaign and contribute money for the (D)’s to win the 2018 Congress, then turn around and use the fact the (R)’s lost the 2018 Congress as a detriment attributable to the fact Trump is President.

    Gary should be celebrating the 2108 election resulted in exactly the way he campaigned.  If Gary actually desired an (R) majority in the House then logic dictates he would have campaigned and contributed money to the (R)’s …not the (D)’s.

    • #153
  4. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    EDISONPARKS (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    We lost the House of Representatives in 2018.

    You wanted Republicans to lose it. That’s the sort of Republican you are.

    It does defy logic that the guy can openly campaign and contribute money for the (D)’s to win the 2018 Congress, then turn around and use the fact the (R)’s lost the 2018 Congress as a detriment attributable to the fact Trump is President.

    Gary should be celebrating the 2108 election resulted in exactly the way he campaigned. If Gary actually desired an (R) majority in the House then logic dictates he would have campaigned and contributed money to the (R)’s …not the (D)’s.

    In 2016, we won the total national House vote 49.1% to 48.0% for a 1.1% Republican advantage. In 2018, we lost the total national House vote 44.8% to 53.4% for a 8.6% Democrat advantage.  This was an incredible 9.7% swing which is even more remarkable given that the electorate bends Republican in non-Presidential elections.

    Supporting House Democrats in 2018 was caused by two factors, Trump’s authoritarian bullying, and the complete institutional lack of any check by Republicans in the House or Senate.  If Trump was not so lacking in character, or there had been an institutional spine in Congress, I wouldn’t have been pushed to support Democrats for the House in 2018.

    I did not support Democrats in the Senate.  As Cocaine Mitch McConnell has said, the Senate is in the personnel business, most notably confirming Judges.  My brother is a physician and he gives the over-under life expectancy for Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg (“RBG”) at 6 months.  If so, I hope that Trump nominates Amy Coney Barrett (“ACB”).  That will be an epic battle.

    • #154
  5. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    the complete institutional lack of any check by Republicans in the House or Senate.

    I need someone to help me get really worried about this. I am just too stupid to see it.

    • #155
  6. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    the complete institutional lack of any check by Republicans in the House or Senate.

    I need someone to help me get really worried about this. I am just too stupid to see it.

    That is because it wasn’t there.

    • #156
  7. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    What if there is an element of truth about Trump being a racialist, and the whiff of kompromat? That would make it much harder to debunk.

    Whoa! What is this “racialist” thing? I thought he was a r-r-r-racist! You mean someone who categorizes people based on their skin color and wants certain categories treated differently than others? I believe there’s a new word for that — “intersectionality” — and the outlook rules on the Left.

    If Donald Trump is a racist, he’s a terribly bad one, given how blacks and browns are prospering right now in DT’s America. I don’t have a better insight on Donald Trump’s conscience than anyone else, but I suspect he wouldn’t care if you’re purple-skinned, so long as you make him look good (by achieving success). And I do have a little testimony to support the idea.

    As for compromising material on his relationship with Russia, you’ll have to provide something factual, not out of the fevered imaginations (wishful thinking) of people who oppose Republicans and conservative constitutionalists at every turn. We know he tried to work a deal to build a hotel over there. Uh, so what? Building is what he does. What else you got?

    You’re not living in 1980’s America anymore, Gary. The people and their voting habits have changed. You think Trump’s an albatross. Many of us think he’s the only Republican who could have beaten Hillary (because he fought her and the press when others would have been cowed — remember when he seated Bill Clinton’s victims as his guests at one of the debates??). And, despite his rough character, he’s doing a helluva job. 

    P.S. I love Vivian! She’s an American!!

    • #157
  8. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    Trump’s authoritarian bullying, and the complete institutional lack of any check by Republicans in the House or Senate. If Trump was not so lacking in character, or there had been an institutional spine in Congress, I wouldn’t have been pushed to support Democrats for the House in 2018.

    It isn’t them, it is you.

    • #158
  9. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    What is this “racialist” thing?

    It’s a term they use in Europe. It basically means someone that plays identity politics but isn’t a racist. I don’t agree with characterizing Trump that way, but it’s plausible.

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    You’re not living in 1980’s America anymore, Gary. The people and their voting habits have changed. You think Trump’s an albatross. Many of us think he’s the only Republican who could have beaten Hillary (because he fought her and the press when others would have been cowed — remember when he seated Bill Clinton’s victims as his guests at one of the debates??). And, despite his rough character, he’s doing a helluva job. 

    I completely agree with this.

    • #159
  10. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    As for compromising material on his relationship with Russia, you’ll have to provide something factual,

    Gary hates President Trump for continuing Hillary’s birtherism.

    To Gary, Trump = Birtherism.

    What Gary doesn’t realize is that kompromat = birtherism.

    Thus Gary commits the same sin as President Trump.

    • #160
  11. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Instugator (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    the complete institutional lack of any check by Republicans in the House or Senate.

    I need someone to help me get really worried about this. I am just too stupid to see it.

    That is because it wasn’t there.

    He brings it up all the time and I don’t get what he’s talking about. Plus, reportedly, it’s been notoriously absent for decades, generally, anyway. 

    • #161
  12. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    I thought that Mueller finally put to bed this nonsense about “Kompromat,” a word that entered our collective vocabulary only a couple years ago, thanks to the efforts of the leftist media.

    At least “birthers” had some grounds for being suspicious, given that Obama promoted himself as being a native Kenyan.

    “Collusion-Truthers” have nothing.

    • #162
  13. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):
    At least “birthers” had some grounds for being suspicious, given that Obama promoted himself as being a native Kenyan.

    Anything to sell the books man.

    • #163
  14. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Instugator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):
    At least “birthers” had some grounds for being suspicious, given that Obama promoted himself as being a native Kenyan.

    Anything to sell the books man.

    Most likely. I suspect that, like Fauxcahontas, he invented an exotic origin so that he could meet and have lunch with interesting people and advance further in academia. In the end, he was just a boring Red Diaper Baby.

    • #164
  15. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Anytime Anti-Trumpers use the words kompromat or Charlottesville, I know that we’re about to get a pile of nonsense built on a foundation of lies.

    • #165
  16. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    What if there is an element of truth about Trump being a racialist, and the whiff of kompromat? That would make it much harder to debunk.

    Whoa! What is this “racialist” thing? I thought he was a r-r-r-racist! You mean someone who categorizes people based on their skin color and wants certain categories treated differently than others? I believe there’s a new word for that — “intersectionality” — and the outlook rules on the Left.

    If Donald Trump is a racist, he’s a terribly bad one, given how blacks and browns are prospering right now in DT’s America. I don’t have a better insight on Donald Trump’s conscience than anyone else, but I suspect he wouldn’t care if you’re purple-skinned, so long as you make him look good (by achieving success). And I do have a little testimony to support the idea.

    As for compromising material on his relationship with Russia, you’ll have to provide something factual, not out of the fevered imaginations (wishful thinking) of people who oppose Republicans and conservative constitutionalists at every turn. We know he tried to work a deal to build a hotel over there. Uh, so what? Building is what he does. What else you got?

    You’re not living in 1980’s America anymore, Gary. The people and their voting habits have changed. You think Trump’s an albatross. Many of us think he’s the only Republican who could have beaten Hillary

    The 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951.  Since then, like clockwork, the American voters have alternated between the Republican and Democratic parties every 8 years, with only two exceptions, both involving the Greatest President of the Twentieth Century, with Ronald Reagan cutting the Democrats short in 1980, and H.W. essentially winning Reagan’s third term.  I assert that any of the 17 Republican candidates would have won in 2016, and only Trump would manage to lose the popular vote.

    • #166
  17. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Instugator (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):
    At least “birthers” had some grounds for being suspicious, given that Obama promoted himself as being a native Kenyan.

    Anything to sell the books man.

    What bugs me about birtherism and its critics is it misses the point of “natural born” citizenship. Barack Obama’s father was an outspoken commie and his mother was an anti-American leftist. His white grandparents (who he threw under the bus to get elected) made sure to give him a black role model in Frank Marshall Davis — an anti-American commie. The question of the geography of his birth is pointless. The question of his loyalties is everything. He ably represented the interests of Iran, the UN (globalists), the Russians… the US? Not so much.

    • #167
  18. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Anytime Anti-Trumpers use the words kompromat or Charlottesville, I know that we’re about to get a pile of nonsense built on a foundation of lies.

    The Fine People hoax. Was clearly a hoax  all along, yet people even here insisted he called white supremacists fine people. Never happened. 

    • #168
  19. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    What if there is an element of truth about Trump being a racialist, and the whiff of kompromat? That would make it much harder to debunk.

    Whoa! What is this “racialist” thing? I thought he was a r-r-r-racist! You mean someone who categorizes people based on their skin color and wants certain categories treated differently than others? I believe there’s a new word for that — “intersectionality” — and the outlook rules on the Left.

    If Donald Trump is a racist, he’s a terribly bad one, given how blacks and browns are prospering right now in DT’s America. I don’t have a better insight on Donald Trump’s conscience than anyone else, but I suspect he wouldn’t care if you’re purple-skinned, so long as you make him look good (by achieving success). And I do have a little testimony to support the idea.

    As for compromising material on his relationship with Russia, you’ll have to provide something factual, not out of the fevered imaginations (wishful thinking) of people who oppose Republicans and conservative constitutionalists at every turn. We know he tried to work a deal to build a hotel over there. Uh, so what? Building is what he does. What else you got?

    You’re not living in 1980’s America anymore, Gary. The people and their voting habits have changed. You think Trump’s an albatross. Many of us think he’s the only Republican who could have beaten Hillary

    The 22nd Amendment was ratified in 1951. Since then, like clockwork, the American voters have alternated between the Republican and Democratic parties every 8 years, with only two exceptions, both involving the Greatest President of the Twentieth Century, with Ronald Reagan cutting the Democrats short in 1980, and H.W. essentially winning Reagan’s third term. I assert that any of the 17 Republican candidates would have won in 2016, and only Trump would manage to lose the popular vote.

    None of them had the monties to even play on the same field as Hillary and the Left. They’re still trying to be the “new” Reagan in a world of smash-mouth, put your opponent’s husband’s rape victims in the front row at a debate.

    • #169
  20. DrewInWisconsin Member
    DrewInWisconsin
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I assert that any of the 17 Republican candidates would have won in 2016, and only Trump would manage to lose the popular vote.

    Non-falsifiable theories are comforting, I suppose.

    • #170
  21. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

     

    • #171
  22. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Ricochet Editor Jon Gabriel has posted about AG Barr’s 4 page letter, and there is a hyperlink to a PDF of it.  

    • #172
  23. Gary Robbins Member
    Gary Robbins
    @GaryRobbins

    Percival (View Comment):

    I suggest that you go to the source material, namely the 4 page PDF that Ricochet Editor Jon Gabriel has a hyperlink to.

    • #173
  24. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):
    I assert that any of the 17 Republican candidates would have won in 2016, and only Trump would manage to lose the popular vote.

    Non-falsifiable theories are comforting, I suppose.

    When you have nothing else.

    • #174
  25. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Weeping (View Comment):

    To be fair to Gary, these things weren’t being advocated by any Democrats during the last election; were they?

    Democrats didn’t just suddenly go crazy in the last two years either. If you didn’t like Donald Trump, you always have the choice of abstaining. But no one can say they didn’t know what they were voting for when they put Democrats in power.

    The Green New Deal, the Anti-Semitism, and abortion until birth are all part of the most extreme left, and do not enjoy anything near to majority support. The 40 Dems who flipped seats are among the most conservative parts of the Democratic caucus. See Lamb, Brian (D-PA).

    You’ve just confirmed what I’ve long suspected about Nevers and liberals who still vote for Democrats. You don’t know what we’re up against with the Left — the most ruthless, power-mad, self-justified (self-important), ends-justify-the-means people on the planet. You don’t know the enemy.

    Do you realize that many liberals see Republicans, especially during the time of Trump, to be the most ruthless, power-mad, self-justified (self-important), ends-justify-the means, dishonest, planet killers, and racists on the planet.

    And Reagan was going to blow up the planet by starting World War III at 12:02 p.m. on 1/20/81 if he was elected, as soon as he took his hand off the Bible Chief Justice Burger was holding. The most rabidly partisan Democrats brought the crazy 39 years ago — there just weren’t as many media outlets, let alone social media sites, for the volume to be as loud as it is today.

    I remember worrying about Reagan before his election.

    You were wrong about Reagan, too.

    • #175
  26. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Moderator Note:

    personal attacks

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Jon1979 (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin (View Comment):

    Weeping (View Comment):

    To be fair to Gary, these things weren’t being advocated by any Democrats during the last election; were they?

    Democrats didn’t just suddenly go crazy in the last two years either. If you didn’t like Donald Trump, you always have the choice of abstaining. But no one can say they didn’t know what they were voting for when they put Democrats in power.

    The Green New Deal, the Anti-Semitism, and abortion until birth are all part of the most extreme left, and do not enjoy anything near to majority support. The 40 Dems who flipped seats are among the most conservative parts of the Democratic caucus. See Lamb, Brian (D-PA).

    You’ve just confirmed what I’ve long suspected about Nevers and liberals who still vote for Democrats. You don’t know what we’re up against with the Left — the most ruthless, power-mad, self-justified (self-important), ends-justify-the-means people on the planet. You don’t know the enemy.

    Do you realize that many liberals see Republicans, especially during the time of Trump, to be the most ruthless, power-mad, self-justified (self-important), ends-justify-the means, dishonest, planet killers, and racists on the planet.

    And Reagan was going to blow up the planet by starting World War III at 12:02 p.m. on 1/20/81 if he was elected, as soon as he took his hand off the Bible Chief Justice Burger was holding. The most rabidly partisan Democrats brought the crazy 39 years ago — there just weren’t as many media outlets, let alone social media sites, for the volume to be as loud as it is today.

    I remember worrying about Reagan before his election.

    You were wrong about Reagan, too.

    [redacted]

    • #176
  27. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    They’re still trying to be the “new” Reagan in a world of smash-mouth, put your opponent’s husband’s rape victims in the front row at a debate.

    That was awesome.

    • #177
  28. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Moderator Note:

    Rude ad-hominem

    Gary Robbins (View Comment):

    Ricochet Editor Jon Gabriel has posted about AG Barr’s 4 page letter, and there is a hyperlink to a PDF of it.

    [redacted].Let’s all go read the doggone pdf.

    • #178
  29. Western Chauvinist Member
    Western Chauvinist
    @WesternChauvinist

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    They’re still trying to be the “new” Reagan in a world of smash-mouth, put your opponent’s husband’s rape victims in the front row at a debate.

    That was awesome.

    Yes. Yes it was. That’s when I thought he might have a chance.

    • #179
  30. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):

    Instugator (View Comment):

    Western Chauvinist (View Comment):
    They’re still trying to be the “new” Reagan in a world of smash-mouth, put your opponent’s husband’s rape victims in the front row at a debate.

    That was awesome.

    Yes. Yes it was. That’s when I thought he might have a chance.

    I hate thinking about and analyzing this stuff, but this really is an issue. I wish it were different, but it isn’t.

    • #180
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.