Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 13
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2019/07/05/...

Mueller sternly declared, engaged in "multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every American."

"I don't think we've ever encountered a more aggressive or direct campaign to interfere in our election process," then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told a Senate hearing.

While the 448-page Mueller report found no conspiracy between Donald Trump's campaign and Russia, it offered voluminous details to support the sweeping conclusion that the Kremlin worked to secure Trump's victory.

But a close examination of the report shows that none of those headline assertions are supported by the report’s evidence or other publicly available sources. They are further undercut by investigative shortcomings and the conflicts of interest of key players involved:

Mueller doesn't know how the DNC emails were stolen or how they ended up at Wikileaks.

Erroneous Mueller report timeline. According to it Assange announced the publication of Democratic Party emails not only before he received the documents but before he even communicated with the source that provided them.

It is doubtful Guccifer 2.0 supplied the stolen emails to Assange.

Mueller didn't even interview Assange.

U.S. intelligence officials relied upon Crowdstrikeon the forensics of CrowdStrike, a private contractor for the DNC that was not a neutral party, much as “Russian dossier” compiler Christopher Steele, also a DNC contractor, was not a neutral party.

The government allowed CrowdStrike to decide what was revealed or not regarding evidence of hacking.

The Mueller report does not allege that the Russian government carried out the social media campaign but a private Russian entity.

"Mueller also falls far short of proving that the Russian social campaign was sophisticated, or even more than minimally related to the 2016 election. As with the collusion and Russian hacking allegations, Democratic officials had a central and overlooked hand in generating the alarm about Russian social media activity."

The "suspicions that triggered the initial collusion probe; the allegations of Russian interference; and the intelligence assessment that purported to validate the interference allegations"was pushed by Brennan who has turned out to be hardly neutral.

Thus the Mueller report does not present sufficient evidence to substantiate that "sweeping and systematic" Russian government election interference occurred.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
"But a close examination of the report......'

I am pretty sure that the author of the article you are quoting is relying on the fact that most people in his target audience (ignorant Trump cultists) have not actually read the Mueller report.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
I am pretty sure that the author of the article you are quoting is relying on the fact that most people in his target audience (ignorant Trump cultists) have not actually read the Mueller report.

A common assumption of those infected with TDS.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"A common assumption of those infected with TDS."

Not an assumption, it is a fact.

Have you read the Mueller report? All of it? And not just had cherry picked taken out of context parts fed to you by your poor news sources?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
Have you read the Mueller report? All of it?

Yes

Have you?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Have you read the Mueller report? All of it?

Yes

Have you?



The deafening sound of crickets.

Kathleen
amused
Print the post Back To Top