CrowdStrikeOut: Mueller’s Own Report Undercuts Its Core Russia-Meddling Claims

Real Clear Investigations ^ | July 5, 2019 | Aaron Mate

[libstripper]

At a May press conference capping his tenure as special counsel, Robert Mueller emphasized what he called "the central allegation" of the two-year Russia probe. The Russian government, Mueller sternly declared, engaged in "multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every American." Mueller's comments echoed a January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) asserting with "high confidence" that Russia conducted a sweeping 2016 election influence campaign. "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.

[libstripper]

More doubt cast on "Russian hacking" claims.

[cpdiii]

I suspect Seith Rich stole the data from the DNC when he worked for the DNC. He gave it to Wikileaks. Seith Rich was murdered.

Seith was a big time Bernie supporter. I suspect he was disgusted at what he saw in the corruption of the DNC in support of Hillary. He died, he was murdered.

[867V309]

I hate it when neither the quote nor the reply has anything to do with the headline.

[volunbeer]

Thanks. This is a very long piece, but it does a fantastic job of laying out the assertions of the Mueller report and the utter lack of any kind of credible evidence to substantiate the claims. In fact, it makes a pretty damning case in most instances that it was all bovine excrement.

It had some stuff I had not heard before and shows why the Mueller report was a hatchet job.

[djpg]

The Mueller report is being treated as a judicial finding. It is not. It is a document by a prosecutor for the purpose of prosecution. No one should take a prosecutor’s word for anything unless it can be verified.

[Boomer One]

Simply put, the Mueller report “is much ado about nothing”. How can the DNC and Crowd Strike not be pursued for obstruction of justice? Seems to me Mueller had the wrong target in his sights.

[Pearls Before Swine]

It is a document by a prosecutor for the purpose of prosecution. No one should take a prosecutor’s word for anything unless it can be verified.

It is said that a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich. Mueller (actually Weissman) wasn't able to do that. The best he could come up with was unindictable baloney.

[Brilliant]

I don’t think they really conducted any meaningful investigation of Russian influence. They just reiterated Dem talking points and prosecuted Trump supporters for unrelated charges.

[Texas Fossil]

Seth

Bump

[Whenifhow]

Sketchy Business – RCI Review Questions Unsubstantiated Conclusions of Mueller Report…

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2019/07/06/sketchy-business-rcp-review-questions-unsubstantiated-conclusions-of-mueller-report/

Real Clear Investigations has a deep dive into the underpinnings of the Mueller report surrounding the sketchy conclusions about Russian interference. What Real Clear outlines parallels our own review where most of the substance claimed by Andrew Weissmann, Robert Mueller and Rod Rosenstein is essentially baseless.

video
New report claims to have uncovered conflicts of interest inside Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTkK-DSeFNs

[lepton]

Bump