SOURCE:
NOTE:
This blog has explained
in detail many times why
Robert Mueller acted as
a political hack, strongly
biased in favor of Democrats.
His hatchet job "report" was
the result of 18 angry Democrats
investigating only Republicans.
The only Russian interference
in the 2016 election that could
have affected the results,
was the Russian disinformation
contained in the Fusion GPS
Christopher Steele Dossier,
intended to smear candidate
Trump.
Robert Mueller's team
did not care to investigate
the Christopher Steele Dossier,
paid for by Hillary Clinton,
which launched an FBI
investigation of the
Trump campaign at least
three months before
Election Day, including
spying and wiretapping.
The Mueller Report fails to
supports its primary claim
of "sweeping and systematic"
Russian government election
interference in 2016.
At his May 2019 press conference,
special counsel Robert Mueller
emphasized the Russian government
engaged in "multiple, systematic
efforts to interfere in our election,
and that allegation deserves
the attention of every American."
The 448-page Mueller Report
found no conspiracy between
Donald Trump's campaign,
or any other Americans,
and Russia.
The Report claims Russian
military intelligence officers
hacked and leaked embarrassing
Democratic Party documents,
and a government-linked
troll farm orchestrated
a social media campaign
that denigrated Hillary Clinton,
and promoted Trump.
None of those
headline assertions
are supported by
the Report’s evidence.
The report uses
very vague language
to describe key events,
indicating that Mueller
does not actually know
whether Russian intelligence
officers stole Democratic
Party e-mails, or how
those e-mails
were transferred
to WikiLeaks.
The report's timeline
of events defies logic.
According to the report,
WikiLeaks announced
the publication of
Democratic e-mails
before receiving the
documents, and before
Julian Assange
communicated
with the source that
eventually provided them.
Mueller suggests an alleged
Russian cutout called
Guccifer 2.0 supplied
stolen e-mails to
WikiLeaks' Assange.
Mueller’s decision
to not interview Assange,
who wanted to talk,
is very suspicious.
The Obama Administration
was never allowed to analyze
Democratic National
Committee computers.
Instead, they relied on CrowdStrike,
a private contractor for the DNC,
not a neutral party, just like
the "Trump Dossier” compiler,
Christopher Steele,
was also a DNC contractor,
and not a neutral party.
Two Democrat-hired contractors
are the source of the allegations
against Russia.
The Obama Administration
even allowed CrowdStrike and the
Democratic Party's legal counsel
to submit redacted records.
Mueller’s Report blames the (lame)
Russian social media campaign
on "a private Russian entity"
known as the Internet Research
Agency (IRA), not the Russian
government.
John Brennan, then director of the CIA,
generated suspicions that triggered
the initial collusion probe, with
allegations of Russian interference;
and the intelligence assessment that
claimed to validate his allegations.
Brennan has since revealed himself
to be far from a neutral party -- perhaps
the harshest critic of Donald Trump
among high level members of the
Obama Administration.
Mueller does not present
sufficient evidence
to substantiate
the Report's core finding of
"sweeping and systematic"
Russian government election
interference in 2016.
As Mueller prepares to testify
before Democrat-led House
committees later this month,
many questions about his claims
of far-reaching Russian influence
must be asked.
