"Where you can find almost anything with A Click A Pick!"
Go to content

The Mueller Investigation Page 2

News > The Mueller Investigation
Tracking the Mueller investigation into how the Russians infiltrated the Trump campaign and the Republican Party and conspired with the Trump campaign to help get Donald J. Trump elected president of the United States of America. The Mueller investigation has exposed illegal schemes across international borders and produced more than 190 criminal charges. So far Mueller has indicted 34 people (26 are Russian nationals), three Russian companies and 6 former Trump advisers, 7 people (six former Trump advisers) have pleaded guilty. It not a witch hunt it’s a mole hunt. What we do not know about the Trump-Russia Affair is far worse than the information that is available to the public, Americans should be very worried that Donald J. Trump is a Russian asset and the Russians may have infiltrated our government at the highest level. Get the latest on the investigation mueller investigation. The Robert Mueller Russia Investigation in to how the Russians infiltrated the Trump campaign and the Republican Party and colluded with the Trump campaign to help get Donald J. Trump elected president. Trump maybe a Russian mole that Putin controls. The Trump Russia affair is worst that Watergate. Trump and Putin maybe working against American interest find out more. Find more about Robert Mueller, Donald J. Trump, Putin and Russia.

On April 18, 2019, a redacted copy of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s “Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election” (Mueller Report) was released to the public. The Mueller report builds on the U.S. intelligence community’s conclusion that there were two campaigns to elect Donald Trump— one run by Trump and one run by the Russian government. The Mueller report clearly identified collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, despite repeated denials from Trump and many of his senior advisers and close associates that there were any connections between the two campaigns. A total of 251 contacts between Trump’s team and Russia-linked operatives have been identified, including at least 37 meetings. And we know that at least 33 high-ranking campaign officials and Trump advisers were aware of contacts with Russia-linked operatives during the campaign and transition, including Trump himself. None of these contacts were ever reported to the proper authorities. Instead, the Trump team tried to cover up every single one of them. Beyond the many lies the Trump team told to the American people, Mueller himself repeatedly remarked on how far the Trump team was willing to go to hide their Russian contacts, stating, “the investigation established that several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office, and to Congress, about their interactions with Russian-affiliated individuals and related matters. Those lies materially impaired the investigation of Russian election interference.” Below is a comprehensive chronological list of the contacts that have been discovered to date and some of the many lies Trump’s campaign, transition team, and White House told to hide them.

In  the summer of 2017, President Trump told Corey Lewandowski, his former  campaign manager, to have then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions thwart  Robert Mueller’s investigation, according to the special counsel’s report. Trump also told Lewandowski to fire Sessions if he refused a meeting to talk about the issue, the report says. The  report details a meeting between Trump and Lewandowski, which came just  two days after Trump met with former White House counsel Don McGahn and  asked him to have Mueller removed. In the meeting, Trump “brought up  Sessions and criticized his recusal from the Russia investigation,” the  report says. He  then asked Lewandowski to deliver a message to Sessions. The attorney  general, Trump told Lewandowski, should give a speech saying the  following:

WASHINGTON — Robert Mueller objected to Attorney General William Barr's characterization of the principal findings of the Russia investigation and asked the attorney general on multiple occasions to release the special counsel's prepared summaries of the report. Mueller communicated his objections to Barr in a letter on March 27, three days after the attorney general disclosed the special counsel's conclusions in a summary letter clearing President Donald Trump of having obstructed the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Trump relied on that summary letter to claim total exoneration. But in his letter, the first clear window into Mueller's thoughts since he became special counsel two years ago, he said Barr's summary of the investigation's principal conclusions "did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance" of the probe. "There is now a public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation," Mueller wrote. "This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations."

Attorney General William P. Barr is set to face two days of grilling by congressional Democrats. Fortuitously, this comes just after we’ve learned that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III privately criticized Barr’s highly misleading summary of the Mueller report, which gave President Trump weeks to falsely spin Mueller’s findings as “complete and total exoneration.” Mueller wrote a letter to Barr only three days after Barr released his four-page summary, as The Post reports, complaining that Barr’s summary “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions.” “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation,” Mueller continued, adding that this will undercut “full public confidence” in the investigation’s findings, thus undermining a “central purpose” of the appointment of a special counsel in the first place.

‘This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel,’ the letter said. Special counsel Robert Mueller wrote a letter to Attorney General William Barr last month complaining that a four-page memo Barr wrote characterizing Mueller’s findings “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of the Russia investigation, two senior Justice Department officials confirmed to POLITICO on Tuesday.
Mueller sent the letter to Barr on March 27, three days after Barr issued his four-page summary, and cited “public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation.”

CNN's Laura Jarrett reads the letter special counsel Robert Mueller sent Attorney General William Barr regarding the Mueller report summary.

Special counsel Robert Mueller told Attorney General William Barr in a letter sent in late March that Barr's description of the Russia investigation’s conclusions did not "capture the context, nature, and substance" of his findings, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday. “The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions,” Mueller wrote in the letter, according to the Post. “There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.” Mueller’s letter was reportedly sent on March 27, just days after Barr released a four-page letter laying out what he described as Mueller’s principal conclusions. In it, Mueller reportedly requested that Barr release the introductions and executive summaries from his lengthy report on Russian interference and made suggestions of how the sections could be redacted to conceal sensitive material. “Release at this time would alleviate the misunderstandings that have arisen and would answer congressional and public questions about the nature and outcome of our investigation,” Mueller wrote, according to the Post.

House Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday said Attorney General William Barr "must answer" for reports that special counsel Robert Mueller objected to Barr's summarization of the conclusions in the investigation into Russian election interference. Nadler's comment comes after the Washington Post reported that Mueller sent Barr a letter in late March expressing concern that Barr did not "fully capture the context, nature, and substance" of the special counsel's probe. "I have demanded the letter & Barr must answer for this. Mueller must be allowed to testify," Nadler tweeted shortly after the Post published its report, which comes a day before Barr is slated to testify before Congress.

Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III wrote a letter in late March complaining to Attorney General William P. Barr that a four-page memo to Congress describing the principal conclusions of the investigation into President Trump “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance” of Mueller’s work, according to a copy of the letter reviewed Tuesday by The Washington Post. At the time the letter was sent on March 27, Barr had announced that Mueller had not found a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian officials seeking to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. Barr also said Mueller had not reached a conclusion about whether Trump had tried to obstruct justice, but Barr reviewed the evidence and found it insufficient to support such a charge. Days after Barr’s announcement, Mueller wrote a previously unknown private letter to the Justice Department, which revealed a degree of dissatisfaction with the public discussion of Mueller’s work that shocked senior Justice Department officials, according to people familiar with the discussions.

WASHINGTON — Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, wrote a letter in late March to Attorney General William P. Barr objecting to his early description of the Russia investigation’s conclusions that appeared to clear President Trump on possible obstruction of justice, according to the Justice Department and three people with direct knowledge of the communication between the two men. The letter adds to the growing evidence of a rift between them and is another sign of the anger among the special counsel’s investigators about Mr. Barr’s characterization of their findings, which allowed Mr. Trump to wrongly claim he had been vindicated. It was unclear what specific objections Mr. Mueller raised in his letter. Mr. Barr defended his descriptions of the investigation’s conclusions in conversations with Mr. Mueller over the days after he sent the letter, according to two people with knowledge of their discussions.

Tech challenges prevented special counsel from establishing full picture of what happened. Special counsel Robert S. Mueller III concluded that there was insufficient evidence to bring criminal charges against individuals connected with President Donald Trump’s campaign for their ties to Russia, but he said the investigation faced numerous challenges, including technological ones, in establishing a full picture of what transpired in 2015 and 2016. “While the investigation identified numerous links between individuals with ties to the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump Campaign, the evidence was not sufficient to support criminal charges,” Mueller wrote in his report made public Thursday by the Justice Department. The special counsel’s office “learned that some of the individuals we interviewed or whose conduct we investigated — including some associated with the Trump Campaign deleted relevant communications or communicated during the relevant period using applications that feature encryption or that do not provide for long term retention of data or communication records,” the report said. “In such cases the Office was not able to corroborate witness statements through comparison to contemporaneous communications or fully question witnesses about statements that appeared inconsistent with the other known facts.”

Washington (CNN) The Mueller report documents at least 77 specific instances where President Donald Trump's campaign staff, administration officials and family members, Republican backers and his associates lied or made false assertions (sometimes unintentionally) to the public, Congress, or authorities, according to a new CNN analysis. The plurality of lies came from Trump himself, and most of them took place while he was president. The redacted version of the 448-page report released by the Justice Department earlier this month didn't find conspiracy or coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Special counsel Robert Mueller did not decide whether Trump obstructed justice in violation of the law, though he investigated it thoroughly and found in several instances both potentially obstructive behavior and motive.

(Reuters) - Numerous investigations spun out of U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s probe are still alive and kicking, presenting potential ongoing legal and political risk for President Donald Trump, some of his former advisers and others. Even though Trump avoided a knockout blow from the April 18 Mueller report, the special counsel disclosed more than a dozen active criminal inquiries that will play out for months to come, some possibly into the 2020 election campaign season. Details on most of these cases are unclear as they were redacted in the 448-page report. Only two were not blacked out: one case versus former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen; and one versus Greg Craig, a former White House counsel in the Obama administration.


President Trump was furious. He had just learned that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation went beyond Russia’s interference in the 2016 campaign and into the White House — and that Trump himself was now under scrutiny for his actions in office. The next day, he attempted to oust Mueller, only to be thwarted by his White House counsel, according to the special counsel’s report. So Trump turned to the one person he could long count on to do his bidding: Corey Lewandowski, his former campaign manager, described by senior White House advisers to investigators as a Trump “devotee.” In a private Oval Office meeting, the president dictated a message he wanted delivered to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions: that he needed to give a speech announcing he was limiting the scope of the investigation.

Special counsel Robert Mueller painted a damning picture of the Trump administration, even as he handed the president a victory on the central issue of collusion with Russia. The Trump White House, as portrayed by Mueller, revolves around an impulsive and angry president who issues orders that underlings often defy, ignore or seek to delay. The depiction will enrage a president who fixates on the concept of strength and is hypersensitive about any suggestion that he is not in absolute control of his administration.

The special counsel’s findings validate the concerns of anyone who feared how Donald Trump would wield presidential power. Mueller’s report cataloged dozens of behaviors from Trump and his advisers—from sharing internal campaign polling data and strategy with a suspected agent of a foreign power to repeatedly lying to the public to systematically seeking to thwart investigations—that would have inspired volcanic eruptions of outrage from congressional Republicans and the conservative-media infrastructure if perpetrated by a Democratic president.

These are the highlights of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report. According to the report, based on hundreds witness interviews and the  examination of thousands of documents furnished by the White House and  the Trump campaign, the president waged a public and private campaign to  discourage potential witnesses from cooperating with the investigation,  and privately attempted to “control” the investigation as it delved  into the conduct of himself and his closest advisors during and after  the presidential campaign.



As president, he tried to control the investigation and fire Mueller. As a candidate, he appeared to know what WikiLeaks planned, ordered Hillary’s emails to be found, and more.

More than two dozen times, Trump’s answers to Mueller included phrases “I can’t remember” or “I do not recall.”

Even with redactions, Mueller’s report is clear Trump undermined the Russia investigation.




Mueller laid out the evidence for members of Congress to take action against President Trump. Will they?

Debunking Mueller’s ‘Conflicts’











After the Justice Department released a redacted version of the special counsel’s report on Thursday, Times reporters shared excerpts and analysis.





His strategy to spin first and release later left many questions unanswered and raised the specter of a cover-up.






A 1989 memo Barr wrote summarizing the “principal conclusions” of a D.O.J. ruling apparently left out several of those principal conclusions.

Those close to Mueller’s team say there was “immediate displeasure” over Barr’s characterization of the special counsel’s findings—particularly on the obstruction question.

Want an impeachable offense? Trump covered up the last Russian attack and seems to be begging for another




Members of the special counsel's team are reportedly angered by the attorney general's portrayal of their report

They’ve made 18 extraordinary claims about what the special counsel concluded. Let’s see if they’re right.



As Bill Barr's "summary" begins to unravel, a new picture comes into focus: Unindicted doesn't mean innocent

The attorney general had neutral ways to relay what the special counsel found. Instead, he’s being coy. It’s hard not to infer bad reasons from how he’s acting.

Legal experts and lawmakers say the attorney general is mishandling the special counsel's report.





To suppress and spin the Mueller report, GOP pulls out the playbook of lies it used to sell us on invading Iraq




The special counsel’s most interesting findings about Trump and Russia might be in the counterintelligence portion of his report.
By Natasha Bertrand
On Sunday afternoon, Attorney General Bill Barr presented a summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s conclusions that contained a few sentences from Mueller’s final report, one of which directly addressed the question of collusion between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russia: “The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” In a footnote, Barr explained that Mueller had defined “coordination” as an “agreement—tacit or express—between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on election interference.” Mueller’s full report has not been made available to the public yet, so it’s not clear whether it sets forth everything the special counsel’s office learned over the course of its nearly two-year investigation—including findings about conduct that was perhaps objectionable but not criminal—or whether it is more tailored and explains only Mueller’s prosecution and declination decisions. But national-security and intelligence experts tell me that Mueller’s decision not to charge Trump or his campaign team with a conspiracy is far from dispositive, and that the underlying evidence the special counsel amassed over two years could prove as useful as a conspiracy charge to understanding the full scope of Russia’s election interference in 2016. “As described by Barr, at least, Mueller’s report was very focused on criminal-law standards and processes,” said David Kris, a founder of Culper Partners, who served as the assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s National Security Division under former President Barack Obama. “We won’t know for sure if that is the case, and if it is the case, why Mueller confined himself in that way, until we see the full report.” Kris noted, however, that “there is no question that a counterintelligence investigation would have a wider aperture than a strict criminal inquiry as applied here, and would be concerned, for example, with the motivations and any sub-criminal misconduct of the principal actors.” A counterintelligence probe, he added, would ask more than whether the evidence collected is sufficient to obtain a criminal conviction—it could provide necessary information to the public about why the president is making certain policy decisions. “The American people rightly should expect more from their public servants than merely avoiding criminal liability,” Kris said. A spokesman for the House Intelligence Committee said in a statement on Monday that in light of Barr’s memo “and our need to understand Special Counsel Mueller’s areas of inquiry and evidence his office uncovered, we are working in parallel with other Committees to bring in senior officials from the DOJ, FBI and SCO to ensure that our Committee is fully and currently informed about the SCO’s investigation, including all counterintelligence information.”

Special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation "did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities" during the 2016 campaign, he wrote in his final report. Attorney General William Barr summarized the report's findings in a letter to lawmakers Sunday. White House press secretary Sarah Sanders called the report a "total and complete exoneration of the President of the United States." Barr says Mueller described the facts surrounding his investigation into allegations of obstruction of justice but made no determination as to whether President Trump committed a crime, deferring to Barr. The report "does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him," Barr quotes Mueller as writing.

What resources did it take to produce the results of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation? WSJ’s Jason Bellini breaks down the numbers.

By Katelyn Polantz, Erica Orden and Kara Scannell, CNN
(CNN) As Robert Mueller exits stage left, the Justice Department will continue to pursue a handful of investigations—and potentially more prosecutions -- that began with or were bolstered by the special counsel's work. And a significant group of them still focus around President Donald Trump.
The still-live investigations range from an expansive probe into the Trump inaugural committee, to various investigations relating to former top Trump campaign officials Paul Manafort and Rick Gates, to tips that stemmed from Trump personal attorney Michael Cohen's experience with Trump and his family's company. It's possible other investigations are being conducted quietly, as well. In all, Mueller leaves behind a mess of prosecutors in federal and state government still collecting documents, interviewing witnesses and prosecuting cases that may keep Trump's family and associates on edge for months. Much of the apparent action so far has been out of the powerful, insular US Attorney's Office in Manhattan. The Southern District of New York office is already looking into donations and expenditures of the Trump inaugural, into the Trump Organization, into allegations from Cohen related to campaign finance and a possible suggested pardon. They're also investigating well-known US lobbyists who worked for Ukraine. Prosecutors from state and local offices and other federal prosecutor offices are also getting involved in the sprawling set of cases. The inaugural investigation. Federal prosecutors from the Southern District of New York in February sent a wide-ranging subpoena to the Trump inaugural committee, marking a major step in what could be a devastating probe in Trump's political world. The Manhattan-based prosecutors were seeking virtually every piece of documentation related to the inaugural's donors, vendors and finances. The subpoena, which was signed by Manhattan US Attorney Geoffrey Berman, disclosed that prosecutors are investigating a broad array of potential crimes related to the inauguration's business conduct: conspiracy against the US, false statements, mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering, inaugural committee disclosure violations and violations of laws prohibiting contributions by foreign nations and contributions in the name of another person, also known as straw donors. The subpoena also specifically sought information on a donor named Imaad Zuberi and his investment firm, Avenue Ventures LLC, which donated $900,000 to the inaugural fund, according to Federal Election Commission records.

By Jacqueline Thomsen
The end of special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation is shifting the spotlight to federal prosecutors in President Trump's hometown. While all eyes this weekend are on the Department of Justice and Mueller’s conclusions, the end of the special counsel’s report won’t finish all of the investigations into Trump. The U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York is reportedly already carrying out a series of probes related to the president, including efforts focused on Trump's inaugural committee. It is also overseeing an investigation into potential campaign finance violations tied to the president. Trump and his allies are well aware of the investigations and the dangers of the New York prosecutors. The office is legendary for its ruthless and broad investigations and has shown a willing to take on big names from mafia bosses to celebrities to economic powerhouses. Legal experts told The Hill that even as the Mueller probe ends, SDNY could pose an even greater threat to the president, his family and his businesses. “That office has been very aggressive about going after high-profile targets,” said former federal prosecutor Kendall Coffey, who called the Manhattan attorney’s office “utterly fearless.” “Anybody that might be in their bullseye ought to be mighty worried,” Coffey added. Jonathan Turley, a professor at GW Law School, said that charges pursued by SDNY could have a statute of limitations that extend beyond Trump’s term, meaning that Trump could be indicted once he leaves office. “If the president was found to be part of a criminal conspiracy or violation, it’s possible that they could proceed with charges after the election,” said Turley, an opinions contributor to The Hill. The White House and Trump attorney Jay Sekulow did not respond to requests for comment for this story. Documents from the federal raids on former Trump attorney Michael Cohen released Tuesday indicated that federal prosecutors in New York are probing a potential campaign finance violation. Cohen has publicly implicated the president in the scheme to make hush-money payments to women alleging affairs, as have court filings from SDNY. Trump has denied any wrongdoing in the case. The New York Times also reported Saturday that the Manhattan attorney’s office is conducting several investigations tied to the president, including one into his inaugural committee and two others linked to former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort.

By Kristine Phillips, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON – The investigation that has cast a cloud over Donald Trump's presidency is over. Special Counsel Robert Mueller submitted his final and confidential report on Friday afternoon, signaling the end of the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and possible links to Trump's campaign. Attorney General William Barr announced its end in a letter to top lawmakers on the House and Senate judiciary committees. "The Special Counsel has submitted to me today a 'confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions' he has reached," Barr wrote. "I am reviewing the report and anticipate that I may be in a position to advise you of the Special Counsel's principal conclusions as soon as this weekend." We know the report is "comprehensive," as described by Department of Justice spokeswoman Kerri Kupec. We know that 34 people and entities were indicted and that a half a dozen of them are former Trump advisers and aides who were convicted of federal crimes. Here's what we know, what we don't know, and what we might never find out: Did Mueller find collusion? We don't know — yet. The investigation did not charge any Americans with coordinating with Russia to help Trump win. And a senior Justice Department official, who was not authorized to speak publicly, said the special counsel's office did not recommend new indictments.

What happens Next?
As Barr said in his letter, he could alert Congress as soon as Saturday about Mueller's "principal conclusions." That does not amount to the whole report. Instead, it's a written summary of Mueller's findings — essentially parts of the report that Barr believes he can share in accordance with Justice Department rules. The only information Barr is required to reveal is whether Mueller's bosses overruled his investigative actions. And Barr said that did not happen.

Will we get to read the Mueller report?
It's too soon to tell. What's certain is that there will be a fight in Congress to make the report public. Lawmakers and President Trump have indicated that they want the report to become public. Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said minutes after Barr's letter to Congress that he looks forward to getting the "full report and related materials." "Transparency and the public interest demand nothing less," Nadler tweeted. Barr told lawmakers that he was "committed to as much transparency as possible." But he did not say he would release Mueller's complete report. Instead, he said he would consult with Mueller and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein to "determine what other information from the report can be released consistent with the law ... and the Department's long-standing practices and policies." Barr has said that the department often cannot reveal information about grand juries, or "derogatory" information about people who have not been charged with a crime.


News Links:

Back to content