Mueller's Report Looks Bad for Obama

CNN is doing its best to keep the Russian interference story going and they are saying that the reason why Russia got away with interfering with the election is because Obama let them.

CNN Op-Ed Admits "Mueller's Report Looks Bad For Obama"

With Congressional Democrats tantruming over redactions, presidential candidates out-virtue-signalling one another in denigration of Trump (for what it is unclear) calling for impeachment (again, for what is unclear) and the liberal media desperate for a distraction from the embarrassment of their two-year harassment in lieu of the main headline - "no collusion, no obstruction;" few if any among the mainstream have noticed (or mentioned) one tiny little detail in the Mueller Report... the 'confirmed' interference by Russia in the 2016 US Election took place - knowingly - under President Obama's watch.

The partisan warfare over the Mueller report will rage, but one thing cannot be denied: Former President Barack Obama looks just plain bad. On his watch, the Russians meddled in our democracy while his administration did nothing about it.

The Mueller report flatly states that Russia began interfering in American democracy in 2014. Over the next couple of years, the effort blossomed into a robust attempt to interfere in our 2016 presidential election. The Obama administration knew this was going on and yet did nothing. In 2016, Obama's National Security Adviser Susan Rice told her staff to "stand down" and "knock it off" as they drew up plans to "strike back" against the Russians, according to an account from Michael Isikoff and David Corn in their book "Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin's War on America and the Election of Donald Trump".

Is this some kind of penance on this holy weekend for CNN's past sins of omission? Perhaps. But Jennings then asked the hard question: Why did Obama go soft on Russia?

My opinion is that it was because he was singularly focused on the nuclear deal with Iran. Obama wanted Putin in the deal, and to stand up to him on election interference would have, in Obama's estimation, upset that negotiation. This turned out to be a disastrous policy decision.

Obama's supporters claim he did stand up to Russia by deploying sanctions after the election to punish them for their actions. But, Obama, according to the Washington Post, "approved a modest package... with economic sanctions so narrowly targeted that even those who helped design them describe their impact as largely symbolic." In other words, a toothless response to a serious incursion.

But don't just take my word for it that Obama failed. Congressman Adam Schiff, who disgraced himself in this process by claiming collusion when Mueller found that none exists, once said that "the Obama administration should have done a lot more." The Washington Post reported that a senior Obama administration official said they "sort of choked" in failing to stop the Russian government's brazen activities. And Obama's ambassador to Russia, Michael McFaul, said, "The punishment did not fit the crime" about the weak sanctions rolled out after the 2016 election.

A legitimate question Republicans are asking is whether the potential "collusion" narrative was invented to cover up the Obama administration's failures. Two years have been spent fomenting the idea that Russia only interfered because it had a willing, colluding partner: Trump. Now that Mueller has popped that balloon, we must ask why this collusion narrative was invented in the first place.

Given Obama's record on Russia, one operating theory is that his people needed a smokescreen to obscure just how wrong they were.

CNN Article

I suggest reading the Susan Rice article to see how well setup the Russian collusion story was made and how much ink has been invested in it.

Share
up
13 users have voted.

Comments

Pricknick's picture

we must believe it.
Supersnark.
/S/S

up
3 users have voted.

Regardless of the path in life I chose, I realize it's always forward, never straight.

snoopydawg's picture

Robert Mueller Is A Coward And A Liar

Robert Mueller is a coward because he again, in his indictment of Roger Stone last week, makes claims against people who can’t defend themselves, and who moreover have in at least one case, that of Julian Assange, previously and repeatedly denied those claims. And Robert Mueller’s a liar because many of his claims are evidently not true; but though he will never be able to prove them, and he knows it, he still makes his ‘case’ based on them.

It’s also public knowledge that Mueller has lied since at least the WMD facade. On February 11 2003, then FBI director Mueller testified before Congress: “..as Director Tenet has pointed out, Secretary Powell presented evidence last week that Baghdad has failed to disarm its weapons of mass destruction, willfully attempting to evade and deceive the international community. Our particular concern is that Saddam Hussein may supply terrorists with biological, chemical, or radiological material.

We know today he was lying, as was Colin Powell (and the entire Bush administration). Which is also interesting because a number of Mueller’s accusations against various ‘suspects’ are basically just that: someone has lied to Congress and must be punished for it. This is again the case in Roger Stone’s indictment, which would ring awfully hollow without it. And we don’t have to know how true that accusation is to realize that it’s being brought by someone who himself lied to Congress, but was never indicted for it. That is curious no matter how you look at it.

So what would happen if Mueller takes any of his present indictments into a courtroom? Note: as long as he treats those he indicts the same way he treated Paul Manafort and others, he’ll probably never have to present anything in a court; every ‘suspect’ will sign a plea deal because he threatens to destroy them, their freedom, their finances, their families. But what IF he did, purely hypothetically? What proof -not allegations- could he present to a judge about Russians hacking US-based servers or computers?
....

Given his legal status, Mueller should be invested with the power to demand he gets the opportunity to talk to Assange. And in the unlikely event that he’s not provided with that opportunity by his superiors, at the very least he must stop talking about Assange. Can’t talk TO him, then stop talking ABOUT him. Sure, he never mentions his name, but that’s just more cowardice. We all know who Organization 1 is in Mueller’s indictments. And we all know who spoke for Organization 1 before he was muzzled.

Mueller could for instance travel to the Ecuadorian embassy in London, after negotiating, both with the man himself and with ‘authorities’ from Ecuador, UK and US, to have a meeting with Assange. Considering his importance as head of an investigation into collusion that might topple a president and start a new cold war with Russia, that should be easy to do. But Mueller hasn’t talked to Assange. Nor has he indicated that he tried.

Mueller accusing Assange without talking to him should raise suspicions that he is not interested in finding the truth, but has other goals. And that shines a dark light on his entire investigation. Because of the fact itself, but also because Assange is a pivotal person in the entire Russia collusion narrative. Mueller can’t make his case without accusing, defaming Assange.

Assange is crucial in the Mueller indictment of 12 Russians issued conveniently three days before the Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki, he’s crucial in the case made against Paul Manafort, and he’s again crucial in the indictment of Roger Stone. Without Assange, Mueller’s hands are empty. Julian is presented as the conduit between Trump and Russia. No conduit, no connection. And Assange has always denied the entire thing, all of it.

Assange is crucial in the Mueller indictment of 12 Russians issued conveniently three days before the Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki, he’s crucial in the case made against Paul Manafort, and he’s again crucial in the indictment of Roger Stone. Without Assange, Mueller’s hands are empty. Julian is presented as the conduit between Trump and Russia. No conduit, no connection. And Assange has always denied the entire thing, all of it.

People who have been accused of, let alone indicted in, a crime, must be given their day in court, says American law, to be able to defend themselves against their accusers. But Assange is not, which means Robert Mueller is no less than a grave threat to the entire American justice system. Not Mueller alone, for sure, but he, along with the Attorney General and Deputy AG (and believe it or not, the President), are immediately responsible for the way the justice system is being perverted. That is very serious business.

From the same author:

Ilargi Meijer: "They Were All Lying!"

What the Mueller report says is that 500,000 articles about collusion, and 245 million social media interactions in their wake, were written without any proof whatsoever (or Mueller would have used that proof). That doesn’t mean they may not have been true, or that they can’t be found to be true in the future, it means there was no proof when they were published. They Were All Lying.....
....
The same goes for the Steele dossier. It holds zero proof of collusion between Trump’s team and Russia. Or Mueller would have used that proof. New York Times, Washington Post, Guardian, CNN: they all had zero proof when they published, not a thing. Or Mueller would have used that proof. Rachel Maddow’s near nightly collusion rants: no proof. Or Mueller would have used that proof.

That there is no proof also means there has never been any proof. Why that is important, and how important it is, is something we’re very clearly seeing in the case concerning Julian Assange. That, too, is based on made-up stories.

Both are worth reading in full.

up
10 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

snoopydawg's picture

Bill Binney States that the NSA Has 32 Pages of Communications Between Seth Rich and Julian Assange, As Revealed by a FOIA Request

“Ty Clevenger has FOIAed information from NSA asking for any data that involved both Seth Rich and also Julian Assange.
And they responded by saying we’ve got 15 files, 32 pages, but they’re all classified in accordance with executive order 13526 covering classification, and therefore you can’t have them.
That says that NSA has records of communications between Seth Rich and Julian Assange. I mean, that’s the only business that NSA is in — copying communications between people and devices.”
....
Beyond that, as Binney makes clear, the Mueller report’s tale of how Wikileaks received the DNC emails from GRU agents styling themselves as “Guccifer 2.0” is absurd on its face to reasonable people who will examine the pertinent evidence.

So let’s push to get the real story out. And, if it turns out that Binney is right, we’ll need to apologize to Russia, and then decide whom to send to prison for the rest of their miserable prevaricating lives.

Uno mas

Moon of Alabama's take on the Mueller report

up
10 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

ovals49's picture

@snoopydawg
when an executive order is all it takes to completely neuter it.

Let’s face it, in our failing capitalist world, the last thing we should expect is easy access to is the TRUTH. Almost everything we see, hear or read will be designed to create a “reality” which serves the interests of Power and Money. When a small corner of the truth does manage to attract some attention it will be mercilessly stomped into the ground and covered with a tsunami of MSM bulshit. Count on it.

up
7 users have voted.

“Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.” Albert Einstein

“And an uncomfortable truth is always superior to a comfortable fantasy.” Caitlin Johnstone

lotlizard's picture

@snoopydawg  
in Saxony, the Sächsische Zeitung, is flat out lying, or at least repeating lies the writer Thomas Spang would have to be very naïve to not know are lies.

This is a newspaper 40% owned by the German Social Democratic party.

https://www.saechsische.de/bericht-zur-russland-affaere-veroeffentlicht-...

Unstrittig ist demnach, dass Moskau versuchte, zu Lasten Hillary Clintons Einfluss auf den Präsidentschaftswahlkampf zu nehmen. Nur fünf Stunden nachdem Trump am 27.7.2016 bei einer Kundgebung Russland öffentlich aufgefordert hatte, die Emails seiner Konkurrentin “zu finden”, machten sich Hacker des Geheimdienstes ans Werk. Das Wahlkampfteam habe sich von den gestohlenen Informationen “einen Vorteil bei den Wahlen” versprochen.

Zu großen Teilen geschwärzt bleibt der Teil, in dem Mueller darlegt, wie die Zusammenarbeit mit Wikileaks gelaufen ist. Die Organisation hatte Emails veröffentlicht, die russische Geheimdienstler gehackt hatten. Im Verdacht als Scharnier gedient zu haben, steht Trumps Intimus Roger Stone, der sich im November vor Gericht verantworten muss.

(Translation:)
It is therefore undisputed that Moscow tried to influence the presidential election campaign to the detriment of Hillary Clinton. Just five hours after Trump had publicly invited Russia to “find” his rival’s e-mails at a rally [actually, probably the debate] on 27 July 2016, intelligence-agency hackers set to work. The campaign team expected the stolen information would give them “an edge in the elections.”

Redacted to a large extent is the part where Mueller explains how cooperation with Wikileaks was done. That organization published e-mails hacked by the Russian intelligence agents. Suspected of serving as go-between: Trump’s friend Roger Stone, who is facing trial in November.

Take political lies in America and amplify them through German mainstream media’s servility to U.S. deep-state elites — the scale of the dishonesty becomes truly stupendous. Breathtaking.

up
6 users have voted.

@lotlizard

Global propaganda by and for the protection of global elites.

up
5 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

@snoopydawg

The whole Russia thing is a lie. The govt knows and sees everything. If there was an ounce of evidence against Russia, it would not be classified. Maddow would be broadcasting it 24/7.

As much as I hate Obama, blaming him for the 12 trolls phishing is just more clowns.

up
6 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

Centaurea's picture

Here's an article discussing Obama's problems dealing with the Kremlin, published by the Washington Post in 2017:

" 'It is the hardest thing about my entire time in government to defend,' said a former senior Obama administration official involved in White House deliberations on Russia. 'I feel like we sort of choked.' "

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2017/world/national-security/oba...

up
2 users have voted.

"Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep ... Don't go back to sleep."
~Rumi

"If you want revolution, be it."
~Caitlin Johnstone

I like the articles you posted in comments better than the one you diaried. That one can be reduced to Round 2: GOP and media turn the lies back on the Dems. What are they going to do now? Deny Russian interference or let Obama take the fall since he already got his.

up
6 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

lotlizard's picture

@dkmich  
Yes, I’d say the Obamas have done rather well — as media and entertainment celebrities.

https://variety.com/2018/digital/news/barack-michelle-obama-netflix-deal...

up
8 users have voted.
Jen's picture

@lotlizard
$65 million for one book? If that's the case, everyone needs to shut up about Bernie's measly $1-$2 million for one book.

I knew about the Netflix deal. Makes me think Netflix needs to put disclaimers on everything touched by them. That way I'll know what not to watch.

up
5 users have voted.

@Jen for two books, one from Barack and Michelle.

Netflix: As I understand, they are one of the 60 or so major co's which didn't pay a dime in fed income tax last year. Doubt if the Obamas will have any comment on that.

And who out there is interested in centrist, incrementally and marginally engaging tv entertainment?

up
2 users have voted.
Jen's picture

@wokkamile
I don't have the energy (or the money) to do things I really want to do. So, for entertainment, it's either watch tv, play pc games, or twiddle my thumbs.

Right at this moment, I would love to go for a walk in the woods behind my house. I also need to go to the store for some things. But I just don't have the energy to do those things.

I don't even have to energy to go out and take pictures anymore. And that sucks because that is something I love to do.

I'm proud of myself for actually being able to get some flowers planted. I try to go out everyday and pull weeds that have sprouted.

So, I don't know who likes "centrist, incrementally and marginally engaging tv entertainment". I'm very picky about what I do watch and if it can't hold my attention past the first 30 minutes, it's not worth any more of my time.

I don't like it that Netflix paid nothing in taxes. I actually think 70% tax on them would be too low. But I have zero control over that. I'm not even paying for the account, my son is.

Please don't judge me. Thank you.

Forgive me for going off-topic.

up
4 users have voted.

@lotlizard
his paltry 1.5 million. Things are relative, which is why I support middle class up to 250K a year family income with kids. Two professionals earning 6 figures and paying for kids, college, elderly parents, their own old age, and a bit of enjoyment in life doesn't equal Bezos, Kochs, Gates or Obama. If 250K is the top of middle class for a famiy, I think 50K family income with kids is poor.

up
8 users have voted.

"Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

snoopydawg's picture

@dkmich

my point though is if we are still going to be stuck with the idea that Russia meddled in the election then let's look at who allowed it to happen and get people to start questioning why Obama thought that wasn't and important issue to address?

A legitimate question Republicans are asking is whether the potential "collusion" narrative was invented to cover up the Obama administration's failures.

The main point is if Trump wasn't involved in any way then who the hell started trying to put the blame on him? As others have asked when will we start seeing the investigations into all the illegal activity that his admin did? Probably never, but don't you think it's kinda funny that one of the main media mouthpieces are asking the question?

And I already had the essay up for awhile and then saw the other articles which I thought would be better in the comments than added to the essay and make it TL/dr

Glad you read the MoA essay. I sure hope that one day those so invested in this farce will wake up and see that they have been taken for a ride. Or that future generations would one day quit believing what our government tells them. Mueller has a long history of lying and yet people overlooked that and called him their White Knight.... ugh, just typing that.

up
4 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

snoopydawg's picture

@dkmich

The question I ask is: Where would we be if Obama had made what he knew about Russia and any FBI investigations public before the 2016 election? I’ll never know the answer, but just wondering helps me to focus on “acting on principle” rather than “acting on presumed strategy.”

Is it starting?

up
1 user has voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

Harm of Russiagate was/is the overreaction and politicization. It turned into an effort by the Ds and the CIA to overturn the results of the election. As usual, the gang that can't shoot straight has created their enemy and is trying to force the rest of us to fight it, even though they already lost by starting a war over piddling crap that would have best been dealt with quietly. On this one, Obama got it pretty much right.

up
1 user has voted.
ggersh's picture

by this russiagate BS...that would be her heinous

and why do they Assange so badly, he thankfully
screwed her heinous from being prez

For those that haven't seen this

up
5 users have voted.

trump will be amerika's last president

ameriKa's been crapified and yes that
has trickled down

snoopydawg's picture

@ggersh

during prime time. Bitches for America to help cover up its war crimes.

Yeah baby!

up
4 users have voted.

America is a pathetic nation; a fascist state fueled by the greed, malice, and stupidity of her own people.
- strife delivery

Deja's picture

@ggersh
That video is excellent! Sharing with my kids and brother. Thank you!

up
1 user has voted.

ordered the surveillance of the Trump campaign on his way out the door?

up
6 users have voted.

"Without the right to offend, freedom of speech does not exist." Taslima Nasrin

EdMass's picture

@Fishtroller 02

Grassley, Graham Uncover ‘Unusual Email’ Sent by Susan Rice to Herself on President Trump’s Inauguration Day

Ambassador Rice appears to have used this email to document a January 5, 2017 Oval Office meeting between President Obama, former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates regarding Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election. In particular, Ambassador Rice wrote:

“President Obama began the conversation by stressing his continued commitment to ensuring that every aspect of this issue is handled by the Intelligence and law enforcement communities ‘by the book’. The President stressed that he is not asking about, initiating or instructing anything from a law enforcement perspective. He reiterated that our law enforcement team needs to proceed as it normally would by the book.”

Grassley and Graham were struck by the context and timing of this email, and sent a follow up letter to Ambassador Rice. The letter reads in part:

“It strikes us as odd that, among your activities in the final moments on the final day of the Obama administration, you would feel the need to send yourself such an unusual email purporting to document a conversation involving President Obama and his interactions with the FBI regarding the Trump/Russia investigation. In addition, despite your claim that President Obama repeatedly told Mr. Comey to proceed ‘by the book,’ substantial questions have arisen about whether officials at the FBI, as well as at the Justice Department and the State Department, actually did proceed ‘by the book.’”

up
3 users have voted.

Prof: Nancy! I’m going to Greece!
Nancy: And swim the English Channel?
Prof: No. No. To ancient Greece where burning Sapho stood beside the wine dark sea. Wa de do da! Nancy, I’ve invented a time machine!

Firesign Theater

Stop the War!

Deja's picture

On his watch, the Russians meddled in our democracy while his administration did nothing about it.

So, all the liars (msm) who lied about "Russian interference" during the election, are still saying that it happened, even after the Mueller report was released.

Has anyone actually seen where Mueller states, and proves it actually happened? Do the liars ever actually quote it? Disclaimer: I generally try to stay away from links to NYT, WaPo, CNN, etc. because, like dkos, I try not to give them clicks. It's my tiny little protest boycott against misinformation.

Is there a link to the god awful report itself? If it's been posted already, sorry. I'm not always online anymore.

up
0 users have voted.