Opinion "Russia-gate" Retrospective

The Russia Investigation/ Muller Report was


  • Total voters
    192

luckyshot

Nazi Punks Fuck Off
Platinum Member
Joined
May 11, 2016
Messages
16,971
Reaction score
11,167
Pre edit: I was struggled to think of a good poll question to ask about the legacy of the Mueller investigation. If you have any choices I should add, let me know.

Now that the Trump Presidency is about to come to an end, and we are left to clean up the mess and grapple with his legacy, the question presents itself of how we should view the Mueller investigation.

I, for one, have complex feelings on the matter. While I think the conclusion of the Mueller report should have been damaging to Trump, the reality is that it was not... in fact, it probably helped him politically.

Read objectively, the Mueller Report all but says Trump was guilty of obstruction of justice, but it does not provide any evidence of collusion, and most Americans seem to have bought into the framing that, since no collusion was found, the whole investigation was a witch hunt or a hoax.

Additionally, many Republicans now speak of the "Russia Hoax" as an offense that justifies Trump's "Stop the Steal" nonsense. What's more, I would be willing to bet that, if the GOP retakes the House in 2022, they will launch an investigation into Biden as retaliation for the Mueller Investigation.

In the minds of many Republicans (and even some independents), the fact that 70%+ of Trump voters will view Biden's victory as illegitimate is justified by the fact that many Democrats "believed in Russiagate!" In other words, the well has been poisoned, and the Russian investigation will be pointed at by a major part of the population as a precipitating event.

Another potentially damaging outcome of the Russian investigation is that, to the extent that it monopolized media attention, it arguably hurt the progressive movement within the Democratic party by distracting discourse from policies such as Medicare for All. While I don't find this argument particularly persuasive, for a variety of reasons, I do think there is a kernel of truth in it. There was certainly an energy and vigor about the Bernie movement in 2016 that was subsumed by the perceived urgency of defeating Donald Trump in 2020-- and everything that made Trump seem like an existential threat to democracy-- arguably added to that.

Yet, balancing all of this, is the simple fact that I think Congress acted rightly in launching the Mueller probe. The plain truth is that every intelligence agency agreed that Russia interfered in the 2016, the clear balance of that interference was on the behalf of Donald Trump, and Donald Trump has Russian contacts and connections that make it plausible, or even likely, that he was aware of that interference. It is the House of Representatives job to investigate such potential corruption-- or at least conflicts of interest.

Then of course, there is this:



At the end of the day, weighing it all up, I am forced to the conclusion that both of the following are true:
  • The Muller investigation was the right thing to do.
  • The main legacy of "Russiagate" will be its contribution to our continuing and intensifying polarization.
 
Last edited:
Trump supporters appear largely incapable of nuance, so the fact that Trump was not led out of the White House in handcuffs after video surfaced of an explicit quid pro quo between Trump and Putin to them means the whole entire issue was a "hoax." They also like to use it as a whataboutism to defend their ridiculous theories. If you point out how absurd their theories are they will reply with something about how you fell for the Russia hoax for years.

Anyway, worth noting Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissman feels Trump should potentially be charged after he leaves office for obstruction of justice . Weissman also says Mueller let the public down by not indicting Trump. And New York is still investigating the financial ties, which Mueller passed on and wasn't part of the Mueller Report.
 
Trump supporters appear largely incapable of nuance, so the fact that Trump was not led out of the White House in handcuffs after video surfaced of an explicit quid pro quo between Trump and Putin to them means the whole entire issue was a "hoax." They also like to use it as a whataboutism to defend their ridiculous theories. If you point out how absurd their theories are they will reply with something about how you fell for the Russia hoax for years.

Anyway, worth noting Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissman feels Trump should potentially be charged after he leaves office for obstruction of justice . Weissman also says Mueller let the public down by not indicting Trump. And New York is still investigating the financial ties, which Mueller passed on and wasn't part of the Mueller Report.
love these fidgety insecure "cover all bases" preemptive posts that are basically a pseudo intellectual "in before.." attempts.
 
I don't think the investigation contributed to polarization as much as the findings from it, and then Trump's efforts to draw on and intensify polarization as a way to deflect from the findings. In terms of the political impact, Barr's dishonest summary of it before it was publicly available probably worked pretty well. Can't see how the report itself would be positive for Trump politically (surely would have sunk any previous presidency).
 
  • Yes the investigation was done for the right reasons
  • Yes it lead to impropriety on behalf of members of the Trump campaign
  • That impropriety was not Trump's campaign colluding with Russia
  • However, what was found was quickly covered up by AG Barr, the cover up specialist
  • This all is completely independent of 2016 and 2020 efforts by Russia (and other countries) to influence US elections, which we have still not addressed based on 2016 recommendations
 
Anyway, worth noting Mueller prosecutor Andrew Weissman feels Trump should potentially be charged after he leaves office for obstruction of justice . Weissman also says Mueller let the public down by not indicting Trump. And New York is still investigating the financial ties, which Mueller passed on and wasn't part of the Mueller Report.

The passing on investigating financial ties was a huge mistake, IMO. There was a lot of pressure to keep the investigation very narrow, for obvious reasons, but that took it too far.
 
Done for the right reasons, done for the wrong reasons, helpful to Trump, handled poorly by the media, handled poorly by Mueller.
 
1. The Muller investigation was the right thing to do.
- I agree. Investigating possible corruption within DC should not be controversial. Isn't that why we have IGs?

2. The Mueller investigation was a no win situation for Democrats-- especially as Mueller interpreted his role in a way that was different than the majority of the public understood it.
- I disagree. The Democrats won quite a bit. They got a boogeyman, they got a distrusting populace, and they won big in the 2018 mid-terms. Plus, I am sure producers at MSNBC/CNN got raises.

3. The extent of the Russian interference in the 2016 election was, no doubt overplayed, by many in the media.
- I agree

4. Russia did interfere in the 2016 election in ways that we needed to investigate and guard against in the future.
- By trolling social media and the comments section of disqus?

5. The main legacy of "Russiagate" will be its contribution to our continuing and intensifying polarization.
- I agree. I am waiting the incoming "Chinagate" and "Burismagate" and, why not, another "Russiagate" to come down the pipeline.
 
I mean, it wasn't really "helpful" to Trump. No white collar criminal is ever happy about his conduct being investigated, especially not when the entire public knows about the investigation
 
I don't think the investigation contributed to polarization as much as the findings from it, and then Trump's efforts to draw on and intensify polarization as a way to deflect from the findings. In terms of the political impact, Barr's dishonest summary of it before it was publicly available probably worked pretty well. Can't see how the report itself would be positive for Trump politically (surely would have sunk any previous presidency).
I agree. I am trying to consider the impact of the whole thing from egg to apples.
 
On the specific topic of collusion, I have to disagree that no evidence was found. Collusion is a "secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others." But for example, what was the Trump Tower meeting if not that? Trump Jr. was notified that the Russian government was assisting his father, that they had damaging info on his political opponent. So Jr., Manafort and Kushner met the Russians to discuss "adoptions" - The Magnitsky Act. Or sanctions on Russian oligarchs/Putin.

We also know discussions surrounding Trump Tower Moscow continued while Trump was running for president, and that Trump's sale of the Palm Beach mansion to a Russian oligarch, Trump personally believes was due to Putin's involvement. At the very least, this show's Trump would never treat Putin severely, as he felt in debt to him and wanted more out of him.

And then there is The Steele Report. Steele is a very legitimate source. He's not Jacob Wohl. He's not Project Veritas. He was MI6's lead top man on Russia. Even the legendary "Pee Tape" was found by one the best American investigative journalists, Jane Mayer, to have 4 different sources.

 
Of course it was done for the wrong reasons, handled disgustingly by the media, and did help Trump politically. When you start making slogans like "Mueller time" and "We wish you a Mueller Christmas", you're pretty obviously rooting for an outcome, and Rachel Maddow literally cried on air after finding out the president was not a Russian spy.

As far as how it was handled by Mueller, that depends on what you were after. The investigation veered way of course, and he came off as a confused old man after being built up as a cunning badass, but you can't really expect more when you send someone on a witch hunt. They still got more people on taxi medallions and perjury traps and other shit that wasn't even related to the investigation.
 
The Mueller investigation was fine, the media coverage was abysmal. And that Democrats thought focusing on this one issue would be the "gotcha" to take down Trump was terrible strategy.
 
Last edited:
The Trump administration "flooded the zone" with so much other incompetent and/or illegal conduct that the Mueller investigation got kind of drowned out by the constant river of other bullshit emanating from the White House. Most folks and media were operating under the assumption that a big investigation of this sort would be some sort of tentpole moment for any administration, but the Trump Tent was basically a reality show with teaser scandals coming out for each new episode. It seemed like this was one of the big pivots where Trump stopped talking to anybody outside of his base.

I kind of view it as an early bulwark for how Trump and the rest of the administration were going to handle credibility issues and holding themselves accountable, and the experienced and competent people left after the Mueller episode, so it was a good excuse for Trump to keep stabbing his own people in the back on the way out.
 
  • Yes the investigation was done for the right reasons
  • Yes it lead to impropriety on behalf of members of the Trump campaign
  • That impropriety was not Trump's campaign colluding with Russia
  • However, what was found was quickly covered up by AG Barr, the cover up specialist
  • This all is completely independent of 2016 and 2020 efforts by Russia (and other countries) to influence US elections, which we have still not addressed based on 2016 recommendations
What were the 2016 recommendations?
 
I have no idea, but the answers people give will help identify TDS sufferers, I think.
 
The man is impeached for a reason.
His impeachment was due to holding up aid to Ukraine in an effort to force their hand on investigating Joe Biden. Had nothing to do with the Mueller Report.

I have no idea, but the answers people give will help identify TDS sufferers, I think.
"I have no idea what I'm talking about... but I'm still going to judge you if you disagree!"
 
Last edited:
On the specific topic of collusion, I have to disagree that no evidence was found. Collusion is a "secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others." But for example, what was the Trump Tower meeting if not that? Trump Jr. was notified that the Russian government was assisting his father, that they had damaging info on his political opponent. So Jr., Manafort and Kushner met the Russians to discuss "adoptions" - The Magnitsky Act. Or sanctions on Russian oligarchs/Putin.

We also know discussions surrounding Trump Tower Moscow continued while Trump was running for president, and that Trump's sale of the Palm Beach mansion to a Russian oligarch, Trump personally believes was due to Putin's involvement. At the very least, this show's Trump would never treat Putin severely, as he felt in debt to him and wanted more out of him.

And then there is The Steele Report. Steele is a very legitimate source. He's not Jacob Wohl. He's not Project Veritas. He was MI6's lead top man on Russia. Even the legendary "Pee Tape" was found by one the best American investigative journalists, Jane Mayer, to have 4 different sources.

I thought this was a legit post until I saw that bit about the Steele report. Wasn't this the same guy leaking anonymous tips to Yahoo News and then the FBI used Yahoo news to verify that Steel was legit? And the pee tape was a bunch of trolls leaking stuff to the media?
 
I thought this was a legit post until I saw that bit about the Steele report. Wasn't this the same guy leaking anonymous tips to Yahoo News and then the FBI used Yahoo news to verify that Steel was legit? And the pee tape was a bunch of trolls leaking stuff to the media?
No.
 
Back
Top