SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Pardon the brevity; submitted via my mobile phone.
[Update (20190418_203255 UTC) --martyb]
I was listening to the radio while running an errand when I heard the Mueller Report had been released. The above link was the first that came up when I did a search. I quickly posted the story using my mobile phone to get it to the community as quickly as possible. Here are additional sources as well as the MD5SUM and resultant file sizes from downloading each. The CNN file has a different size from the others. A quick inspection suggests that it contains searchable text (presumably through OCR (Optical Character Recognition) processing) whereas the others contain images of each of the pages in the report.
CNN (searchable): http://www.cnn.com/2019/04/18/politics/full-mueller-report-pdf/index.html provided a link to:
https://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/04/18/mueller-report-searchable.pdf:
MD5: 614529b6979e7ec5323af8c2a286afdd
Size: 140,352,112 bytes
DOJ: https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf:
MD5: ce5859e9b5d8b76aedd18dc296dcc1e6
Size: 145,509,756 bytes
NPR: https://www.npr.org/2019/04/18/708850903/read-the-full-mueller-report-with-redactions provided a link to:
https://media.npr.org/assets/news/2019/04/muellerreport.pdf
MD5: ce5859e9b5d8b76aedd18dc296dcc1e6
Size: 145,509,756 bytes
PBS: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/read-the-redacted-mueller-report provided a link to:
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2019/04/Muellereport.pdf
MD5: ce5859e9b5d8b76aedd18dc296dcc1e6
Size: 145,509,756 bytes
(Score: 0, Troll) by Captival on Thursday April 18 2019, @07:57PM (5 children)
It takes an INSANELY stupid Libtard to read a report saying "no collusion" and come to the conclusion "plenty of collusion". Yet there's so many of you here, crudely attempting to change the goalposts and insist how right you were all along despite being proven wrong over and over and over. Two years of "just wait for the Mueller report" suddenly morphed into "Collusion isn't a crime so Trump is still guilty anyways! BLEARGH!" Many of you are so delusional you don't even realize how completely owned you are by your media handlers, and how frequently you repeat their talking points for them.
The same frightening taint of insanity is currently infecting most of the MSM and the Democrat Special Victims Unit this morning. By accusing Barr of covering up the important evidence, you have to believe that Mueller and his entire team of Hillary-worshipping Democrat lawyers who wrote the report are all mysteriously staying silent while the AttGen misrepresents them. If you are seriously retarded enough to believe this, there is no helping you. You're doomed.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 18 2019, @08:30PM (3 children)
You're a blind partisan idiot projecting out your own problems.
You're taking the words of Barr, a man appointed specifically due to his opinion that a sitting president can't be indicted, and running with it like it is gospel truth. The report specifically said that Trump is NOT exonerated, but they were supposedly unable to find enough evidence to push criminal charges.
The report acknowledges there was a ton of communication between Russia and multiple members of the Trump campaign, Trump lied about the Trump Tower meeting with Russian agents, and everyone else lied about their involvement. Multiple criminal convictions, yet here you are trying to take the high ground because for some strange zany reason people see all this evidence and think "fuck yeah they colluded, fuck yeah Trump broke the law."
Go fuck yourself you partisan hack.
Party over country FUCK YEAH AMIRITE! /s
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday April 18 2019, @09:01PM (2 children)
Will be interesting seeing how you respond to Mueller being questioned under oath.
One of the things Rosenstein and Barr asked, I presume to specifically alleviate concerns that Rosenstein had, was whether Mueller would have suggested charges if it were not for the policy against charging sitting presidents. Mueller expressed to Rosenstein that it was not the case that he did not suggest charges because of that policy.
If Mueller in the next few weeks, under oath, affirms that this conversation was correct, how will you respond? Barr already said he would not stop Mueller from testifying.
Also, no criminal referrals for anything having to do with the campaign, with the exception of lying under oath, which should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The only crimes that related to the campaign are purgury traps, you should sign up with user name "Gingrich" as you sound sound just like the Republicans attacking Clinton over Lewinsky.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 18 2019, @09:22PM (1 child)
"We recognized that a federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt the constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct" [...]
"We considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgement that the President committed crimes." [...]
"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgement, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgement. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him."
(Score: 1) by Sulla on Thursday April 18 2019, @09:37PM
Yes. That is correct. Barr and Rosenstein said that according to a conversation with Mueller, he would not have come to a different conclusion even if the Justice manual standards did not exist. I have no doubt Mueller will be asked about this under oath and it will be interesting to see what he says.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 18 2019, @08:50PM
Oh right you like citations, the below is a comment from someone else I'm copying here because it is mostly citation with a spot-on analysis at the bottom:
Thats not at all what this report says.
Pg 182 Conclusion:
"Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgments, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we we’re making a traditional prosecutorial judgement. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgement. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime it also does not exonerate him. "
Muller found plenty of stuff. But, they state that their purpose was "not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgments" - so they didn't. Thats why the reports ends with "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime it also does not exonerate him."