• The Mueller Report, January 6, Mar-a-Lago, and the Abyss

    August 26, 2022

    Tags: , , , , , ,
    Posted in: 2020, Democracy, Post-Constitution America, Trump

    Dear Merrick Garland:

    One of the problems with the Abyss is you often don’t realize how close you are to falling in until too late in the game. Watching the seemingly endless January 6 hearings and Mar-a-Lago search throw mud against the political wall in hopes something sticks, it is easy to forget how close we came to impeaching or prosecuting a president based on false information, and in that process wrecking our system of rule of law. Remember what was at stake — the President of the United States was accused of being a Russian agent. Then there was a backup plan to get Trump, an indictment for obstruction of justice based on obstructing a case which could only have exonerated him, based on false info as it was. It is all worth revisiting as the January 6 Committee and the FBI contemplate empty but politically juicy criminal referrals.

    As we look at gaps in the January 6 story, older questions remain: why didn’t the Mueller Report say the obvious, that the Steele Dossier and all that flowed from it via Crossfire Hurricane, was based on bogus information created by a politicized FBI, that there was no Russiagate? And why didn’t Trump say the same thing, explicitly (he did deny the allegations) and call the Democrats’ bluff, exposing Russiagate in real time for what it was, a Hillary Clinton paid-for smear exercise that was allowed to get out of control? Imagine the Constitutional issues of an impeachment based on false information, especially if it had been upheld by the Senate or Trump otherwise driven from office?

    Special Counsel Robert Mueller, portrayed as the dogged Javert, presented his report on Trump-Russia ties to the public in April 2019. The report tackled two broad questions: did Trump work with Russia to get elected in 2016, and did Trump obstruct justice as the FBI, the Special Counsel, and Congress sought to investigate the first question? Mueller answered questions upon presenting his report to Congress, and then disappeared from public eye. No Late Night, no memoirs, no high brow interviews.

    As to the first question, Mueller was very clear “The Special Counsel’s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 US Presidential Election… the report does not recommend any further indictments, nor did the Special Counsel obtain any sealed indictments that have yet to be made public.”

    But the second question, obstruction, was left open for many of the hopeful. Mueller wrote in Footnote 1091, “A possible remedy through impeachment for abuses of power would not substitute for potential criminal liability after a President leaves office. Impeachment would remove a President from office, but would not address the underlying culpability of the conduct or serve the usual purposes of the criminal law. Indeed, the Impeachment Judgment Clause recognizes that criminal law plays an independent role in addressing an official’s conduct, distinct from the political remedy of impeachment… Impeachment is also a drastic and rarely invoked remedy, and Congress is not restricted to relying only on impeachment.” Mueller also mentioned “the conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of the office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.” Heard that again recently?

    Just about everyone sitting left of political center read that clearly as saying even if Congress could/would not impeach and convict Trump (as the Senate was Republican controlled) they could open a case against him with DOJ that would pend during his term while he had immunity and then whack! come down on Citizen Trump the day he left office. A cardinal rule for prosecutors is to not publicize negative information that does not lead them to indict someone — “the decision does the talking.” James Comey was criticized for doing this with Hillary Clinton during the campaign. Yet most of the Report’s Volume II is just that, descriptions of actions by Trump that allegedly contain elements of obstruction. Some say Mueller wanted to draw a “road map” for a prosecution that would have to take place years separate from his Report.

    Following Mueller was an amazing amount of smoke and noise regarding obstruction, but ultimately Trump was not impeached nor after he left office did anyone (SDNY, DOJ) seek to prosecute him as a private citizen for connections to Russia or obstruction. It all just faded away as impeachment over something-something Ukraine was ginned up in a hurry based on a bogus whistleblower and a non-issue quickly forgotten when the Senate righteously failed to convict Trump. We will never know how close the U.S. got to impeaching Trump for obstruction or a prosecution for the same. We do know the temptation was there.

    What we know now that we did not know then is that there was no Russiagate. All the stuff of the Steele Dossier, the pee tape, the Moscow meetings, Michael Cohen in Prague, was simply made up. Everything investigated by Steele, Mueller, and the FBI never happened. It was all paid for by Clinton operatives for the purpose of smearing Trump during the campaign and after he won, in an attempt to destroy his administration and possibly drive him to resign or be ridded by the 25th Amendment.

    We know know Christopher Steele, paid by the Clinton campaign (after Clinton’s denial, it took a year for congressional investigators to uncover that the dossier was commissioned by the opposition research firm Fusion GPS, working for the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s campaign, paid through the Perkins Coie law firm), seems to have done no investigative work. Instead, his reputation as a former British intelligence officer was purchased to validate a dossier of lies and then traffic them to the FBI and journalists. One of Steele’s key “sources” is the now-arrested Igor Danchenko, a Russian émigré living in the United States whose trial for perjury is scheduled for this autumn (Steele was introduced to the Russian by Fiona Hill, then of the Brookings Institution. Hill would go on to play a key role in the Ukraine impeachment scam.) Danchenko completely made up most of what he told Steele about Trump-Russian collusion.

    When he did not make up stuff himself, Danchenko was spoon-fed lies by Charles Dolan, a Clinton campaign regular (Fiona Hill introduced Dolan to Danchenko). Ironically, Dolan had close ties not only to the Clintons but to the Russians as well; he and the public relations firm where he worked represented the Russian government and were registered as foreign agents for Russia. Dolan is credited with, among other things, making up the pee tape. Dolan also fed bogus info to Olga Galkina, another Russian who passed information to Danchenko for inclusion in the Dossier. Galkina noted in e-mails that she was expecting Dolan to get her a job in the Hillary administration.

    Mueller mentioned the Steele Dossier in his own Report numerous times, and was well aware the Dossier played a major role in the FBI investigation of Trump. Did Mueller also come to know it was bogus, fake, a fraud, campaign fodder paid for by Clinton? If so, Mueller remained silent and so much for the rule of law. Why? The FBI, internally we now know dubious of many of the Dossier and other claims handed to it by various Clintonites working undercover, stood by its justification for the full investigation. And so much for the rule of law.

    “The fact pattern that John Durham is methodically establishing shows what James Comey and Andrew McCabe likely knew from day one the Steele dossier was politically-driven nonsense created at the behest of the Clinton campaign,” said Kevin Brock, the FBI’s former intelligence chief. “And yet they knowingly ran with its false information to obtain legal process against an American citizen. They defrauded not just a federal court, they defrauded the FBI and the American people.” The 2019 Horowitz Report, a look into the FBI’s conduct by the Justice Department Inspector General, also made clear the FBI knew the dossier was bunk and purposefully lied to the FISA court.

    What would have happened had some entity brought charges against Trump for obstructing an investigation itself based entirely on false information and false pretenses? At the very least all hell would have broken loose in Washington. For example, would an FBI whistleblower have emerged, concerned his beloved Bureau was about to throw its reputation away on a political assassination while the Bureau et large remained mum co-conspirators?

    Would Trump have revealed the mountain of information he for some reason still holds close today? For example, Trump, knowing exactly what he ever did or did not do vis-a-vis Russia, knew the Dossier to be bogus but stuck simply with short-form denials. At what point in a Trump trial would it have come out that nearly 100 percent of the information against him came from the Clinton camp as campaign smear material? Is it even legally possible to be found guilty of obstructing an investigation that could have only found you guilty by employing fraud against you? Obstruction requires a showing of intent and how could Trump intend to obstruct an investigation he knew could not lead to anything because all the basic facts are false?

    A prosecutor need also look deeply to ensure he can prove intent as necessary, that an act — perjury, for example, was done with the intent to mislead and was not simply a mistake. That’s the difference between a mistake, error, misstatement and a true lie, what it was intended to accomplish, a crime. The act is easy to prove, the thought pattern, what was in someone’s head, the mental objective behind an action, much less so. Imagine those issues being debated in a divided America during say a presidential election campaign? Rare is the challenge to peoples’ belief in the rule of law. Was the Deep State ready to go that far?

    That’s the Abyss. Perhaps future historians of January 6 and Mar-a-Lago will tell us how close we really got to it.





    Related Articles:

    Copyright © 2020. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

  • Recent Comments

    • Rich Bauer said...


      The Abyss? It’s a wet dream fantasy. The James Cameron film that represents the reality the current ship of GOP state, it’s theTitanic. Donnie failed to realize the dangerous waters he was swimming. If he thought his stolen boxes of state secrets could help him race again in 2024, it was a bad bet. Donnie will be indicted for crimes much worse than Reality Winner was convicted. No doubt the FBI has the tapes. Donnie will have years to look into the Abyss.

      08/26/22 8:39 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      Bauer: If the Democrats finally geld Trump so he can’t run they could still lose the White House by running a doofus candidate (there too many of them out there to name). You might end up lamenting the good old days of Donnie’s buffoonish autocratic appeal if a Pompeo or De Santis becomes POTUS.

      08/27/22 9:33 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...



      The Dems WANT the horses ass to run so DeSantis and the Pompous horses asses can’t. The Dems can wait until the race has begun to box him in. The FBI steward has the video replay of obstruction to claim foul.

      Bet on him, Repugs. He has lost all his supporters money. He will go down in the homestretch, broken, retired to a stable environment..actually a prison cell in Leavenworth.

      This will be THE END of the racist.

      08/27/22 4:17 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      I can’t see a former POTUS being sent to prison. George Bush needs to be in prison way before Trump for what Bush did to America’s reputation and security. It might be that neither party now really knows what to do or what they want to happen in 2024. The outcome might be so contentious that the usual celebration will elude the victor.

      08/28/22 9:01 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...



      If it gets to the point the orange clown gets fitted for an orange jumpsuit, he will use the few classified docs the FBI didn’t recover to get political asylum in Putinland.

      08/28/22 6:08 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Trump takes aPiss into the Abyss: The Trump peepee tape is likely at the bottom of this Abyss. Why would Trump need to violate 18 U.S.C. 2071 – Concealment, Removal, or Mutilation of government documents as it carries as one of its penalties the possible disqualification from holding public office?

      Section 2071 makes it a crime to willfully and unlawfully remove a government record with the intent to conceal or destroy it or to conceal or destroy such documents already in one’s custody. This is a more attractive statute for a prosecutor to apply to Trump than Section 1924, mainly because it does not require that the documents be classified – it applies to all government records.

      It also seems to fit the facts we know so far, namely that the FBI reportedly searched locations within Mar-a-Lago other than the room originally shown to DOJ during their June visit – suggesting that they had received information in the interim that additional documents were being stored, or concealed, elsewhere. For example, FBI agents allegedly searched Trump’s personal safe and his closet. Evidence that Trump had failed to reveal the full scope or all the locations where government records were being stored both to NARA and then to DOJ would also meet the heightened intent standard required by Section 2071, which is that the defendant act “willfully.” This is a heightened standard which typically requires knowledge of the defendant that the conduct is generally illegal. It would be surprising if Trump was not repeatedly informed of the laws for the handling of government documents while he was in office. Moreover, it is also likely that DOJ and NARA warned Trump in writing that retention of such documents would be unlawful.

      In a word, Trump’s DEFENSE LAWYERS chances are PISS-POOR..

      08/29/22 3:13 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      The irony might be that a disqualified Trump could end up being more influential than a running Trump with none of the pitfalls. He’d pick his “spokesman” and his minions would feel they were getting Trump in office for a second term. He’d even be a permanent “guest” at the White House with a special consulting room next to the Oval Office.

      08/30/22 8:41 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Trump must run if the Dems expect to realize their 2024 destiny. The Repugs will have no use for him if he doesn’t run. His supporters wont bet on anyone else. If Lady Graham wants riots in the streets, then the Repugs know what will do it.

      They shoot horses, don’t they?

      08/31/22 8:12 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      “A prosecutor need also look deeply to ensure he can prove intent as necessary, that an act — perjury, for example, was done with the intent to mislead and was not simply a mistake.”

      Got to admit Peter has a point. One top secret paper, sure. But 30 boxes, really?

      There are many reasons why Demented stole those documents. Not one of them are good.

      Try using this excuse on the IRS, Demented. They are investigating you too.

      09/1/22 9:57 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...


      Lordy, I hope there are tapes!

      Just as Nixon was brought down by his recording system of his own creation, so will Demented. The FBI has security video from Trump’s security cameras of people moving the boxes of security documents. These people did not have a security clearance. This evidence, along with very direct information from a source inside regarding the location of classified documents within Mar-a-Lago is essentially the smoking gun to charge Demented with OBSTRUCTION.

      If Trump is too stupid to agree to plea, expect the jury to see the video with witness testimony to convict the moron for concealment of, or lack of cooperation with, the prior efforts to recover those documents.

      Peter’s Abyss take is well-taken here. The Abyss is a 1989 American science fiction film about an American submarine that sunk with top secrets, and a US search and recovery team races against the Soviets to recover them. Just imagine if any of those people moving the boxes were working for Putin…

      09/1/22 10:21 AM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...


      Bauer: If I wanted to protect secretive documents I’d have them in boxes marked: saved funny birthday cards, thank you notes from special donors, warranties for electric shaver, instructions on how to reset my radio/alarm clock snooze setting. Boxes wouldn’t be marked: TOP SECRET!! , DO NOT REMOVE, TRANSFER OR OPEN UNDER PENALTY OF PRISON!

      09/1/22 2:30 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...



      The DOJ should release an unclassified summary of the TS documents that the FBI recovered, as well as an unclassified summary of TS documents that Demented may have destroyed or provided to others. TS SCI docs have a paper trail.

      If the FBI suspects Trump is involved in espionage, you can bet his and his associates’ “wires are being tapped.” This will be a very long investigation lasting until the 2024 election. Trump is already claiming the race is rigged and demanding he should immediately be reinstated as president, claiming he won by millions of votes. Will the GOP risk betting on The Great Exaggerator? Nothing can prevent the horses ass from running again. He could retire to stud with his porn stars, but with his fatty McDonalds diet he just doesn’t have the heart for it. You can bet Mitch is wishing the fat guy would just die in the stretch.

      09/2/22 1:06 PM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)