RE: 13 Russians Indicted By Mueller For Election Tampering
※→ Reasonable, et al,
I can agree that some of this speculation might be accurate. But, back, immediately after the election, there were some serious allegations made with no reason to believe that any of it was true.
Based on what we know now, it is just as likely that Americans, unhappy with the Presidential Election, created the allegations in order to damage the President and the White House ability to function. It is just as likely that the Special Prosecutor is an unwitting marionette to further damage the government.
There are basically three kinds of crimes Mueller’s team might uncover. The first is crimes directly related to the election — if the Trump team engaged in a criminal conspiracy to help hack Hillary Clinton’s email (stealing documents is illegal) or violated
campaign finance laws by soliciting help from a foreign source, for example. The second kind is crimes committed during the investigation itself: witness intimidation, perjury, obstruction of justice, and the like. And the third is crimes committed by Trumpworld members even before they joined the campaign.
Trump could soon be forced into a terrible choice. Either he risks a close associate or family member going to jail — or potentially making a deal with federal prosecutors in return for testimony that could incriminate others — or he uses the presidential pardon power to shield them from federal charges.
It’s clear that Mueller has the legal authority to bring charges against any of Trump’s family members or associates. But there’s (yet another)
legal debate as to whether it’s constitutional for prosecutors to indict the
president himself on criminal charges. ( Ken Starr and many others have said yes he can that no person is above the law.) No president has ever been indicted on serious criminal charges by a state or federal attorney, so we have no Supreme Court precedent to answer the question — just legal theory.
Mueller would likely sidestep that whole minefield and do something that’s
clearly within his powers: make a report to the House of Representatives that documents evidence of “high crimes and misdemeanors,” the constitutional standard for impeachment. If the evidence in Mueller’s report really were damning, it would put a lot of pressure on the House to begin impeachment proceedings.
(COMMENT)
I think I all need to look at facts and not speculate beyond the actual facts and events.
I don't see a connection yet between the indited Russians and the Moscow Government (not an agent of a foreign power).
I don't see a conspiracy between the indited Russians and Americans to knowingly further or advance some evil agenda. What do the Russian get out of this? Usually (not always) a crime in cyberspace is committed for some sort of gain.
I'm not a Sherlock Holmes. I wish someone would fit the pieces together for me and explain who did what to whom? Why they did it? What damage did they cause? Who was injured? Who profited and how?
I want to know how these indictments uncovered a threat to national security?
The Allegation was:
• U.S. Intelligence Community was confident that the Russian Government directed recent hacking of e-mails with the intention of interfering with the U.S. election process.
• It was claimed that Russian leadership favored presidential candidate
Donald Trump over
Hillary Clinton, and that Russian president
Vladimir Putin personally ordered an "influence campaign" to harm Clinton's electoral chances and "undermine public faith in the US democratic process.
I don't want to hear about some scam that a Russian mini-cyber mafia is doing. I want to feel confident that the resources that America layed down on this investigation either "proves" or "disproves" that there is cause to believe that the Allegations were true.
I did not know that it was illegal to lie on the internet and social media. We better be careful about that, because once we make it a crime, we'll have to live with it.
Most Respectfully,
R