Reality Check; The Mueller Report

The following is based upon information and conclusions contained in the “Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election” dated March of 2019, aka The Mueller Report.  I will pose questions with answers and bullet points to provide a foundation for each answer.  Most of the information below came directly from the report.  Some statements are summarizations of material gathered from the report.

1.  Did Russia interfere with our election and did Trump operatives work with foreign nationals to influence the election outcome?  Answer, Yes.

• ·       The Internet Research Agency (IRA), based in St. Petersburg, Russia, is funded by Yevgeniy Prigozhin who is directly tied to Vladimir Putin.
• ·       The IRA sent employees to the U.S. for intelligence-gathering and later used information warfare techniques to undermine the U.S. electoral system.
• ·       The IRA used fake social media accounts to spread misinformation that helped the Trump campaign and harmed the Clinton campaign.
• ·       The IRA, in coordination with the GRU (Russian intelligence agency), hacked email accounts, and documents of the Clinton campaign.
• ·       Russian operatives had multiple contacts with members of the Trump campaign.  The list of individuals with Russian contacts and meetings includes Michael Cohen, George Papadopoulos, Paul Manafort, Jared Kushner, Carter Page, Steve Bannon, and Michael Flynn.  There were no found recordings of these contacts but several of these individuals were found to have lied under oath about these Russian encounters.
• ·       There was not enough evidence of a direct conspiracy between Russian intelligence officers and Trump campaign officials to either bring conspiracy charges or find that the Trump officials were unregistered agents of the Russian government.  Several  of these Trump officials (Manafort, Flynn, & Cohen) did, however, lie under oath in this regard and were found guilty.

2.  Were there Federal election-law violations?  Answer, Yes.

• ·       Foreign nationals are prohibited from providing “anything of value” that would influence an election.
• ·       Americans may not solicit, accept, or receive any such illegal foreign national support regarding an election.
• ·       Donald Trump solicited, in his famous “Russia, if you are listening..” speech, the cooperation of Russia to benefit his campaign.
• ·       Donald Trump, Jr., actively participated in a meeting with Russian operatives when he was promised “dirt” on the Hillary Clinton campaign.

3. (a)  Did the Trump campaign collude with Russia?  Answer, Yes.

3. (b)  Did the Trump campaign break the law by colluding with Russia?  Answer, Probably.

• ·       Collusion defined: “secret or illegal cooperation or conspiracy, especially in order to cheat or deceive others.”
• ·       See the section above on violations of Federal election-law for clarification of collusion with Russia “probably” being in violation of the law.
• ·       It is correct that federal campaign finance laws, which prohibit activity undertaken by foreign nationals to influence elections, do not refer to collusion.  That does not mean, by inference, that they do not directly address activities of the kind in which the Trump campaign reportedly engaged in encouraging and supporting the Russian electoral intervention of 2016.

4.  Did Donald J. Trump obstruct justice during the investigation into the Russian interference with our 2016 election and in so doing did he commit multiple felonies?  Answer, Yes.

• ·        Obstructive act defined: Obstruction-of-justice law "reaches all corrupt conduct capable of producing an effect that prevents justice from being duly administered, regardless of the means employed."  Further, “an effort to influence" a proceeding can qualify as an endeavor to obstruct justice even if the effort was "subtle or circuitous" and "however cleverly or with whatever cloaking of purpose" it was made.
• ·       Over 400 former federal prosecutors, Democrats and Republicans signed a letter that stated that Trump would be charged with multiple felonies for obstruction of justice if he were not the president.
• ·       Page 7 of Volume I of the Mueller Report states that “the President engaged in a second phase of conduct, involving public attacks on the investigation, non-public efforts to control it, and efforts in both public and private to encourage witnesses not to cooperate with the investigation.”
• ·       Page 8 of Volume I of the Mueller Report states that “Under applicable Supreme Court precedent, the Constitution does not categorically and permanently immunize a President for obstructing justice through the use of his Article II powers.  The separation-of-powers doctrine authorizes Congress to protect official proceedings, including those of courts and grand juries, from corrupt, obstructive acts regardless of their source.”
• ·       One of the more egregious examples of obstruction came when Trump ordered White House Counsel Don McGahn to say that he never ordered him to fire the Special Counsel.  He was later asked to place a “letter on file” that would deny that the president had sought to fire the Special Counsel.  McGahn again refused.  These actions by the president “qualify as an obstructive act.”  [page 118 Mueller Report]  

This is not a comprehensive analysis of the 400+ page Mueller Report but it highlights some of the points with which all Americans should be aware.  It is understandable that some people are confused as to what is actually in the report.  In an interview with a Republican that attended a town hall meeting recently where they discussed some of the matters mentioned above, that individual said she had no idea that the report even suggested that Trump may have committed crimes. She then admitted that she only watched conservative news sources.

People should know that, contrary to statements repeated in soundbites and in Tweets, the President of the United States committed crimes before and after he was sworn into office.  He has lied to the American public about those crimes in his attempted coverup.  In many instances, he has hired or appointed individuals who share his beliefs and carry out his bidding even when it violates the law.  When some of those individuals refused to carry out his bidding, they were fired, disgraced, and vilified.  The rogues' gallery of characters mentioned in the Mueller Report and who were within the president's selected support group, reads like a casting call for a new Godfather movie.  When it comes to moral turpitude in the political arena, the bar has been set very low in recent years.  With this president, that bar has been buried in the sand. 

You don't have to take my word for all of this, read the report for yourselves.  This link features two PDF's that are word searchable.  Portions of the report are redacted but there is enough still visible to draw your own conclusions about the legality and morality of this president.  Remember, the report was written by a Republican who was selected by another Republican.  The Mueller Report was written as part of an investigation into Russian influence in our election process and coincidentally found evidence of corruption, obstruction of justice, bank fraud, witness tampering, and several unregistered foreign (Russia, Turkey, and Ukraine) agents.  


The chart below was pulled from a New York Times article published in February of 2018.  The list is not up to date but is offered as an example and proof of the fact that the "witch hunt" bagged a few witches.

Charged by the special counsel Guilty Charged		Charges
	Paul ManafortFormer campaign chairman	Tax evasion, bank fraud, failure to disclose a foreign bank account and witness tampering.	Sentenced to 7.5 years in prisonMarch 13
	Roger J. Stone Jr.Longtime informal adviser to Mr. Trump	Obstruction of an official proceeding, making false statements and witness tampering	ChargedJan. 24
	Michael D. CohenMr. Trump’s former lawyer	Lying to Congress (pleaded guilty Nov. 29, 2018)	Sentenced to 3 years in prisonDec. 12, 2018
	Richard PinedoCalifornia man who sold bank accounts online	Identity fraud (pleaded guiltyFeb. 12, 2018)	Sentenced to six months in prisonOct. 10, 2018
	George PapadopoulosFormer campaign adviser	Lying to the F.B.I. about conversations with people he believed were working on behalf of Russians (pleaded guilty Oct. 5, 2017)	Sentenced to 14 days in prisonSept. 7, 2018
	Twelve Russian intelligence officers	Conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States, identity theft, conspiracy to launder money	ChargedJuly 13, 2018
	Konstantin V. KilimnikRussian Army-trained linguist and associate of Mr. Manafort	Obstruction of justice	ChargedJune 8, 2018
	Alex van der ZwaanLawyer who worked with Mr. Manafort and Mr. Gates	Lying to investigators about conversations with Mr. Gates (pleaded guilty Feb. 20, 2018)	Sentenced to 30 days in prisonApril 3, 2018
	Rick GatesFormer campaign adviser	Financial fraud and lying to the F.B.I.	Pleaded guiltyFeb. 23, 2018
	Thirteen Russian nationalsand three related companies	Conspiracy to defraud the U.S., conspiracy to commit bank fraud, identity theft	ChargedFeb. 16, 2018
	Michael T. FlynnFormer national security adviser	Lying to the F.B.I. about conversations with the Russian ambassador	Pleaded guiltyDec. 1, 2017

Charged in related cases Guilty Charged		Charges
	Stephen M. CalkChairman of Chicago bank	Issued loans in an effort to obtain a position in the Trump administration	ChargedUnsealed May 23
	Maria ButinaAlleged Russian agent	Conspiring to act as a foreign agent	Sentenced to 18 months in prisonApril 26
	Gregory B. CraigWhite House counsel in Obama administration	False statements to the Justice Department about work he did in 2012 for the Russia-aligned government of Ukraine	ChargedApril 11
	Paul ManafortFormer campaign chairman	Mortgage fraud and more than a dozen other state charges	ChargedUnsealed March 13
	Bijan KianFormer business associate of Michael T. Flynn	Conspiracy to violate federal lobbying rules	ChargedDec. 17, 2018
	Ekim AlptekinFormer business associate of Michael T. Flynn	Conspiracy to violate federal lobbying rules and lying to F.B.I.	ChargedDec. 17, 2018
	Michael D. CohenMr. Trump’s former lawyer	Tax evasion, bank fraud, campaign finance violations (pleaded guilty Aug. 21, 2018)	Sentenced to 3 years in prisonDec. 12, 2018
	Sam PattenLobbyist linked to Konstantin V. Kilimnik	Failing to register to work as an agent of a foreign power	Pleaded guiltyAug. 31, 2018

What's In A Label? By Jack Dallas

Either we label ourselves or others do it for us.  These labels are how others perceive us or how we perceive ourselves.  On the political front, these labels normally have to do with party affiliation or ideology.  You may register as a Republican or a Democrat.  You may also be a Libertarian, Socialist, Democratic Socialist, Communist, Anarchist, or a Political Atheist.  None of the labels in this latter group requires registration in our system of government and some people may identify with more than one label.   I am old enough to remember that some Republicans today would have been Democrats back in the ‘50s.  This would be especially true of those with a sense of white entitlement or at least a fear of white subjugation. 

1860 Presidential Campaign Poster

In the1860s, after the Civil War, Republicans passed laws that expanded protections for African Americans and advanced social reforms while Democrats largely opposed these expansions of power.  Republicans favored big business, which also meant they supported big government to fund Western expansion and the transcontinental railroad.

Sometime between our World Wars, these positions were switched and the Democrats, under the leadership of F.D. Roosevelt, ushered in the New Deal to solve the problems of the Great Depression.  This brought us financial reforms, welfare and pension programs, and infrastructure development.  It was the dreaded “S-Word,” but it worked.  Roosevelt instituted a series of experimental New Deal projects and programs, such as the CCC, the WPA, the TVA, the SEC and others, that aimed to restore some measure of dignity and prosperity to many Americans.

Roosevelt signs New Deal

Then around 1948, the Democratic Party was splintered by the Southern Democrats who formed a new party, the Dixiecrats, who were determined to protect state’s rights and protect racial segregation.  Having grown up in Florida, I remember these years.  While the Dixiecrats were short-lived (founded 1948; dissolved 1948), the repercussions were long lasting in the south.  The Dixiecrats eventually flipped parties and joined the Republicans.  When Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he virtually forced the South to join the Republican Party.  Johnson literally said this in a quote while signing the legislation.

While we can talk about state’s rights and big versus small government, racism is at the very core of these arguments.  The party of Lincoln responsible for the emancipation of the slaves and advancing social justice has evolved to become the party of Trump, which believes that among the White Nationalists in Charlottesville, there were “some very fine people.”  They believe that there is a “brown menace” flowing across our borders from the south bent on murder, rape, and robbing Americans.  It wasn’t that many years ago that the Democratic Party in the south, dominated by segregationists like George Wallace, Lee Atwater, and Strom Thurmond fought integration with a passion.  However, eventually, the south became a Republican Party stronghold.  Democratic control was then shifted from the south to various east/west coastal regions of our country.

This is all to say that neither the Democratic Party nor the Republican Party has stayed true to a singular objective that can be traced throughout its existence.  In fact, both parties have evolved their points of view on a variety of topics.  The conservative Republican Party of small government and fiscal responsibility just recently passed a massive tax break by plunging us into more debt.  They just coincidentally gave the largest breaks to corporate America and wealthy America with but crumbs for the rest.  This may have helped the economy in the short run, but someone will eventually have to pay the bill.

Therefore, as labels go, saying you are a Democrat or a Republican, will never truly identify the totality of anyone’s convictions.  The dynamic nature of any party will reflect the beliefs of their current leaders.  Among our congressional leaders, many are like windsocks and change directions whenever there is a shift in the political winds.  Their hypocrisy is made even more apparent with the archiving of video by news channels, which take great pleasure putting together clips of politicians taking one position in one year and an opposite position the next.  Our current president has managed to make contradictory remarks on topics within the same speech to the delight and confusion of broadcasters.

“You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.”  Bob Dylan

Few Republicans are White Supremacists or openly racist.  Many will merely tolerate that small group for other ideological reasons.  Perhaps they are evangelicals who place Christianity above all else and will just accept the racists among them.  Some may be fiscal conservatives that still believe the economy will survive a dose of freewheeling tax breaks.  They merely accept that those radical racists are but a fringe group within the party.

Democrats are not without blame here either.  We have those on the far left that might want to be fiscally irresponsible in order to bring about some philosophical equality among people.  We have centrists who have beliefs touted by both parties with which they identify but label themselves to be more liberal or conservative on any given day.

Video:  Lindsey Graham's shifting opinions on Trump

By observation and experience, it is my opinion that politicians have to “color outside the lines” in order to first get elected.  Once in office, their main goal seems to be another term in office.  They fight for constituents with deep pockets or those who may control voting blocks that will benefit their eventual reelection.  With this latter objective in mind, they must compromise their perhaps true beliefs in order to stay in the party’s good graces.  They vote like sheep along party lines and rarely argue conscience in deference to any party objective.  To members of either party, it eventually becomes clear that you can no longer vote for the character of the person in office but you must vote for their proclaimed party allegiance.

I can remember a time when, as a Democrat, I would cross party lines if I liked a candidate on the “other side.”  Now, I enter the voting booth and vote a straight party ticket.  I would rather be able to vote for the person but that is no longer realistic given the stranglehold wielded by party whips.

A whip is an official of a political party whose task is to ensure party discipline in a legislature.  They ensure that members of the party vote according to the party platform, rather than according to their own individual ideology or the will of their constituents.  Whips are the party's "enforcers.”

Labeling someone a Democrat or Republican is only a generality.  It just indicates a general preference.  If you prefer chocolate ice cream over strawberry but will enjoy either when offered you should understand preferences as contrasted with a deeply held conviction.  As a Democrat, I don’t hold with some of the party beliefs but I hold with most of their objectives.  I would say that political purists are rare and those few people are probably just pliable individuals who don’t want to think for themselves.

We are now a nation divided.  We are divided by labels.  We are divided by ideologies that seem to be personally fluid and reliant on the strength of the sales pitch of proponents.  These labels, however, are rarely adequate to fully describe anyone’s true values.  You are unlikely to conform with every topic of your identified party affiliation.  While your core value system is likely part of your long-held belief system, political labels are dynamic.  Therein lays one of the many problems with labels.  While you must register as a Democrat or Republican to be allowed to vote in primaries, this shouldn’t always dictate your vote.  While I now am forced to vote my party line for individual representatives for the reasons described above, I still can individually express my feelings on amendments and other political issues on the ballot.

Buckley v. Valeo: "limits on election spending restrict free speech"
Citizens United v. Fed. Elect. Com.:  "corporations may spend from general treasuries"
McCutcheon v. Fed. Elect. Com.:  "aggregate limits on individual spending unconstitutional"

I find that political labels are like canine breeds.  The much-maligned American Pit Bull Terrier has a temperament described as:  "stubborn, affectionate, loyal, obedient, clownish, strong-willed, friendly, intelligent, and courageous."  I'm sure some will disagree with this assessment, especially those who may have been bitten.  I have a couple of these in my neighborhood who the owner walks off the leash he carries.  I get along with most dogs and find these two to be quite friendly.  I do however count my fingers after petting them.  The point here is that any label is a generality and there are exceptions to any assigned amalgamation of traits.


If we are ever able to disassociate money from its stranglehold on our political process, perhaps we can return to a time when you can vote for an individual’s character and not just their party affiliation.  I doubt that this will be the case within my lifetime.

It's A Matter of Character, by Jack Dallas

Whatever your political leanings I would think that most Americans would want a person of character to represent our nation.  To this end, I feel that Donald J. Trump is so lacking that he should not be considered for any political office.

Most of us have heard of his failed business ventures.  Most would agree that any successful businessperson should be allowed a few mistakes.  Nothing ventured nothing gained.  Among those failures are his casino in New Jersey, the Trump University, Trump Steaks, Trump Airlines, Trump magazine, Trump Mortgage, Trump’s travel site, Trump Vodka, etc., but here I would like to shed a bit of light on just one of his business misadventures where his character is clearly evident.

"It shows that business crime may not always pay but a lack of scruples and morals can have value."

Trump Ocean Resort Baja Mexico is but one of several failed “Tower” ventures.  While all of these tower failures bear similarities, this one typifies Trump’s demeanor and attitude.  It shows that business crime may not always pay but a lack of scruples and morals can have value.  In the Baja Mexico, Ocean Resort, D.J. Trump licensed his name to developers.  He became a front person to add credulity to the project.  He represented himself as the developer/builder of the project.  He claimed to have purchased his own unit in Tower 1.  Two of his siblings (Don Jr. and Ivanka) were buying condos there as well. They all attended events for the promotion of the project.

Billboard fraudulently states, "Trump Owning Here..."
They were eventually known as Ghost Towers

In 2006, two Los Angeles-based developers named Jason Grosfeld and Adam Fisher announced they had formed a partnership with Trump to develop a three-tower 525-unit ocean-front condo and hotel project in Baja Mexico.  The condominiums would cost from $275,000 to $3 million and would sit on 17 acres with swimming pools, spas, tennis courts, and fine dining.  The developers built a sales office on the site, produced slick brochures, and a slick seven and a half minute video featuring both Donald Trump and Ivanka Trump promoting the project.  

From July 2007 Press Release
"property built by...Donald J. Trump..."

In the video, Trump claims, “that when I build, I have investors that follow me all over.  They invest in what I build, and that’s why I’m so excited about Trump Ocean resort.”  Anyone who watched this video, who read the brochure, or who may have talked to D.J. Trump, Ivanka, or Don Jr. at VIP cocktail receptions, would be led to believe that Donald Trump was the developer/builder and was heavily committed to the project.  They would be told that Don Sr., Don Jr., and Ivanka had purchased units in Tower One.  In a 2007 sales brochure, purchasers were told that the Baja resort was being “developed by one of the most respected names in real estate, Donald J. Trump.”

From July 2007 Press Release
Donald Trump Jr. never bought any unit

As is now known, these were all lies designed to defraud purchasers.  We know they were lies because investors sued him in 2013 for fraud and Trump lost.  However, Trump also won in that the investors only got back a fraction of their money.  How much they got is confidential, as Trump knows to keep all such arrangements sealed.

While many lost thousands of dollars in this debacle, Trump’s lawyers still claim that the purchasers should have read the fine print in their contracts.  Ivanka Trump told CBS News that her family had “lived up to our obligation under a license agreement.”  She said: “We were never the developer of this project, and that was made clear.  We never took anyone’s deposit.”  She is correct in this as she and her family members only collected licensing fees and were never the developers.

Perhaps the failure could have been foreseen....

No member of the Trump family ever invested a dime in this project but they lied to the public for financial gain.  Three family members showed up at promotional events and told "investors" aka people buying vacation homes, that they would all be neighbors.  When the project failed Ivanka Trump stated, “I am sorry for everyone, but we are in the same boat.”  Well, if she meant that the investors were in a sinking lifeboat being towed behind the Trump yacht by a badly frayed rope, maybe there is some accuracy in the analogy.

“I am sorry for everyone, but we are in the same boat.”  Ivanka Trump
Somehow I doubt she was aboard this one.

If this were an isolated incident perhaps Trump Ocean Resort Baja could be chalked up to "an oversight" or lapse in judgment.  But as they say on TV, wait, there's more.  He did it again in Tampa.  With Trump Tower in Tampa, Florida, Trump sold the use of his name to developers of the $300 million condo project for $2 million. According to Rolling Stone, the developers collected down payments from investors but after the project went south in 2008, the snookered buyers sued Trump for misleading them. Trump did settle the suit, but plaintiffs lost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Trump also defaulted on a $640 million construction loan for Trump International Hotel & Tower in Chicago in 2008.  Then there was Trump Hollywood, a $355 million project where lenders were forced to foreclose but again, Trump claimed that he only licensed his name and wasn’t guilty of fraud.  Then again in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, where people thought they were buying into the Trump Hotel & Tower Ft. Lauderdale (now called the Conrad) but lost their deposits of $100,000.  Trump again stated he only licensed his name.

This predatory practice of not risking his own money, licensing his name, deceiving buyers into thinking he has a commitment and/or is the builder, has gotten Donald J. Trump into trouble time after time.  But, he keeps making money playing the same game.  He gets away with this by defrauding innocent buyers, getting sued in court, and settling the suits for pennies on the dollar.  An individual with scruples or some sense of morality wouldn't be able to sleep at night but I don't think that is Mr. Trump's problem.  His sociopathic personality lets him sleep like a baby.

If you know all of these things about his business practices and still think he is a fit president, I imagine your values differ from mine.  Even if you still think he is a good president, I doubt you would buy a condo from this man.

Your New Luxury Trump Tower Condo
Caveat Emptor