The Mueller Report – A Few Thoughts on Volume II of II

As I began my previous post: The long-awaited, or dreaded, Mueller Report: Volume II is out.

This work concentrates not on Russian interference in the 2016 election and any connections with the Trump campaign, but on whether or not Trump (et al) obstructed or attempted to obstruct the government’s investigation of that interference. As such, it was more difficult reading and there was a great deal of legalize with which to deal.


  • Mr. Trump and, many, if not most, of the people around him have no respect for the truth. In fact, I have my doubts that some of them even have a concept of “truth.” If the statement helped Mr. Trump it was good; if the statement harmed Mr. Trump it was bad. Whether the statement was true or not had/has no place in the discussion.
  • It is interesting that some of the people surrounding Mr. Trump (whether in government positions or not) refused to follow his instructions, sometimes repeatedly.
  • Questions of (Constitutional) law are complicated — especially, involving the separation of powers.
  • We are lucky in that we have a system of checks and balances which limits both the powers of Congress and the President.

A charge of Obstruction of Justice needs three elements:

  1. An obstructive act —

    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.”

  2. Nexus (a connection) to a pending or contemplated official proceeding;

  3. Corruptly (intent) —

    The word “corruptly” provides the intent element for obstruction of justice and means acting “knowingly and dishonestly” or “with an improper motive.”

In other words: Did Mr. Trump (or others at his direction) corruptly obstruct, or attempt to obstruct, the investigations by the FBI or Special Counsel.

The Mueller Report goes into a great deal of detail to explain the above, the conduct of Mr. Trump and his associates in regards to it and the constitutional ramifications of various actions and charges.

I found the Report to be damning.

I also found the lack of people willing to come forward and honestly tell their stories disturbing. There are no real “good guys” connected with the White House. Everyone, even those who refused to carry out Mr. Trump’s instructions, seemed/seems to be concerned with only themselves — no one puts America first.

It took me two days to read through Volume II. While the language was no more difficult than Volume I, the content density of the material was greater and frequently required re-reading of sections.

Following the investigative material and its conclusions is the Appendix:

AAAAAA. The order establishing the Special Counsel;

AAAAAB. A Glossary of names and brief descriptions of individuals and entities referenced in the two volumes of the report;

AAAAAC. Questions submitted to Mr. Trump for written replies (and the reasoning behind this) and Mr. Trump’s replies;

AAAAAD. The matters transferred or referred by the Special Counsel’s Office, as well as cases prosecuted by the Office that are now completed.


To get the full impact of the Mueller Report you must actually read it. No media summary and commentary is sufficient. However, the following may give you a hint of its effect.

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, 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 judgment. 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 judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

What has happened to the Republican Party?

As I look at our Republican President I’m really rather gobsmacked at his (alleged) behavior and our reactions to it.

First, let us take his congratulations to Putin regarding his re-election. Can you imagine Eisenhower doing this? Especially with all of the questions regarding (alleged) election tampering? And using nerve gas to assassinate people in England?

How about either Eisenhower or Reagan thinking that it is a good idea to have a President-for-Life in the US?

Or, perhaps, we should replace Mr. Trump’s name with that of Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan or Bush in one of the stories revolving around sex life?

From today’s LA Times:

President (Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan or Bush) faced new legal and political jeopardy Tuesday as a former Playboy Playmate and alleged paramour sued to break a confidentially agreement and a judge rejected his move to quash a lawsuit stemming from a charge of sexual assault.


In three separate lawsuits, he (Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan or Bush) is accused of sexually mauling a former contestant on . . .  his show set in a corporate boardroom, and paying money to hush two alleged lovers, the former Playboy model, Karen McDougal, 46, and pornographic actress Stormy Daniels, 39.

Can you imagine Mr. Reagan — “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” saying: “I will build a great, great wall on our southern border, . . .”

No, just no, no, NO!

None of these men, nor the Democrat Presidents during my lifetime, were, or are perfect. Some of them were good presidents and some of them not so good. Some were/are good human beings, some not. Some I admired and others not.

But, I believe that each of these men, even Mr. Nixon, put service to his country above personal considerations. I do not believe that this is true of Mr. Trump.


I believe that like Marcus Licinius Crassus, Donald John Trump is an opportunistic billionaire plutocrat intent only on aggrandizing himself and his fortune. He is not interested in what is good for America or Americans. He is not concerned with the welfare of others only himself. He treats those not of his social, economic or ethnic class as lesser beings.

Crassus and Trump
Crassus and Trump

This also seems to be true of much of the current Republican leadership.

Here in California the Republican Party is rapidly becoming an irrelevancy. If things continue as they are, this will continue to its logical conclusion in both California and the rest of the nation . . . and the Republican Party will go the way of the Whig Party — which last elected a president in 1848, Zachary Taylor.

. . . and we’ll end up with a super-majority Democratic Party and a number of minor parties unable to mount any sort of credible opposition to the Democrats in Congress, much less, elect a President.

Note: If the above seem unduly pessimistic, Zachary Taylor was elected President in 1848 and the Whig Party was dissolved in 1854 — just six years later.

Note 2: No, I didn’t forget Mr. Ford; he was not elected to the Presidency and succeeded to the Presidency with the resignation of Mr. Nixon.

The Right to Bear Arms: Purchasing Power — Part 1


When this nation was founded in the late Eighteenth Century the predominant weapon used by an infantryman was a flintlock musket. A proficient musketeer could load and fire his weapon two or, maybe, three times in a minute. The weapon had an effective range of about 100 yards.

The American Long Rifle (Kentucky rifle, Pennsylvania rifle) was accurate — could hit a man-sized target — at a range of 200-250 yards, but was slower to reload than the musket. The slower reloading times were due to tighter tolerances required for the bullet to make use of the rifling — spiral grooves which caused the bullet/ball to spin and thus increasing its accuracy.

Pistols were also single-shot weapons requiring similar load times of the era’s muskets and rifles — the six-shooter weapons of our Western movies had not yet made an appearance on the scene.

These were the weapons in use when our “founding fathers” wrote and adopted the Constitution and the Bill of Rights (including the 2nd Amendment).

There were no semi-automatic or automatic pistols and rifles capable of firing several rounds a second or hundreds of rounds a minute. And yet, deaths in battles and wars still reached into the hundreds and thousands.

These were still the basic weapons used during the American Civil War of the 1860s. The opposing armies were each made up of tens of thousands of men and boys — and casualties in a single day “often” exceeded 10,000.

It seems to me that most of the mass-shootings in the US over the last several years have occurred at close ranges; i.e., at distances of less than 50-100 yards. The shootings at schools such as Sandy Hook Elementary and Douglas High School occurred at ranges of less than 50 yards. Thus, it is not the weapon’s accuracy but its rate of fire that is important.


A large infantry platoon might contain 50 men. In the late 1700s such a group of soldiers might fire their muskets a combined 100 to 150 times in a single minute. Today, a single individual, using an AR-15 type semi-automatic rifle can fire a like number times per minute — limited only by the strength of his trigger finger and the time it takes him to reload (change ammunition clips).

How might Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Hamilton and Madison and other “founding fathers” have written the 2nd Amendment to the U. S. Constitution had the weapons of today been in existence in the 1790s?


Perhaps, just perhaps, we should visit that question again.

Perhaps, just perhaps, the 2nd Amendment should be repealed and another, better suited to the weapons of today, adopted in its place.

And perhaps, just perhaps, Mr. Trump is more right than he realizes; perhaps we need to examine the mental health of our entire society. A society which places the “right to bear arms” above the lives of its children.



A-FNN — Trump Initiative on Korea

Breaking News — from A-FNN

Dateline — Washington DC

A-FNN White House correspondent Amber Gris reports that unnamed, but highly placed, sources within the Trump White House have confirmed our earlier reports about President Trump’s decision to re-work American policy towards North Korea.

President Donald John Trump
President Donald John Trump

In an astounding reversal of his long-standing policy of confrontation with Kim Jong-un, President Trump will announce tomorrow that the United States, its allies and the People’s Republic of China will end their sanctions targeting North Korea. Instead of sanctions, billions of dollars in aid will be given to its government and people. The aid will include, but will not be limited to the following:

  • 5 million smartphones, enough for 20% of the country’s population. Included in this will be 1 year unlimited access accounts with the provider of their choice. (With his Mr. Kim will receive his own Twitter account, Facebook page and the Candy Crush app.)
  • 2 million iPads
  • 5 million Microsoft Surface computers pre-loaded with a Korean language version of Windows 10
  • 500,000 used (re-called) Volkswagen diesel automobiles (each with a credit card for 1000 gallons of Chinese fuel)
  • 20 Walmarts

In an effort to combat malnutrition:

  • 100 McDonalds restaurants (including one reserved for the exclusive use of Mr. Kim and his family)
  • 50 Domino’s and
  • 50 Papa John’s pizza stores
  • 100,000 tons of Frito-Lay snack products
  • 1 year’s supply each of Coke, Pepsi and Bud Light for the entire population
  • 100 years supply of high-fructose corn syrup

In an effort to combat a perceived lack of healthcare for much of the Korean population Sen. Bill Cassidy, Sen. Lindsey Graham and Sen. Joni Ernst will tour the country espousing their ideas regarding healthcare reform on the Korean Peninsula.

Rep. Duncan Hunter, Rep. Paul Ryan, Sen. Mitch McConnell and Rep. Nancy Pelosi will give a presentation on the advantages of a democratically elected legislature and its noted efficiencies in getting new and reformist legislation enacted with a minimum of hassle.

These, and other related measures, will be proposed by Mr. Trump during his speech tomorrow before the NAAPMS (National Association for the Advancement and Preservation of Moral Sanity).

A-FNN: Alternative-Fact News Nutwork // a division of I-Witless News

Breaking News from A-FNN — 5.26.17

Breaking News — from A-FNN

Dateline — Washington DC

A-FNN White House correspondent Amber Gris reports that unnamed, but highly placed, sources within the Trump White House have confirmed our earlier reports about President Trump’s decision to cut funds from the Federal Budget for California’s earthquake early-warning system. Also included was the decision to eliminate funding for tsunami-monitoring stations in oceans.

When asked about this President Trump replied: “Yes, we intend to focus on core USGS science and efficiency. While California (a state in which millions of illegals voted for my opponent in the last election) will lose funding, states which sit astride the New Madrid fault in the interior of our nation (and legally voted for me) will see earthquake research monies increased.

“Most of the rest of our great nation cares nothing about “Blue California” and will little mourn its loss in a major earthquake. Besides, I and many of my colleagues own land in California’s interior, and its neighboring states which will become valuable coastal resort properties when California slides into the Pacific.”

A-FNN: Alternative-Fact News Nutwork