THE MUELLER REPORT. PART 3. BY ANY OTHER NAME. BARR SUMMARY LETTER. PART 3.

The main problem with Attorney General Barrs summary of the Special Counsels report, when relating information about Russian Interference in the 2016 election, and possible collusion with members of the Donald Trump Campaign, is a failure to clarify Terms and Definitions. This is especially important when the summary letter quotes actual parts of the Special Councels Report dealing with POSSIBLE RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT IN THE 2016 ELECTION.

This occurs twice:

 As the report states: "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian Government in its election interference activities."

 The Special Counsel defined "coordination" as an "agreement-tacit or express-between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government on election interference."

As you can see, when the Report itself is quoted, the term "RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT" IS USED with no qualifications, it is clear and consise.  However, the Barr Summary letter uses multiple terms that creates confusion as to what is actually being discussed, and the exact nature of who and what is being accused or exonerated.

FROM THE SUMMARY LETTER WE GET:

- "...the results of the Special Counsel's investigation into Russia's interference..."

- "... persons associated with the Russian government in connection..."

- "... joined the Russian conspiracies..."

- "... Special Counsel found that Russian government actors..."

- "... Russian military officers for conspiring to hack into computers..." 

-"... Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.

What this doesn't tell us is if these were RUSSIAN NATIONALS
WORKING:

-  WITHOUT THE KNOWLEGE OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
-  WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
-  ON BEHALF OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
-  INDEPENDENT OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT.
-  AS A MEMBER OF, OR EMPLOYED BY, THE
   RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT. 

THIS WOULD INCLUDE MEMBERS OF THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT WHO WENT "RENEGADE."

TO BE CONTINUED...

THE MUELLER REPORT AND TESTIMONY, ARTICLES AND POSTS, START TO FINISH: COLLUSION OR DELUSION. THE BARR LETTER. PART 2.

(THE INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THIS 

ARTICLE IS TAKEN FROM ATTORNEY GENERAL

BARRS LETTER TO CONGRESS SUMMARIZING 

THE FINDINGS OF THE MUELLER REPORT, AND 

PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED MATERIAL THAT

APPEARS ON THIS WEBSITE.)

Well, it seems that a "MYTHOLOGY" has already developed around

the contents of Attorney General Barrs Summary Letter detailing

the Special Councels findings of 2016 Election Probe about possible

COLLUSION,INTERFERENCE, CONSPIRACY etc., that provided the

TRUMP CAMPAIGN WITH PRIVILEGED OR PRIVATE INFORMATION THAT

THEY USED AGAINST HILLARY CLINTON,TO INFLUENCE THE FINAL

OUTCOME.

MYTH #1.-  DONALD TRUMP, AND HIS CAMPAIGN,WERE CLEARED FROM
ACCUSATIONS THAT THEY WERE INVOLVED IN ANY TYPE OF COLLUSION
OR INTERFERENCE WITH THE ELECTION.

NOT TRUE- Contrary to what has been said by over the airwaves, what follows is taken from the summary letter:

THE SUMMARY LETTER SAYS THE FOLLOWING- "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 U.S. presidential election."

THIS STATEMENT WAS FOLLOWED BY THIS QUOTE, WHICH WAS TAKEN FROM THE BODY OF THE SPECIAL COUNCELS REPORT-  “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

The Difference? THE SUMMARY LETTER, (WRITTEN BY ATTORNEY GENERAL BARR), USES THE FOLLOWING WORDING: "Conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election."

THE ACTUAL QUOTE THAT IT REFERS TO SAYS: "Conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SAYING:

"...WITH RUSSIA..." INSTEAD OF ..."WITH THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT...",

THIS DIFFERENCE IS ESPECIALLY TELLING IF WE LOOK AT 
SPECIFIC CRIMINAL ACTIVITIES THAT WERE UNCOVERED 
DURING THE INVESTIGATION.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SHOULD KNOW THAT.

THE MUELLER REPORT AND TESTIMONY, ARTICLES AND POSTS, START TO FINISH: WHAT IT IS, AND WHAT IT IS NOT. THE BARR LETTER. PART 1.

(THE INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THIS 

ARTICLE IS TAKEN FROM ATTORNEY GENERAL

BARRS LETTER TO CONGRESS SUMMARIZING 

THE FINDINGS OF THE MUELLER REPORT, AND 

PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED MATERIAL THAT

APPEARS ON THIS WEBSITE.)

IF YOU VISIT THIS SITE ON A REGULAR BASIS, THE

FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS PROBABLY FAMILIAR;
THE 2016 ELECTION: "INFLUENCING " AN ELECTION,
AND "RIGGING" AN ELECTION ARE TWO DIFFERENT 
ISSUES.

THE MAIN POINT OF THE ARTICLE CAN BE SUMMED UP BY
THE FOLLOWING, (TAKEN FROM THE BODY OF THE POST.)

OBTAINING INFORMATION ILLEGALLY, AND PROVIDING
IT TO ONE SIDE IN AN ELECTION TO HARM THE OTHER 
BY ATTEMPTING TO INFLUENCE VOTERS...

AND

...PHYSICALLY ALTERING VOTING COUNTS THROUGH THE BALLOT BOX, OR COMPUTER, SO THAT ONE CANDIDATE EMERGES VICTORIOUS...

...ARE SEPERATE AND DISTINCT ACTIONS. THE TRUTH OF ONE IS NOT DEPENDENT ON THE OTHER. THEY MAY BOTH BE TRUE, OR BOTH FALSE. ONE MAY BE TRUE, AND THE OTHER FALSE. WE MUST NOT ALLOW EVIDENCE, OR LACK OF, IN ONE CASE TO BE USED IN JUDGING THE OTHER.

HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION?

A MAIN GOAL OF THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION WAS TO ANSWER THE FIRST PART, WHICH INCLUDES THE RUSSIAN GOVERNMENT OBTAINING PRIVATE AND PRIVILEGED INFORMATION ABOUT THE OPPOSITION PARTY AND CANDIDATE, AND OFFERING IT TO TRUMPS CAMPAIGN 
TO HELP WIN THE ELECTION.

HOWEVER, IN THE SECOND PART, THE ALTERING OF VOTING COUNTS TO ENSURE A DONALD TRUMP VICTORY, IS NOT SOMETHING ADDRESSED BY THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION, AND HAS NO BEARING ON THE POSSIBLE FINDINGS OF "COLLUSION" OR "OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE" THAT ARE THE GOALS OF THE INVESTIGATION.  

ALONG THESE LINES, THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES INVESTIGATION OF DONALD TRUMPS FINANCES, BOTH THE SOURCES AND THE POSSIBILITY THAT FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC POLICY COULD BE INFLUENCED FOR THE RIGHT CONSIDERATIONS, IS SEPERATE FROM ANYTHING THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION ADDRESSED, AND ANY ATTEMPT TO BRING THEM TOGETHER IS DEMONSTRABLY FALSE.

IN THE END, IT COMES DOWN TO THE FOLLOWING: IT IS NO MORE VALID FOR ME TO SAY THAT DONALD TRUMP IS GUILTY OF FINANCIAL CRIMES IN THE HOUSE INVESTIGATION BECAUSE THE MUELLER REPORT SUPPORTS THE ACCUSATION OF "COLLUSION" OR "OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE,"... 

...THEN IT WOULD BE FOR ME TO SAY THAT HE IS INNOCENT OF ANY CHARGES BROUGHT BY THE HOUSE BECAUSE THE MUELLER INVESTIGATION DID NOT FIND SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO BRING CHARGES AGAINST HIM,(OR HIS CAMPAIGN.) 

THE MOST DANGEROUS ONE OF ALL. PT 3.

I would like to make one thing clear: The HYPOCRITE IS BY NO MEANS FOUND IN A SINGLE POLITICAL PARTY, OR REPRESENTS A PARTICULAR POLITICAL, MORAL, OR RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY.  

They may be more Prevalent on One Side of a DEBATE OR DISCUSSION,but the LACK OF A COHERENT LINE OF REASONING IS NOT FOUND ON JUST ONE SIDE OF THE AISLE.  It is Vital to Identify Hypocritical Thinking as soon as possible, before it has a chance to take hold and become Entrenched in the Minds of Those who may not realize the Inherent Irrationality of what it Truly is.

On a Personal Level, I have found it More Discouraging when it Happens Among Those I Think Should Know Better.  

On one Hand there are Certain Types of Public Figures, Politicians, Decision Makers etc., I have come to expect it from. Calling out Their Self- Centered and Egotistical Thinking Processes is not a surprise, because They Rarely come up with a Well- Reasoned Line of Argument.  They don't change, and Those who Support the same Agenda could care less anyway.

What is Really Troubling, is when I see Intelligent, Insightful, and Focused Individuals Toss out Critical Thinking and Logic, when it Doesn't Lead Them to the Conclusions They Expect, or more likely, Desire.  For Some, it is Difficult to Understand that:

LOGIC AND CRITICAL THINKING ARE MENTAL PROCESSES, AND DON'T HAVE A PRECONCEIVED AGENDA THAT WILL LEAD YOU DOWN ANY PATH YOU DESIRE.  THE ARGUMENTS YOU MAKE, THE PREMISES YOU USE, AND THE CONCLUSIONS YOU DRAW ARE SUBJECT TO THE SAME RULES THAT YOUR OPPONENT  MUST OBEY.

This leads us to DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF HYPOCRITE; WHAT THEY HAVE IN COMMON, WHAT SEPARATES THEM, AND THE PROBLEMS EACH PRESENTS TO FINDING SOLUTIONS AND ANSWERS.