The Mueller Live

Live Updates On Donald J. Trump Federal Special Counsel Investigation


The curious case of Richard Pinedo. Was he indicted separately to minimize damage to Trump and Co? Is OP a bloody heretic? Click to read more…

DOJ press release

IRA Indictment filed 02/16/18

Pinedo info filed 02/07/18
Pinedo statement of offense filed 02/12/2018
Pinedo indictment

So please hear me out on this. This may be considered heresy here, as Mueller’s image here is built up to be a super meme hero of sorts, but looking at this **critically and in retrospect**, could that be a possibility that Mueller ran a basic damage control operation?

If you read the DoJ presser, two disclosures jump out:

>There is no allegation in the indictment that any American was
>a knowing participant in the alleged unlawful activity. There is
>no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct
>altered the outcome of the 2016 election.

This looked like a sweetener to placate Trump and Co, for a number of reasons.

The most obvious one, Richard Pinedo was involved with IRA, he provided them with fake identities and helped conduct financial transactions – i.e. payments for political ads and other services.
Clearly he was arrested and indicted at the same time, for the same crime. However, he was indicted separately, just so the press could run with **”No American was involved”** (if any of you recall press coverage around that time).

Obviously, he’s an American, and he was involved. He may be small fries in the big scheme of things, but the way the case against him was filed separately and these strange assuring disclosures contained in the DoJ presser look pretty strange.

**They assure no American was involved (not true).**

**They assure no American was a “knowing participant” (that’s just laughable)**. Is AG office a public defendant now?

They state **”there’s no allegation in the indictment that the charged conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election”.**

That’s completely outside of the scope of the investigation and a pretty high bar to attempt. What led Mueller to the conclusion IRA did not alter the outcome of the election? What empirical evidence/study/methods they engaged to come to this conclusion? If nothing else, this little sweetener enabled the talking point of **”2016 election results were not affected by IRA/Russian interference”** – a conclusion that was never tested or even included in the scope of the investigation.

Which leads me to believe, in combination with a myriad of other signs, that Mueller’s investigation may have been a damage control campaign. What other signs, OP, you may ask? Here’s an assorted listing, in no particular order:

**A.** The fall guys all got laughable sentences.

**B.** DoJ pressers like the one above continuously provided right wing press with talking points belittling the overall impact of Russian meddling.

**C.** Ivanka/Don Jr, and their security clearances/amended disclosures were never investigated.

**D.** Trump continuously insulting the investigation is an easy tell of stupid – he would never insult any party who is dangerous to his interests.

**E.** Trump got away with giving written answers.

**F.** Mueller’s office playing cover for Trump whenever possible, with le jems like this one:

All I am saying is that I am very skeptical on the objectivity of this investigation or its findings.

Read More

View Reddit shared by cage_the_orangegutan

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *