Maybe will find out on the 15th, or whatever date they finally decide on.
BTW Trump doesn't want it to happen, so I'll assume he is afraid.

Mueller report is silent about collusion. Doesn't matter if it happened or didn't, to Mueller. Only thing that mattered to Mueller is espionage.

collude: Act in unison or agreement and in secret towards a deceitful purpose

espionage: The systematic use of spies to get military or political secrets

Seems to me collusion has been proved. Rump campaign talked in secret with Russia about dirt on Clinton, use of a foreign government to influence a US election is deceitful and despicable.
Espionage wasn't proven, but suggested because Rump said hack the e-mails and they suddenly appeared from Putin's spy service.
Obstruction, wail till Mueller testifies to see what he has to say about the 10 obvious obstruction charges that should be filed on Rump and company PDQ after he becomes chargeable.

I wonder if Clyde has watched the latest on Planet America?

It could improve this thread greatly from the "CCS" that it's becoming again. ;-)

It seems "The Bozo" loves warnings.
Warning 1
Warning 2
Own shares in the armament industry Bozo?

But I have no hope that these types will understand and fully enter reality

You've highlighted the problem. :-) They are in the real world, it is you & Trump that is in an alternate reality.

•Trump warns presidency is being stolen amid Mueller angst•

(CNN) Donald Trump -- warning that his presidency is being stolen -- sure seems threatened by Robert Mueller, especially considering his declaration that the special counsel handed him "complete and total exoneration."

Trump on Sunday called for Mueller to be barred from testifying to Congress -- in a hearing that could come as soon as May 15 -- as his anxiety exploded in a double barreled tweet that reversed a position expressed only two days earlier.

"After spending more than $35,000,000 over a two year period, interviewing 500 people, using 18 Trump Hating Angry Democrats & 49 FBI Agents - all culminating in a more than 400 page Report showing NO COLLUSION - why would the Democrats in Congress now need Robert Mueller to testify.......," Trump wrote Sunday.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/06/politics/donald-trump-robert-mueller/index.html

Another series of comments from Trump that are falsehoods and lies, the obvious one is the "18 Trump hating Democrats...." most of them are or were registered Republicans.

A number of thoughts:

#1 - Trump is correct in some respects. But, the "Terrible Tweeter" cannot accept responsibility for many (most?) of his problems.

many (most?) all

#2 - The Never Trumper's in the Democrat Party, the News Media and Social Media have no comprehension that they are the unwitting ally for Trump regarding his re-election. Yes, they are possibly more stupid than Trump.

There are also some Never Trumper's in the Republican Party as well. You are possibly correct, the best idea is to not make comments about or to him.

#3 - Hopefully we can move on from the silly, stupid, lying and delusional attempt to remove a legitimately elected President.

The election was legitimate only because the Electoral College said it was, but was the Electoral College made up the correct Electors?

But I have no hope that these types will understand and fully enter reality

Another series of comments from Trump that are falsehoods and lies, the obvious one is the "18 Trump hating Democrats...." most of them are or were registered Republicans.

......wow, you really need to get your sources vetted......talk about alternate realities.......
Washington Post-March 18, 2018
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2018/03/18/trump-said-muellers-team-has-13-hardened-democrats-here-are-the-facts/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.6703c52380a3

"..But publicly available voter registration information shows that 13 of the 17 members of Mueller's team have previously registered as Democrats, while four had no affiliation or their affiliation could not be found.

Nine of the 17 made political donations to Democrats, their contributions totaling more than $57,000. The majority came from one person, who also contributed to Republicans. Six donated to Hillary Clinton, Trump's opponent in the 2016 race."

The election was legitimate only because the Electoral College said it was, but was the Electoral College made up the correct Electors?

This statement clearly demonstrates your lack of knowledge regarding the Electoral College system.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

Hundreds of former prosecutors say Trump would have been indicted if he were not president.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/hundreds-former-prosecutors-say-trump-would-have-been-indicted-if-n1002436

President Donald Trump would have been indicted for obstruction of justice in special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation if he did not hold the nation’s highest office, more than 370 former federal prosecutors argued in an open letter publish on Medium on Monday.
The ex-prosecutors — who have served under both Republican and Democratic administrations dating back to President Dwight D. Eisenhower — said Attorney General William Barr's decision not to charge Trump with obstruction "runs counter to logic and our experience."

https://medium.com/@dojalumni/statement-by-former-federal-prosecutors-8ab7691c2aa1

Only crooks defend other crooks. ;-)

Only crooks defend other crooks. ;-)

How many went with Nixon?

Is it possible that Mueller was "Hedging his bets"?

No he was following DOJ's longstanding policy.

---

Trump would have been charged with obstruction were he not president, hundreds of former federal prosecutors assert

More than 450 former federal prosecutors who worked in Republican and Democratic administrations have signed on to a statement asserting special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s findings would have produced obstruction charges against President Trump — if not for the office he holds.

The statement — signed by myriad former career government employees as well as high-profile political appointees — offers a rebuttal to Attorney General William P. Barr’s determination that the evidence Mueller uncovered was “not sufficient” to establish that Trump committed a crime.

In red and large so that Clyde can see it and maybe, but I don't have much faith, will stop repeating, "[W]hile this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,"

That should be as plain as daylight you'd think. ;-)

That should be as plain as daylight you'd think. ;-)

I'm a skeptic by profession.

Individual #1 watched his lawyer enter prison today.
I suspect Individual #1 is experiencing some anal leakage this evening.

---

I do not fight fascists because I think I can win.
I fight them because they are fascists.
Chris Hedges

A riot is the language of the unheard. -Martin Luther King, Jr.

That should be as plain as daylight you'd think. ;-)

Wiggo, there is very little daylight under a bridge.

---

That should be as plain as daylight you'd think. ;-)

Wiggo, there is very little daylight under a bridge.

Especially when the underside is just touching the perfume river flowing under it.

That wasn't a scream, I would have put it in upper case if I wanted to scream. I was merely highlighting in a way so that your wouldn't miss it. And hope you read it, understood it and stopped repeating that statement from Barr, who thinks the AG's job is to protect the president. When his actual job, which you pay him to do, is to protect the citizens of the US from illegal actions of the Executive and the Legislative. There are too many reports from numerous sources that say Barr's interpretation is lacking the truth.

You only need to look at Trump's statements in the last few days, since he has no doubt been informed what actually is in the report, to see that Barr's four page summary was lacking in a few key areas. And now Trump is trying to keep it all from coming out by attempting to stop Mueller giving his views to the House committee, which is penciled in for the 15th.

edit]

Sooooo........how exactly do you 'obstruct justice' for a crime that never occurred?

Or for that matter a crime that doesn't exist?

Show me anywhere in the US Judicial Code where there is a crime labeled 'Collusion'.

I'll be waiting.

---

"Sour Grapes make a bitter Whine." <(0)>

You know you did something. You don't know if what you did was legal or not. You obstruct an investigation into what you did. Is your obstruction, obstruction of justice because at the time you didn't know if what you did was legal or not?

Lock him up!