a professional environmentalists take on Hunter Biden laptop

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The real story about Hunter Biden is that the current president hasn't fired the FBI director, called it a hoax, or tried to obstruct the investigation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What did you believe, or think, or feel, when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear the laptop was Russian mis or dis information?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

What did you believe, or think, or feel, when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear the laptop was Russian mis or dis information?

Well, for one, just look at what happened after Hunter Biden left the White House. The Saudis, who claimed they had him in their pocket, gave him $2 billion. No, wait, that was Jared Kushner. Never mind.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Well, for one, just look at what happened after Hunter Biden left the White House. The Saudis, who claimed they had him in their pocket, gave him $2 billion. No, wait, that was Jared Kushner. Never mind.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What did you believe, or think, or feel, about the laptop when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was Russian mis or dis information?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

What did you believe, or think, or feel, about the laptop when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was Russian mis or dis information?

Isn’t that the one Ghouliani and Bannon had?
I’d assume it’s as good as their evidence of election fraud.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Isn’t that the one Ghouliani and Bannon had?
I’d assume it’s as good as their evidence of election fraud.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What did you believe, or think, or feel, about Hunters laptop when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was Russian mis or dis information?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

What did you believe, or think, or feel, about Hunters laptop when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was Russian mis or dis information?

It wouldn’t surprise me a bit.
There's a lot of wild stuff that came out in the whole Trump-Russia saga, but I still can't get over how there's an email chain that literally says, "this is part of Russia and it's govt's support for Mr. Trump" and the son of the pres. replies, "if it's what you say I love it."

I think Trump would have given Putin Ukraine for it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

It wouldn’t surprise me a bit.
There's a lot of wild stuff that came out in the whole Trump-Russia saga, but I still can't get over how there's an email chain that literally says, "this is part of Russia and it's govt's support for Mr. Trump" and the son of the pres. replies, "if it's what you say I love it."

I think Trump would have given Putin Ukraine for it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not sure how to parse all that in relation to my question. Are you saying that the framing of the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation influenced you into believing that it was?

[wdmso]

Hey all you computer geniuses, the physical laptop could be hunters, but the chain of custody there is no way that you can prove that the original hard drive hadn’t been replaced because they’re replaceable. Or re written

So yes the actual laptop the body screen key board could be hunters tracked by serial number and Apple ID.
But it all comes down to the hard drive and a court would be hard to accept anything on it. as probable cause to start an investigation or accept as evidence

A House committee are not bound by the rules of evidence and the GOPQ have no regard for evidence anyway or power to prosecute. Show it will be all in the window and rumors.

The investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018, Unrelated to his laptop But for taxes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Hey all you computer geniuses, the physical laptop could be hunters, but the chain of custody there is no way that you can prove that the original hard drive hadn’t been replaced because they’re replaceable. Or re written

So yes the actual laptop the body screen key board could be hunters tracked by serial number and Apple ID.
But it all comes down to the hard drive and a court would be hard to accept anything on it. as probable cause to start an investigation or accept as evidence

A House committee are not bound by the rules of evidence and the GOPQ have no regard for evidence anyway or power to prosecute. Show it will be all in the window and rumors.

The investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018, Unrelated to his laptop But for taxes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

im guessing the fbi can tell if it’s the original hard drive. but on top
of everything else, now you’re a tech expert.

First, you said everything on the laptop was harmless, not i docstuve of any wrongdoing. Are you saying. Hunters political
opponents replaced the hard drive with one that had nothing incriminating?

WDMSO: there’s nothing incriminating on the laptop. And if there is, the GOP put it there!!

wayne, take off the to. foil hat for one second and think. consider what you know about hunter biden. Would it really be surprising to you, if he did things he wasn’t supposed to, for millions of dollars?

you’re taking talking points from Joy Behar now?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Hey all you computer geniuses, the physical laptop could be hunters, but the chain of custody there is no way that you can prove that the original hard drive hadn’t been replaced because they’re replaceable. Or re written

So yes the actual laptop the body screen key board could be hunters tracked by serial number and Apple ID.
But it all comes down to the hard drive and a court would be hard to accept anything on it. as probable cause to start an investigation or accept as evidence

A House committee are not bound by the rules of evidence and the GOPQ have no regard for evidence anyway or power to prosecute. Show it will be all in the window and rumors.

The investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018, Unrelated to his laptop But for taxes
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did you believe, or think, or feel, that Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Not sure how to parse all that in relation to my question. Are you saying that the framing of the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation influenced you into believing that it was?

No, I’m saying the Trump organization’s history of working with Russia did.
The Russian oligarchy made Donald Trump.
I believe Trump’s not only a 5-decade Russian asset,he married his 1st of 2 Soviet-born brides in 1977,at which time the KGB opened a file on him and that’d be when they started compiling Kompromat,like the “golden showers” thing and funneling money to him to launder. It’s probably not only true,but far worse than we know.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...-big-megaphone

How a Hunter Biden conspiracy theory grew, from lone tweet to a big megaphone
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Did you believe, or think, or feel, that Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation when the media cited intelligence sources that made it appear that it was?

Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation Makes some sense haven’t seen anything yet to disprove that possibility

There’s no intelligence source who specifically said the laptop was Russian disinformation.

The memo to all social media companies was look out for the possibility of Russian disinformation

Still waiting on what you feel is on the hard drive and what will it prove

You should read the article I linked
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

No, I’m saying the Trump organization’s history of working with Russia did.
The Russian oligarchy made Donald Trump.
I believe Trump’s not only a 5-decade Russian asset,he married his 1st of 2 Soviet-born brides in 1977,at which time the KGB opened a file on him and that’d be when they started compiling Kompromat,like the “golden showers” thing and funneling money to him to launder. It’s probably not only true,but far worse than we know.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Are you saying that Inteligence characterizing the laptop as Russian disinformation had no influence on your believing it? That the first thing that came to your mind when the story was released and before intel saying it was, was that it was "Russian disinformation"? And that your notions of various circumstances that were suggestive to you and for you were probable was what convinced you, whether or not the lap top story was characterized as Russian disinformation by Intel?

Does that "suggest" to you that, just maybe, since all your notions about Trump and Russia proved to be wrong in regard to the laptop, and proved to be unprovable or just wrong about stuff for which Mueller could not find sufficient evidence, that maybe you shouldn't be so certain about Trump being some sort of Russian agent. And that Intel was either lying, or not so smart or reliable? That all your railings against Trump might be some degree of over the top?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

im guessing the fbi can tell if it’s the original hard drive. but on top
of everything else, now you’re a tech expert.

First, you said everything on the laptop was harmless, not i docstuve of any wrongdoing. Are you saying. Hunters political
opponents replaced the hard drive with one that had nothing incriminating?

WDMSO: there’s nothing incriminating on the laptop. And if there is, the GOP put it there!!

wayne, take off the to. foil hat for one second and think. consider what you know about hunter biden. Would it really be surprising to you, if he did things he wasn’t supposed to, for millions of dollars?

you’re taking talking points from Joy Behar now?

WDMSO: there’s nothing incriminating on the laptop. And if there is, the GOP put it there!!

Sorry Jim no tinfoil hat seems again you’re unabashedly think Rudy would never do such a think. And please keep ignoring the law. If there was a criminal activity to be found Rudy and the gop contaminated the entire crime scene.
If you had any Common sense you’d understand that . And making money off your family name isn’t a crime ..
not paying your taxes is . funny the gop claims the irs is coming for your money so we must defund them.

Yet the only credible crime hunter may have committed is tax fraud.

Maybe the IRS shouldn’t investigate Hunter by gop standards
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Are you saying that Inteligence characterizing the laptop as Russian disinformation had no influence on your believing it? That the first thing that came to your mind when the story was released and before intel saying it was, was that it was "Russian disinformation"? And that your notions of various circumstances that were suggestive to you and for you were probable was what convinced you, whether or not the lap top story was characterized as Russian disinformation by Intel?

Does that "suggest" to you that, just maybe, since all your notions about Trump and Russia proved to be wrong in regard to the laptop, and proved to be unprovable or just wrong about stuff for which Mueller could not find sufficient evidence, that maybe you shouldn't be so certain about Trump being some sort of Russian agent. And that Intel was either lying, or not so smart or reliable? That all your railings against Trump might be some degree of over the top?

Trump was involved with Russia long before he was a politician.
Mueller did not investigate Trumps finances.

Donald Trump asked for help from Russia. Putin obliged him with the stolen emails.

Then Trump used that help every single day in the final month, knowing it was Russian help. It was the focus of his campaign.

How is this not a criminal conspiracy?

So now you believe the tale fed to Matt Taibbi by Elon Musk

And claim Democrats & the media manufactured the Trump/Russia scandal

Or read the GOP CONTROLLED SENATE COMMITTEE REPORT

Which details a conspiracy between a Russian intelligence officer & Trump campaign chairman Manafort

Or the fact that Robert Mueller found that Paul Manafort had been repeatedly tampered with by Trump agents so that he wouldn’t reveal any information to the FBI about Trump, and that in compensation for this Trump gave him a presidential pardon in full view of the American public?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

WDMSO: there’s nothing incriminating on the laptop. And if there is, the GOP put it there!!

Sorry Jim no tinfoil hat seems again you’re unabashedly think Rudy would never do such a think. And please keep ignoring the law. If there was a criminal activity to be found Rudy and the gop contaminated the entire crime scene.
If you had any Common sense you’d understand that . And making money off your family name isn’t a crime ..
not paying your taxes is . funny the gop claims the irs is coming for your money so we must defund them.

Yet the only credible crime hunter may have committed is tax fraud.

Maybe the IRS shouldn’t investigate Hunter by gop standards
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i’m not saying the GOP would never stoop to that ..i’m saying we’d know if they did

The FBI had the laptop for a long time. THEY had it. And they aren’t saying it was tampered with

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it was tampered with?

You desperately hope it was tampered with. That doesn’t mean it was.

you’re scared, and it’s showing. The laptop, the classified documents debacle, and a very possible/probable recession coming. i get why you’re scared, i do. It’ll be OK.

making money off your family name isn’t necessarily a crime. but it obviously might be. depends on what was done. And again, i’m more concerned with why the FBI thought it was their job to lie about the laptop being russian information, just before the election. One reasonable explanation would be that they wanted to help Biden. I can’t think of another explanation, maybe there is one. Hopefully the hearings will illuminate that. f there is i fence to suggest it was russian disinformation, no one has shared that. it appears the FBI made that up. And again, they had the laptop when they made that claim. They’d therefore know. Today, the FBI isn’t saying the laptop was planted by russians, nor are they saying it was tampered with.

If chain of custody principles were trampled to prevent a prosecution, i’d still like to know what happened, so would many others

Those hearings are coming.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation Makes some sense haven’t seen anything yet to disprove that possibility

Why does it make sense if there is no proof that it is? And several of its emails have been verified by forensic experts. And early on, the DOJ said it was not Russian Disinformation.

There’s no intelligence source who specifically said the laptop was Russian disinformation.

I didn't say Intel specifically said it was, but that it characterized it as such, i.e. had all the earmarks of Russian disinformation. Which effectively cripples it--actually serves to "debunk" it in the eyes of many.

he memo to all social media companies was look out for the possibility of Russian disinformation

And it was known by those who wrote the memo that the laptop story was about to be broken, so the news media, and social media were primed by them to view it as Russian disinformation. And so treated it as such, either debunking it or suppressing it. The release of the Twitter files has shown how it was primed to block it.

Still waiting on what you feel is on the hard drive and what will it prove

I have no feelings about what is on the Hard drive. I was not even disgusted with the supposedly disturbing photos on it.

You should read the article I linked
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I did. It stated that several of the emails were verified, and some, including banking transactions and connection with Ukraine corruption.

But my question to you, was what did you believe, think, or feel about the story when it was characterized by various intel people and your favorite, or preferred media, as Russian disinformation. What effect, at the time when that happened did it have on your view of the story?

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Trump was involved with Russia long before he was a politician.
Mueller did not investigate Trumps finances.

Donald Trump asked for help from Russia. Putin obliged him with the stolen emails.

Then Trump used that help every single day in the final month, knowing it was Russian help. It was the focus of his campaign.

How is this not a criminal conspiracy?

So now you believe the tale fed to Matt Taibbi by Elon Musk

And claim Democrats & the media manufactured the Trump/Russia scandal

Or read the GOP CONTROLLED SENATE COMMITTEE REPORT

Which details a conspiracy between a Russian intelligence officer & Trump campaign chairman Manafort

Or the fact that Robert Mueller found that Paul Manafort had been repeatedly tampered with by Trump agents so that he wouldn’t reveal any information to the FBI about Trump, and that in compensation for this Trump gave him a presidential pardon in full view of the American public?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

You'll have to ask Mueller about all those things. Apparently, he did not view them the same way you do. I wanted to know what effect the Intel characterization of the Hunter emails as Russian disinformation have on your view of them.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Hunters laptop content was Russian disinformation Makes some sense haven’t seen anything yet to disprove that possibility

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

how about the fact that today, twitter and facebook and cbs have all said it’s a legit laptop? Is the FBI claiming that the laptop is in any way, a product of russian disinformation? is anyone other than you, still making that claim?

wayne, have you seen any evidence to support the idea that it’s russian disinformation?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

how about the fact that today, twitter and facebook and cbs have all said it’s a legit laptop? Is the FBI claiming that the laptop is in any way, a product of russian disinformation? is anyone other than you, still making that claim?

wayne, have you seen any evidence to support the idea that it’s russian disinformation?

Guessed you missed the whole part that laptop hard drives can be removed and replaced

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

I did. It stated that several of the emails were verified, and some, including banking transactions and connection with Ukraine corruption.

But my question to you, was what did you believe, think, or feel about the story when it was characterized by various intel people and your favorite, or preferred media, as Russian disinformation. What effect, at the time when that happened did it have on your view of the story?

And it was known by those who wrote the memo

Did that conclusion come with a roll of tinfoil ? Because we know it’s not based on evidence

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i’m not saying the GOP would never stoop to that ..i’m saying we’d know if they did

The FBI had the laptop for a long time. THEY had it. And they aren’t saying it was tampered with

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it was tampered with?

You desperately hope it was tampered with. That doesn’t mean it was.

you’re scared, and it’s showing. The laptop, the classified documents debacle, and a very possible/probable recession coming. i get why you’re scared, i do. It’ll be OK.

making money off your family name isn’t necessarily a crime. but it obviously might be. depends on what was done. And again, i’m more concerned with why the FBI thought it was their job to lie about the laptop being russian information, just before the election. One reasonable explanation would be that they wanted to help Biden. I can’t think of another explanation, maybe there is one. Hopefully the hearings will illuminate that. f there is i fence to suggest it was russian disinformation, no one has shared that. it appears the FBI made that up. And again, they had the laptop when they made that claim. They’d therefore know. Today, the FBI isn’t saying the laptop was planted by russians, nor are they saying it was tampered with.

If chain of custody principles were trampled to prevent a prosecution, i’d still like to know what happened, so would many others

Those hearings are coming.

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it was tampered with?

You desperately hope it was tampered with. That doesn’t mean it was.

Jim you don’t need to prove it was tampered with all they need to prove is Rudy had possession of the laptop.. game over inadmissible in court

House hearings won’t change that . They have no law enforcement authority

If chain of custody principles were trampled to prevent a prosecution, i’d still like to know what happened, so would many others

Still don’t get it. Do you? chain of custody principles were trampled by Rudy and the gop operatives who thought they could influence the election with what they thought was a smoking gun ..

Only the MAGA horde want to know what happened hell their still waiting on the Durham report to save them. You still waiting With them?


And your expecting a party who allowed Greene 9/11 truther who has history of embracing far-right conspiracies on the homeland security committee

To be trusted by the American people . You’re crazy

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it was tampered with?

You desperately hope it was tampered with. That doesn’t mean it was.

Jim you don’t need to prove it was tampered with all they need to prove is Rudy had possession of the laptop.. game over inadmissible in court

House hearings won’t change that . They have no law enforcement authority

If chain of custody principles were trampled to prevent a prosecution, i’d still like to know what happened, so would many others

Still don’t get it. Do you? chain of custody principles were trampled by Rudy and the gop operatives who thought they could influence the election with what they thought was a smoking gun ..

Only the MAGA horde want to know what happened hell their still waiting on the Durham report to save them. You still waiting With them?


And your expecting a party who allowed Greene 9/11 truther who has history of embracing far-right conspiracies on the homeland security committee

To be trusted by the American people . You’re crazy

and democrats out Eric Swalwell, he who sleeps with Chinese spies, on the house i telling everyone committee. that’s more trustworthy?

You’re in a glass house wayne.

the republicans won’t be testifying. just calling witnesses and asking questions.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Guessed you missed the whole part that laptop hard drives can be removed and replaced

Because the Computer Forensic Professionals always get stymied by that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Because the Computer Forensic Professionals always get stymied by that.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

right, the FBI, who had the laptop, would have no way of knowing if that had happened.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You'll have to ask Mueller about all those things. Apparently, he did not view them the same way you do. I wanted to know what effect the Intel characterization of the Hunter emails as Russian disinformation have on your view of them.

Mueller did what he was told to do, within parameters set by others.
He was not told to let the evidence lead the investigation and DOJ regulations also restricted his investigation.
That’s a lot different than what you think should happen with this citizens laptop.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

And it was known by those who wrote the memo

Did that conclusion come with a roll of tinfoil ? Because we know it’s not based on evidence

The evidence that the FBI knew in advance that the NYP post story on the Hunter lap top was going to be reported is revealed in the Twitter Files that have been released. Perhaps, most likely, you didn't watch the video I posted. But you do want me to read what you post.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Mueller did what he was told to do, within parameters set by others.
He was not told to let the evidence lead the investigation and DOJ regulations also restricted his investigation.
That’s a lot different than what you think should happen with this citizens laptop.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

We were told that he did a thorough investigation and he said that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that Trump conspired with Russ to influence the election--in contrasts to your vague, insufficient verbiage.

And I have not said what I think should happen with the laptop. I absorb information, and spread it when appropriate.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by detbuch

We were told that he did a thorough investigation and he said that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that Trump conspired with Russ to influence the election--in contrasts to your vague, insufficient verbiage.

And I have not said what I think should happen with the laptop. I absorb information, and spread it when appropriate.

No, your statement about Mueller is incorrect.

Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III Makes Statement on Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election
Washington, DC ~ Wednesday, May 29, 2019
Two years ago, the Acting Attorney General asked me to serve as Special Counsel, and he created the Special Counsel’s Office.



The appointment order directed the office to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. This included investigating any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.



I have not spoken publicly during our investigation. I am speaking today because our investigation is complete. The Attorney General has made the report on our investigation largely public. And we are formally closing the Special Counsel’s Office. As well, I am resigning from the Department of Justice and returning to private life.



I’ll make a few remarks about the results of our work. But beyond these few remarks, it is important that the office’s written work speak for itself.



Let me begin where the appointment order begins: and that is interference in the 2016 presidential election.



As alleged by the grand jury in an indictment, Russian intelligence officers who were part of the Russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system.



The indictment alleges that they used sophisticated cyber techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton campaign. They stole private information, and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization WikiLeaks. The releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate.



And at the same time, as the grand jury alleged in a separate indictment, a private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation where Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to interfere in the election.



These indictments contain allegations. And we are not commenting on the guilt or innocence of any specific defendant. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court.



The indictments allege, and the other activities in our report describe, efforts to interfere in our political system. They needed to be investigated and understood. That is among the reasons why the Department of Justice established our office.



That is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation. The matters we investigated were of paramount importance. It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned. When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.



Let me say a word about the report. The report has two parts addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate.



The first volume of the report details numerous efforts emanating from Russia to influence the election. This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity, as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.



And in the second volume, the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the President.



The order appointing me Special Counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation and we kept the office of the Acting Attorney General apprised of the progress of our work.



As set forth in our report, after that investigation, if we had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that.



We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime. The introduction to volume two of our report explains that decision.



It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view—that too is prohibited.



The Special Counsel’s Office is part of the Department of Justice and, by regulation, it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the President with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.



The Department’s written opinion explaining the policy against charging a President makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report. And I will describe two of them:



First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents are available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could now be charged.



And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrongdoing.



And beyond Department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of an actual charge.



So that was the Justice Department policy and those were the principles under which we operated. From them we concluded that we would not reach a determination – one way or the other – about whether the President committed a crime. That is the office’s final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President.



We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the Attorney General—as required by Department regulations.



The Attorney General then concluded that it was appropriate to provide our report to Congress and the American people.



At one point in time I requested that certain portions of the report be released. The Attorney General preferred to make the entire report public all at once. We appreciate that the Attorney General made the report largely public. I do not question the Attorney General’s good faith in that decision.



I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak about this matter. I am making that decision myself—no one has told me whether I can or should testify or speak further about this matter.



There has been discussion about an appearance before Congress. Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. It contains our findings and analysis, and the reasons for the decisions we made. We chose those words carefully, and the work speaks for itself.



The report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress.



In addition, access to our underlying work product is being decided in a process that does not involve our office.



So beyond what I have said here today and what is contained in our written work, I do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the Justice Department or Congress.



It is for that reason that I will not take questions here today.



Before I step away, I want to thank the attorneys, the FBI agents, the analysts, and the professional staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner. These individuals, who spent nearly two years with the Special Counsel’s Office, were of the highest integrity.



I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments—that there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election.



That allegation deserves the attention of every American.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device