Each new moment compounds rational fear. 2/5/19 (There are follow-ups to this article below the 2/5 article).

Suppose that Muller’s report is not made public. Half the country is curious enough about it to want to either see it, or have people they trust to be allowed to see it, with them being able to report it out (leaving Trumps’ only recourse to be calling it “fake news,” or not).

If the public release is blocked, there is guaranteed to be leaks about it. It is just too “hot” an issue now. Remember how Trump talked about it as a waste of taxpayer funds? Well shouldn’t citizens be able to see the benefit from their paying of taxes? And one benefit would be seeing the report that Trump thinks they paid too much for, right? By saying that it was a “waste of tax-payer funds” he shot himself in the foot, as he always does.

Remember, Trump is not a strategist, he is a tactition, though a master at it.https://trumpuniverse.net/they-are-not-just-bad-they-are-incompetent-and-bad/tactition (though a master at it).

Will Trump ever admit that he boxed himself in on this? He will of course call the leaks (and leak it will), “fake news” and/or do something similar as witnessed in the Cavanaugh hearing, that is discredit victims and/or witnesses, and of course Muller. He has his bag of tricks.

Some tricks (tactics) that we recently saw in the latest Trump interview were worth sharing. Trump often says: “when you look at……..” and thus points the listener or reader to focus on his made up claim of “validity”, which is nothing but Trumps’ purposefully reframed and distorted version of a real event.

Trump knows that the “eyes don’t lie”, or “seeing is believing” is an almost ancient homo-sapien canard, which can thus be easily exploited by this tactic. Thus one of his go-to phrases is “when you look at…” That phrasing subtly traps his listeners’ mind to to see it in the way Trump wants it to be seen.

The dilemma is what happens when Trump runs out of tricks? Imagine him to be the “emperor” who finds himself really naked in public, completely discredited, humiliated, shamed, and possibly threatened with imprisonment and/or financial ruin. So many of his followers realizing that they were suckered. Will he go gracefully into the night? What are the odds?

At any rate, Trump would pointedly not say that he would be comfortable with the results being released publicly. He said: “I don’t know” “It depends. I have no idea what it is going to say.” Is that the same as saying that if only it is good for Trump, will Trump allow the release? And now, with the apparent full support of his new attorney general, William Barr.

What could the report possibly say that would be sufficient to block the citizenry from seeing it? Would the new Attorney General agree with that conclusion? How about any yet remaining republican senator with a conscience? Wouldn’t they want their constituents (whos’ tax money helped pay for it) have the right to see it? Only need a few.


The minute cost of the Muller report, attacked as a “waste of money” by Trump, is as an astonishing bargain for Trump, if it establishes the innocence of family Trump (and collaborators). Trump is not even burdened to spend a penny of his own money to defend his own behavior. Think not only of his relief (plus that of the rest of the Republican Party and Trump family). Wouldn’t that result also create much better odds of them winning future elections? Holding on and even expanding their current base and power?

This proves that future obstruction to its public release would almost certainly be due to an intent to conceal information detrimental to their future election chances, and/or Trumps’ self interests.

Further, if released, there should/will be a focus on redactions. Are they an attempt at concealment, and if so, is that legitimate or not? What is the rationale behind each redaction. These will be heavily scrutinized. History takes a very long view.

With nothing to lose, that is, if the report is exculpatory for “their group”, one could rationally expect a quick release of the Muller Report.

Delays of the report, critical redacted portions of it, underlying evidence, caused by Trump administration interference, will be the beginning of the end for America as we knew it. You can’t go back. History students will be studying these moments centuries from now.

We don’t wish to worry our readers, but we do have to follow the story and make rational deductions.


Expect that this will be a repeat of the “good guy, bad guy” routine, with Trump often “urging” the full public release of the Muller Report, with Barr insisting, for one reason or another, why it can’t be released.

Since we at least know one thing for sure, the report was not exculpatory as to the crime of obstruction of justice. Even though all that was in plain sight, Trump never sat for an interview with Muller, which may have established motive, a necessary component of an obstruction crime. Thus the evidence, in itself, never rose to the necessary certainty that a crime was actually committed, even though it clearly looked like an obstruction crime. It may have been. Thus the report doesn’t say Trump was innocent, but, critically it doesn’t clear him either.

Did Trump have a pre-existing understanding with Barr?

If Bill Barr was able to thoroughly read and mark up the report in the short time he had, you would think it would be simple to prepare it for public release, since he is so remarkably efficient. We hope to be wrong about this, but we don’t think that the Muller Report will see the light of day for many years.

Anyone would logically think that if the report is benign for Trump, it would be timely released. But we worry about the setup, the “good guy, bad guy” routine aforementioned. Let all the blame for failing to release it fall on Barr. Its the oldest trick in the book. And surely, if it is not released, its likely not benign.

Scott Turow just published an article in Vanity Fair, where he credibly found reason to say that Barr had used a fallacious argument to reach his conclusion, , and that “impugns his integrity and his reputation as a lawyer”. Strong words indeed.

Our worry is that there may have been a conspiracy between Barr and Trump. We don’t think that Barr would make central logical mistakes, such as appear in his short “summary,” without some unseemly motive.

We sincerely hope that we are wrong. But to be realistic see below:

The end of our democracy may be at hand now. We wonder how hard that is for everyone to see?