What the Mueller Report Leaves Out
Reading the Mueller report, I have been surprised by what it leaves out, in particular Cambridge Analytica and the allegations of Russian financial support to the campaign. Question: were these left out because they are subjects of future prosecutions? Referred elsewhere?
In the case of alleged Russian financial assistance, it is easy to see why Mueller may have farmed them out to someone else. They did not necessarily fall within the narrow confines of his investigation into social media influence campaigns and computer hacking. It is very possible that he decided that following the money was a job for someone else. Thus, we hear nothing in the report about the activities of Maria Butina, in jail on a spying charge, or the National Rifle Association, which was apparently the happy recipient of her largesse and that of her handler, Alexander Torshin.
However, given Bill Barr’s remarkably inept and obvious attempts to use his office of Attorney General to protect President Trump and spin the conclusions of the Mueller report, I am worried. Worried that the further prosecutions that Mueller enumerated in the report and that Barr carefully redacted, will be quashed. That is one of the most important things to look for as the investigations and prosecutions continue.
The case of Cambridge Analytica is more complex. Would Mueller have considered this to be related at all to the Russia investigation? The case seems to concern a pro-Trump consulting firm illegally accessing Facebook data and using it for purposes that were similar — or aligned with — the Russian disinformation effort. It seemed strange that any mention of it was omitted from the report. Did Mueller agree that there was a strong enough Russian connection? Or connection to the campaign. That will remain one of the big mysteries of the Mueller report, in its currently redacted state.