posted on Oct, 31 2017 @ 12:44 PM
I thought I'd post a little thought exercise I went through this morning. I like to keep myself grounded in reality and not delve too deep into
conspiracies, but when there is not a lot of information available one has to make logical leaps or assumptions to get a clearer picture of what is
It's easy to get caught up in the conspiracies surrounding Mueller. I'm going to lay out the events that have happened and and filter them through
the two majority view points: Mueller is working for the swamp against Trump vs. Mueller is working for Trump against the swamp.
The first theory, Mueller working for the swamp, goes something like this: Mueller was hired to find/uncover crimes and present a case for the
impeachment of the president, because he's an outsider and the swamp protects itself from outsiders.
The second theory, Mueller is working for Trump, goes something like this: Trump is using Mueller to take down the crime syndicate that is Washington
The key points/facts, in no particular order:
1) Trump fires comey
2) Trump met with Mueller just days before he was appointed as SC
3) Sessions recuses from campaign related events
4) Rosenstein appoints Mueller with basically unlimited scope
5) Mueller indicts Manafort
6) Sessions ignores calls to appoint SC for uranium one and dossier
7) Mueller hire's a bunch of democratic leaning lawyers
So, through the lens of Mueller working for Trump here are the reasons for the fact pattern
1) Comey was not credible and had over-politicized his position
2) Trump was explaining the corruption to Mueller and telling him he would be SC, assured Mueller of pardons for his crimes
3) Draining the swamp needs to be seen as something other than rep v. dem
4) Would have to do this to move beyond investigating the Russian narrative
5) Manafort is a swamp creature
6) There's no need for them, as Mueller is actually investigating these things
7) Mueller's team needs to be trusted by dems in order to take down the corruption. They must believe Mueller is on their side.
Problems with these explanations:
1) completely plausible
2) No evidence
3) Makes sense
4) Plausible and backed up by Manafort indictment
5) He is a swamp creature
6) Plausible but again, no evidence
7) Again, no evidence
Basically there is no way of knowing if this view point is accurate until the probe ends. It does explain points 1, 3, 4, and 5 better than the
alternative theory but 4/7 isn't anything to write home about.
So through the lens of Mueller working for the swamp, here are the reasons for the fact pattern:
1) Trump fired Comey because he was getting close to uncovering ties to Russia
2) Trump was simply interviewing Mueller for his old job, that was the stated reason for the meeting after-all
3) Sessions is part of the swamp and making it nigh impossible for trump to fire the SC.
4) Trump may have hid his tracks well, so Mueller needs freedom to go anywhere to find the ties
5) Manafort has (or may have) dirt on trump and will squeal under pressure, common tactic
6) Sessions is part of the swamp
7) This team of prosecutors will find dirt on Trump
Problems with these explanations:
1) If he was close, there shouldn't have been this much left for Mueller to investigate.
2) Completely plausible
3) Sessions was the first senator to back trump. Just a bit odd that he'd turn swampy so quickly
4) This directly flies in the face of point number one, comey couldn't have been close AND Mueller needed to do major sleuthing
5) While it's a common tactic, Manafort has committed some serious crimes, I can't imagine a prosecutor dropping those for a little dirt. Manafort
would have to have the mother-load. But it is certainly plausible.
6) See point 3
7) Completely plausible, but no evidence.
This theory explains points 2 and 7 well, but there are major flaws in the logic behind many of the explanations. Multiple facts make no sense through
this lens or appear to be completely off base ( such as points 1 and 4).
Going into this, I actually thought that Mueller working for trump was going to look more like the conspiracy theory than Mueller working for the
swamp. Neither theory actually looks great when examined logically. So now I'm going to compare each explanation and pick a winner, this can be
subject to bias. If bias feels like it's playing a leading role, it will be divided into halves.
1) This is easy, one point for team trump. Comey was too political.
2) A little convoluted, but in the absence of evidence I have to give this point to team swamp, the interview timing was coincidental.
3) This is a bias question about sessions. .5 to each team.
4) Team trump easily wins this one as team swamp contradicts their first explanation.
5) This was a tough one, but another win for team trump. I'm very swayed by how easy it is to believe this is a common tactic but, as pointed out
before, manafort would have to have the bomb shell and he only worked for Trump for a few months. If this was someone closer to trump I would give
this one to team swamp, but manafort is just too far removed.
6) I don't believe sessions is a swamp creature but I don't think 'no need' is very compelling. .5 to each team
7) There's no evidence for either team and logic is only swayed by your view of the other points. .5 to each.
Raw Score = Trump 4.5 v Swamp 2.5
Now I'll adjust the score to see which team is currently winning. This adjustment will weight each item by importance to the respective theory. The
scoring will go in increments of 0.5 on a scale of 1-4 (4 being most important). This score will be a multiplier and each point given will be
multiplied by this score. The purpose of the multiplier is to clarify which side has more convincing arguments on their side. This will allow a theory
that didn't have as many raw score points but whose points more solidly prove their argument to make up lost ground or further separate it from the
Swamp score: 5.75
Trump score: 11
Even after all of this analysis I'm skeptical of Mueller working for Trump. I think both theories remain solidly in conspiracy land, meaning neither
one is necessarily true. At this point it looks like if one is going to be true, it's going to be Mueller working for trump. Only time will tell.
It's going to be an interesting few months coming up as we learn m ore answers.