Just what is Robert Mueller investigating?

That is the question that is being asked even in Rolling Stones:

". an investigation into Trump's campaign might very well uncover a range of improprieties and shady dealings by some of the campaign "associates" who've figured into news reports. This wouldn't be surprising, I don't think, even to some of the people in the White House.

But when it comes to the collusion investigation, there are serious questions. A lot of our civil liberties protections and rules of press ethics are designed to prevent exactly this situation, in which a person lingers for extended periods of time under public suspicion without being aware of the exact nature, or origin, of the accusations.

It's why liberal thinkers have traditionally abhorred secret courts, secret surveillance and secret evidence, and in the past would have reflexively discouraged the news media from printing the unverified or unverifiable charges emanating from such secret sources. But because it's Donald Trump, no one seems to care.

We should care. The uncertainty has led to widespread public terror, mass media hysteria and excess, and possibly even panic in the White House itself, where, who knows, Trump may even have risked military confrontation with Russia in an effort to shake the collusion accusations. All of this is exacerbated by the constant stream of leaks and hints at mother lodes of evidence that are just around the corner. It's quite literally driving the country crazy.

The public deserves to know what's going on. It deserved to know before the election, it deserved to know before the inauguration, and it deserves to know now."

 

Rolling Stone is a Liberal publication, so it won't surprise many if I disagree with many of their themes. But I agree with their conclusion. We deserve to know what is being investigated. But, we are not left without knowing some of the results of the investigations so far. These are:

 

1. If there were collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, it would not be illegal;

 

2. The Russians were NOT involved with the Trump campaign;

 

3. Comey testified under oath (May 3) that there was no interference with the FBI investigation;

 

4. Comey's deputy testified that there was no lack of funds for the investigation, contradicting the fake news that appeared in the NY Times.

 

So, what is everyone investigating? Or, is it just an attempt to cloak an attempted coup d'état under the guise of 'investigating?' Political aims under the guise of "investigating?"

 

There are things  to investigate though. There is Obama saying in March 2016 that Hillary should not be charged because there was no intent on Hillary's part to cause harm when she transmitted classified material over an unsecured server. Comey repeated the same phrasing in June.

 

a) was Obama illegally interfering with the investigation of Hillary's conduct? b) was Comey delerict of his duties in failing to refer Hillary to the Justice Department?
 

c) then there is Hillary's false testimony to Congress on the subject of Bengazi and her illegal server.

d) As Secretary of State, Hillary signed off on a uranium mine sale to Russia and later received $100M to the Clinton Foundation that provided income to the Clintons.

e) There is the unmasking of US citizens whose names were obtained while being recorded  under FEISA warrants or swept up collaterally>

f) Innumerable leaks of classified material to the NY Times and Washington Post.

Mr Mueller has an opportunity of going into the history books as a person that helped the President "drain the swamp" in Washington, DC.

Will Mr Mueller rise to the occasion? Since, he served Obama (who complemented him and extended his tenure two years) he has slime on him.
 and one has little confidence in him.