Should the Mueller investigation be cancelled? Has he overstepped his boundaries of investigation?

MSgt Steve Sweeney - I agree that we may just have to agree to disagree. However, I have heard your viewpoint on this before and it always seems to come from those with strong political views that oppose the current POTUS. I don't find this to be a coincidence. I also find it an interesting contradiction that those same "anti-Trumpers" will often paint the POTUS as an "idiot" but continue to push a narrative that he somehow was a brilliant agent of Russia, colluding with them to hack our elections, all-the-while being too smart to leave any evidence of his tradecraft behind. I would only ask that you look at the situation objectively (without any personal feelings you may have towards Trump). You have made comments such as you "feel Trump is complicit and likely compromised" when there is no evidence to support such views (even though you are of course entitled to them). As an investigator, that is an indicator to me of a personal bias, and those with such feelings often fall victim to confirmation-bias, seeing any new information as supporting their beliefs. I am not saying this is you, but I am saying people in general often fit into this category. How can I think otherwise when I see an investigation based on false pretense? Speaking just from a criminal justice standpoint, this is not normal, and there are many others who agree.

For the record, even if the Special Counsel finds President Trump guilty of nothing, I do not believe the anti-Trumpers out there will let it go (and I think you know that is true as well). They will likely continue to find any reason to present him as the "bad guy" because they have already invested too many emotions into the situation already.

Once again, just my opinion.

Anyway, I enjoyed the debate.

MSgt Steve Sweeney - It's not about what is suspicious or not. I am firmly aware of what Russia's capabilities are and have seen nothing to prove that they have done anything different than they always have... As for my political beliefs, I don't consider myself pro-Trump or anti-Trump if you were implying one or the other. Additionally, from a legal standpoint, none of what you just stated meets the threshold for even "circumstantial" evidence. I can say that because we have no clear crime and none of those actions are illegal in anyway. Or are we to assume 2+2=5? People in this country aren't investigated on such weak notions like Pres. Trump has been (again, based on a fabricated dossier and outcry from a political party and nothing more). Many with your ideology on this situation seem to forget our criminal justice system is one based on "innocent until proven guilty." My personal opinions on the fact that there not enough evidence to even investigate aside: In this case there is not even enough evidence to indict him (or in his case impeach), let alone enough to prove him guilty of any conspiracy, or fraud charges beyond a reasonable doubt (the level of proof needed for conviction in a court of law).

For the record: I have never "denigrated" Mueller, and nothing you have stated that you "believe" the POTUS has done is illegal. However, saying he is "complicit" implies a criminal act, but if as you say, he is simply being played by Putin, then that is not the same thing. You clearly have strong feelings about the POTUS and do not think much of him in terms of intelligence (as I said, I have come to expect that from people making these arguments who also tend to be "anti-Trumpers"). However, even if what you say is true, he is still the President. And dumping money into a fruitless investigation is not going to get him out of office or sway his supporters. If anything, it will likely strengthen his base. When opponents continue to make baseless claims and accusations at someone that are continually proven false, it just makes the target of those attacks stronger.

Mueller, I would remind everyone, is a life-long Republican, with an absolute spotless reputation and impressive resume.

SN James MacKay - That is irrelevant to my comments. In fact, his reputation and record means he should know better than to appoint people of questionable objectivity to participate in a special counsel investigation which was authorized due to the mere appearance of a "conflict of interest." See the irony?

Agreed.

Folks don't usually give guilty pleas for things that aren't crimes.

SPC David Willis - The only person that has pled guilty was the guy who lied to the FBI about something that was not even important and had no reason to lie about. Now we find out the FBI and the DOJ were using circle logic to authenticate and legitimize an investigation started by a paid DNC "opposition" research. Muller knows the moment he has completed his "investigation" and found nothing he is going to be sacked and all the DOJ, FBI, DNC, HRC, and Obama Admin are looking at ending up in jail for Obstruction of Justice, Lying, bribery, evidence tampering, abuse of authority, just to start.

Once there were some indication that Mueller was interested in Trump finances......Trump started sweating bullets. Leads me to believe there might be something to all the talk about Russian mob money being laundered through New York real estate (Trump?).

The presidents finances are none of his business. There is no LAW requiring presidential candidates to release tax forms. But, I have an idea what his show...page one "Wealthy". page two "Really Wealthy, and final page "You Gotta Be Kidding Me Wealthy".