The Mueller Report: The Final Report of the Special Counsel into Donald Trump, Russia, and Collusion

The Mueller Report: The Final Report of the Special Counsel into Donald Trump, Russia, and Collusion

NOOK Book(eBook)

View All Available Formats & Editions

Available on Compatible NOOK Devices and the free NOOK Apps.
WANT A NOOK?  Explore Now
LEND ME® See Details


The wait for The Mueller Report is over. This strikingly designed edition has been prepared by expert typographers – allowing for an optimised, immersive reading experience. "From the moment [the report] was published, two separate news universes took shape. In one, the special counsel's report was presented as a smoking-gun chronicle of high crimes and misdemeanours. In the other, it was heralded as a credibility-shredding blow to the president's opponents."—The Atlantic Make up your own mind. The Mueller Report is a must read political blockbuster.

Product Details

ISBN-13: 9782291066279
Publisher: PDRG Publishing
Publication date: 07/10/2019
Sold by: Bookwire
Format: NOOK Book
Pages: 707
Sales rank: 231,262
File size: 1 MB
Age Range: 10 Years

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

See All Customer Reviews

The Mueller Report: The Final Report of the Special Counsel into Donald Trump, Russia, and Collusion 3.4 out of 5 based on 0 ratings. 5 reviews.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Every American should read at least some of this report . Read Vol. 2 if you can`t read all of this.
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Thorough report presented in such a way that an interested person can follow the facts, the law and logic of the OSC to guide Congress everyone interested in a just result to this effort telling a story of corrupt intent. It will be helpful in the future as a reference document as further investigations unfold.
HBarca218 7 months ago
No stars deserved. It was very hard to read the so called Mueller Report, because of the poor writing done, misspellings. Example: lied, spelled with a capital I instead of an L, information also misspelled. There were also gaps in words, example: information. The word President was spelled Pres ident multiple times throughout. If this was because of the writers of the report, then it is very sad that they are “professionals,” but cannot write a proper report. They tried tying re-tweeting or sharing someone else’s posts as collusion or in their case, criminal conspiracy. Obvious that a crime was committed, but they tried make one. Some reviewers said only read part 2, not appropriate to say read only the bad about the President but ignore the implicit directive of the investigation, 2016 Russian election interference. Only one candidate was reviewed. There was ample reason to look at the other. One individual reviewed was said to be tied to both campaigns, only one side explored, speaks to the bias. The team had attorneys who had numerous Clinton connections, one worked for the Foundation, none for the Trump Organization. Another worked on the e-mail case, and one for an employee. I am sure they guaranteed that nothing nefarious happened. One had to recuse themselves from a different Trump case, none in the case of HRC. In Vol. 2, they try again to make crimes out of no crimes. They state that not sharing with the media is somehow obstruction. They are stating that the press is somehow part of the government and not sharing with them is a crime. Also stated that public comments were somehow heard by the jury in cases, but offer no proof. In fact, juries are not to follow items in the media, so they are stating that the jury(s) broke the law. Assumptions were made that all supported Trump and believed him if he says they are good, and not the opposite, that they are bad because he says they are good. No attempt made to charge anyone or have mistrials declared. Also tried was the firing of Comey was obstruction. Not only was it Constitutional, but evidence illustrates how legal it was, because of IG criminal referrals. Dems wanted him removed based on the handling of the HRC affair. He did something in that case, that did not occur with Trump, so no equal justice observed. Both Trump and Bernie were attacked saying Russians tried to help both beat her. In their pre-determinations, if the person did not follow through, they “stopped” or “did not” cooperate, examples: Cohen and Manafort and Manafort and Podesta, who also did not register under FARA. Alan Dershowitz gave a grade of a C- for part of the report, with inflation. The Ivy League Curve is evident, because this report was horrible, biased, and did not fairly investigate its purview, the 2016 Pres. election. If it did, it would have also discussed the HRC campaign in greater detail. There are a few endnotes about spearfishing, but not in the text, nor are there pictures, while they are pictures of journal entries. Supposed texts of entire e-mails exchanged on the Trump side were shared. Very sad that an attorney for Trump had to bring to light how the report does not provide the full conversation that transpired. Do not buy the book, but get it from the library. The Mueller Team was completely biased. It is quite tragic that this lie was allowed to be perpetuated on the American public and that they were allowed to profit from this occurrence!
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Anonymous More than 1 year ago
Endnotes are off/hard to follow. Would recommend paying $1-$2 more for another version.