That the Russian thing was a hoax, and yet, you are still here grasping at straws.  None of these points  you made have anything to do with TRUMP colluding with the Russians.  Mueller knows all of this stuff you are saying, but he still found that "No American (and that would include Trump) conspired with the Russians to affect the outcome of the election.  I think "No American" also includes the NRA and what you call the Thumpers.  Get over it and move on.  You are just making yourself look stupid.  You should leave making you look stupid to us professionals.  

 

It was known that an NRA PAC (or whatever it was called) spent $30 million on the 2016 campaign. That kind of PAC was structured in a way that they were not required to report who their donors were to the FEC.  I don't know if Mueller subpoenaed those records during the investigation.  Very recently (June 2019), several Attorneys General have subpoenaed financial records from the NRA.  
.
If there is evidence there of unreported Russian donations to the NRA PAC but Mueller did not find it during the course of the investigation, it might lead to charges being filed for campaign finance violations or similar. Others might have to figure out if there was criminal conspiracy (a formal agreement: "You, Russia, give us, the NRA, $30 M and we will conduct a pro-Trump ad campaign on your (hidden) behalf.")

speculation, but I will repeat . . . . . . Mueller knew all of this and it doesn't rise to the level of being illegal, so what's the big deal?

Mueller knew about Butina and Torshin and "small" Russian contributions to the NRA and its agenda. Mueller knew that the NRA had spent more than $30 M on the Trump campaign. I do not think that anyone had investigated the source of that $30 M. It was spent by an arm of the NRA that was not required to disclose the sources of its donations. It is only being investigated now.  
.
Of course, if you have a LINK to an article that says otherwise, please post it.

-- Modified on 7/14/2019 4:27:00 PM

continue to Speculate, he could reopen the investigation on the basis of "newly discovered evidence."  Prosecutors do it all the time, so I think the fact that he hasn't militates in favor of the fact that he did know, but there is no "there" there.  

With the release of the Mueller Report, the Special Prosecutor investigation was shut down.  
.
The on-going investigations by State AGs and others are trying to find out how the NRA PAC got the $30 million.  If it turns out that it was a lot of Russian money, that is a FEC violation. If it turns out that there is sufficient evidence of an agreement, that could be conspiracy.  
.
Maybe Mueller did find out about $30 M of Russian money going to the NRA but felt that his mission was not to investigate the NRA but the Trump campaign itself. If he did have evidence of an NRA - Russia conspiracy, maybe he felt it was not his job to investigate or prosecute it and he passed it off to another DoJ office. Maybe further investigation of the NRA and Russian ties is one of the 12 or 14 ongoing secret investigations that have not yet been disclosed.  
.
Who here wants to know who donated the $30 M to NRA? Who here is concerned that foreigners might be trying to influence US elections (pro-Dem, pro-Rep, anti-Dem, anti-Rep, ...) by making "hidden" donations to various PACs?  
.
If you are opposed to finding out who donated the $30 M, please state your reasons.

-- Modified on 7/15/2019 3:01:23 PM

Your post has too many "IF'S" to be taken seriously.  It falls somewhere between speculation and wishful thinking.  What source do you have that the any state AG's are investigating the donation to the NRA?  I would be interested in reading about that since it doesn't seem to be publicized much.  

 

Maybe it's not Fox News, but it is all over NYT, WaPo, Newsweek, etc..  
.
D.C. AG and NYS AG have subpoenaed NRA records to try to figure out the NRA moved around over $200 M between different arms of their organization. Some of the money was taken in by their "charitable arm" but moved to other arms for non-charitable purposes.
http://www.newsweek.com/nra-investigation-fraud-charity-subpoena-dc-1449038
NRA INVESTIGATION ESCALATES AS ITS CHARITABLE FOUNDATION TARGETED BY D.C. ATTORNEY GENERAL

I don't believe Trump's name is mentioned in the article even once, so that is an overreach that you took upon yourself to add to your prior post.  

of guilt or innocence by a court of law, any investigation can be reopened.  If there was court determination, either by a judge or jury, the double jeopardy clause prevents re-litigation of the accused.  So Yes, I did say that.  Barr can reopen it if he wanted to, but he would probably do so with a different prosecutor because of the cloud over Mueller's integrity from the slimy way he worded his report.  

Separate issues. The NRA investigations are separate from the Mueller investigations. Foreign interference in the US elections is a crime. If the NRA was complicit in that (Russia gives money to NRA for the NRA to spend on campaign ads), that is a crime: FEC violation, maybe worse, ... to be determined.  
.
Mueller did note the ties between the Trump campaign and several "NRA" Russians, including Butina. That was separate from anything going on between the NRA and Russia that was hidden behind veils of secrecy.  
.
Mueller was not investigating EVERYTHING.  Someone found a "Vote for Trump" or a "Vote for Clinton" poster 10 feet too close to a voting center.  Not for Mueller.  A local business brought cupcakes and soda to a campaign rally and didn't declare it as a campaign contribution. Not for Mueller.  Seemingly independent NRA campaign spending on Trump ads. Not for Mueller.  
.
Do you want to know where the NRA got the $30 M for those ads?  Do you want to know where Clinton supporting groups and PACs got their $$ for various campaign activities?  The answer to both questions should be the same: YES.

for Mueller's partisan incompetence?  He looked up the ass of everyone Trump knew for two years.  If there was a connection to be make to Russia THROUGH the NRA, he would have been all over it, and the Dems would have gotten the Mueller report they wanted.  Mueller knew it was a dead-end, and that's why he didn't mention it.  

 
What I really want to know is what the conversation was between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch on the airport tarmac just days before Comey cleared Hillary.  THAT seems more like obstruction of justice to me than anything Trump has said or done.  My guess, and its just a guess, is that Lynch was told by Bill that she could keep her job as AG after Hillary becomes president, but that Lynch needed to step up and make sure Hillary gets cleared before the election.  There is a whole basket of felonies there if that is what happened.  Comey has already said Lynch directed him to call it a "matter" instead of an investigation when talking publicly.  

Total speculation on YOUR part. We do not know what has not yet been disclosed. Mueller might have handed off anything NRA related to another office for investigation (most of which are still ongoing and sealed). I would also like to know what transpired. Comey has already said (not fact checking you on this) that Lynch told him to use "matter" instead of "investigation." Why wouldn't Comey say anything else about any of her instructions? Let me predict CDL's reply: "Because he explicitly mentioned one thing ("matter") that gives me license to assume dozens of other anti-Clinton facts not in evidence nor attested to."

my response.  My take is that he didn't disclose anything else because it would be information that he should have disclosed at the time to the IG.  He was not going to throw his boss, Lynch, under the bus, and he was not going to incriminate himself by admitting several months later that he did not report it in a timely manner.