Mueller

Burnthings

Active Member
139214
 

awpitt

Main Streeter
I'm not even sure why this "hearing" is taking place. The investigation is over, the report has been submitted. But wait! We need Mueller to testify what was in the report and if he found anything - anything at all! - that he didn't put in the report!

Our tax dollars and government at work.

Exactly.

Nothing is being said today that hasn't already been said.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
One of the many painful moments



I get the feeling Mueller's lawyer is there to shank him if he goes off the reservation in any way.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
On Collusion....

“The investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” Mueller said in his opening statement before the House Judiciary Committee. “We did not address ‘collusion,’ which is not a legal term. Rather, we focused on whether the evidence was sufficient to charge any member of the campaign with taking part in a criminal conspiracy. It was not.”


Damn that is inconvenient

The MSM is starting the "Mueller's health is hindering the hearing" mantra now. NYT is leading that excusapalooza.



Of Course .. they are not getting the testimony they want, so now the excuses start
 
  • Like
Reactions: BOP

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
So what do you suppose the Dems will do next? Election? Lose. Mueller investigation? Lose. Mueller testimony? Lose.

So now what?
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
I get the feeling Mueller's lawyer is there to shank him if he goes off the reservation in any way.

Mueller's Lawyer is the guy that helped Hillary destroy black berry's and delete 30,000 emails



Lawyer Who Represented the Aide Who Destroyed Hillary Clinton's Cell Phones Sits With Mueller


The most eye-opening question involved Aaron Zebley, a lawyer Mueller actually brought with him to the hearing before the House Judiciary Committee.

"Aaron Zebley, the guy sitting next to you, represented Justin Cooper, a Clinton aide who destroyed one of Clinton’s mobile devices," Armstrong noted. Fact check: True.

[clip]

"This isn’t just about you being able to vouch for your team," Armstrong insisted. "This is about knowing — the day you accepted this role you had to be aware — no matter what this report concluded, half the country was going to be skeptical of your team’s findings. That’s why we have recusal laws that define bias and perceive bias for this very reason. 28 U.S. code 528 specifically lists not just political conflict of interest but the appearance of political conflict of interest."

"It’s just simply not enough that you vouch for your team," the congressman explained, noting that "over half of the prosecutorial team had a direct relationship to the opponent of the person being investigated."

Armstrong posed a hypothetical situation to explain just how noxious this bias is.

"I wonder if not a single word in this entire report was changed but rather the only difference was we switched Hillary Clinton and President Trump. If Peter Strzok had texted those terrible things about Hillary Clinton instead of President Trump, if a team of lawyers worked for, donated thousands of dollars to, and went to Trump’s parties instead of Clinton’s, I don’t think we’d be here trying to prop up an obstruction allegation," he suggested.
 
Last edited:

This_person

Well-Known Member
Exactly.

Nothing is being said today that hasn't already been said.
It's just sad, really. Both sides of the issue are proving it already - a meme here, a tweet there....and, it's just snippets from the questioning that in and of itself adds up to squat.

Which seems to be the point of the politicians.
139216
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
View attachment 139215


I saw this coming, not that the accusation means a damn thing, but it is a deflection from the conversation
How could you see it coming? You shouldn’t be able to see it at all if you are ignoring me.

That being said, if you intentionally don’t watch the hearings so that you can get a synopsis from your favorite talking head, you like being told what to think.
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
The really funny thing about this meme is that it treats the information as somehow new information.

However, from the fifth paragraph on page 1 of volume 2:
The OLC opinion also recognizes that a President does not have immunity after he leaves office.4 And if individuals other than the President committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time.​

It's not new information. It's only new information if one did not read the report.
 

kom526

They call me ... Sarcasmo
However, from the fifth paragraph on page 1 of volume 2:
The OLC opinion also recognizes that a President does not have immunity after he leaves office.4 And if individuals other than the President committed an obstruction offense, they may be prosecuted at this time.​
I wonder how this will affect the folks behind the illegitimate FISA warrant? Remind me when the request went to the FISA court, you know, in order to spy on a presidential campaign. :sshrug:
 
Top