Posted by DrJohn on 1 June, 2019 at 4:12 am. 241 comments already!



The more I listen to Robert Mueller, the less respect I have for him. He has become a corrupt politician and has disgraced his career. There has been talk of Mueller being subpoenaed to testify before Congress. Nadler insists that Mueller wants to testify- privately.

“He is willing to make an opening statement, but he wants to testify in private,” Nadler said. “We’re saying we think it’s important for the American people to hear from him and to hear his answers to questions about the report.”

So do I. More than ever.

It is said that Barr and Mueller are old friends. If so, it is a curious relationship. Mueller has crossed Barr multiple times now.

Mueller apparently had discussions with Barr prior to the release of the report. Barr issued a statement about the report summarizing the findings. Barr was under no obligation to release the report but release it he did, with minor redactions. Once the report was released Barr was assailed non-stop by democrats as a liar. Pressure built on Mueller to make a statement. He did that the other day and went out before the press and lied.

But Mueller did not mince words on his inquiry into whether the president obstructed justice.

“If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that,” Mueller said. “We did not determine whether the president did commit a crime.”

Mueller explained longstanding Justice Department policy, which states that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime.

“Charging the president with a crime was not an option we could consider,” Mueller explained, adding that “it would be unfair to accuse someone of a crime when there could be no court resolution of the charge.”

Swiftly a statement was issued jointly by Barr and Mueller spokespersons disagreeing with what Mueller has said in his statement.

“The Attorney General has previously stated that the Special Counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying that, but for the OLC opinion, he would have found the President obstructed justice. The Special Counsel’s report and his statement today made clear that the office concluded it would not reach a determination — one way or the other — about whether the President committed a crime. There is no conflict between these statements,” a joint statement from DOJ spokeswoman Kerri Kupec and Mueller spokesman Peter Carr said.

Then Barr calmly added that Mueller could indeed have brought charges if he had a case.

Mueller is peddling bullsh*t and Barr is having none of it. But here’s a really critical point, and it’s a point that has long irritated the living crap out of me:

“The use of foreign intelligence capabilities and counterintelligence capabilities against an American political campaign to me is unprecedented and it’s a serious red line that’s been crossed,” Barr said in an interview with CBS.

Russian disinformation paid for by Hillary Clinton and the DNC was used to mobilize America’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies against an American Presidential candidate. Let’s remember that when FBI lawyer Lisa Page feared that Trump might be elected, disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok said

“No. No he’s not. We’ll stop it”

Denying that there was a conspiracy against Trump is laughable, and Barr is on it despite plodding into headwinds:

But Barr, in an interview with CBS News that aired Friday, said he has more questions than answers at this point in the probe.

“Like many other people who are familiar with intelligence activities, I had a lot of questions about what was going on,” Barr said, referring to the origins of the Russia probe. “And I assumed I’d get answers when I went in, and I have not gotten answers that are at all satisfactory.”

He added: “In fact, I probably have more questions and some of the facts that I’ve learned don’t hang together with the official explanations of what happened.”

Barr did not elaborate further on his findings, but added: “Things are just not jibing.”

Let’s get some answers. By all means let’s get some answers. Let’s start with Robert Mueller. Make him testify. Part 1 of the Mueller Report dealt with Russian collusion and conspiracy. Mueller concluded there realistically was none of either. Part 2 dealt with the possibility of obstruction of justice by Donald Trump over a crime he did not commit. So let’s have Muller answer some questions:

“Mr. Mueller, when did you determine there was no collusion or conspiracy?”

“Mr. Mueller, if you were operating under the presumption that you could not indict a sitting President for collusion what was the point of undertaking Part 2 of your investigation? Was it to provide democrats with a road map for impeachment?”

“Mr. Mueller, was a road map for impeachment to aid democrats part of your directive from Mr. Rosenstein in the Scope Memo?”

“Mr. Mueller, can you please explain how you came to choose so many ardent Trump haters to be on your team? Can you explain the justification for adding a lawyer for the Clinton Foundation to your team?”

“Mr. Mueller, why would you choose someone with such a dodgy past as Andrew Weissman to be on your team?”

“Mr. Mueller, you said in your statement that you could not indict the President based on the OLC opinion but AG Barr said you did not reach a conclusion irrespective of the OLC opinion. Who is lying?”

When Mueller wrote

Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment, we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President’s conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.

It may be that Mueller knew that his potential obstruction case is garbage. Devin Nunes is pushing for release of all background source information, and it is well wort noting that at least some of the information has been altered:

The top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee sent out a tweet critical of Mueller after federal prosecutors, in compliance with an order from a federal judge, released the transcript of a voicemail former Trump lawyer John Dowd left for retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn’s lawyer Rob Kelner shortly after he agreed to cooperate with Mueller.

Mueller referenced parts of the Nov. 22, 2017, voicemail in his final report about how Dowd asks for a “heads up” if Flynn knew information that “implicates” Trump after Flynn dropped from a joint defense agreement with the president. But, as a Twitter user points out, parts of the transcript that were left out, including Dowd saying his request was “not only for the president, but for the country,” he was not asking for confidential information, and he did not appear to be certain that Flynn had decided to cooperate with Mueller’s team.

“This is why we need all backup and source documentation for the #muellerdossier released publicly. It’s all a fraud…,” Nunes tweeted in reply.

Barr had asserted that the DOJ had a different take on the analysis than did Mueller:

Barr told CBS News chief legal correspondent Jan Crawford that the Department of Justice determined “many of the instances” Mueller found “would not amount to obstruction” as a matter of law.

“[W]e didn’t agree with … a lot of the legal analysis in the report. It did not reflect the views of the Department. It was the views of a particular lawyer or lawyers, and so we applied what we thought was the right law,” he explained.

“The bottom line was that Bob Mueller identified some episodes,” Barr added. “He did not reach a conclusion. He provided both sides of the issue, and his conclusion was he wasn’t exonerating the president, but he wasn’t finding a crime either.”

Barr went on to say it is up to Mueller if he wants to testify before Congress, but he did say he does not think the line Mueller drew about sticking to his report is “the proper line.”

Inquiring minds want to know. No wonder Mueller doesn’t want to testify in public. Let Mueller testify.

In public.




0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x