Can you imagine the questions:
Q: Mr. Mueller, did you go to Oval Office on May 16, 2017, because you wanted to apply for the job of FBI Director?
A: No.
Q: Mr. Mueller, was the mysterious cell phone you left behind in the oval office that day actually yours?
A: No.And then, as Rod Rosenstein takes a hard and uncomfortable swallow, the Weissmann constructed house-of-cards starts to collapse….
(CNN) Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team has expressed reluctance to him testifying publicly in front of the House Judiciary Committee, according to sources familiar with the matter.
The special counsel’s team has conveyed the notion that Mueller does not want to appear political after staying behind the scenes for two years and not speaking as he conducted his investigation into President Donald Trump.
[…] Rep. Doug Collins, the top Republican on the Judiciary Committee, suggested at Tuesday’s hearing, a meeting where former White House counsel Don McGahn did not appear after being subpoenaed, that Democrats appear to have a lack of urgency in scheduling Mueller’s testimony.
[…] Justice officials are generally supportive of how the team is proceeding with negotiations. As Attorney General Bill Barr told The Wall Street Journal last week: “It’s Bob’s call whether he wants to testify.”
Special counsel spokesman Peter Carr and the Justice Department declined to comment on the current status of negotiations. (read more)
With a larger portion of the U.S. electorate now beginning to realize there never was a Trump Russia-Collusion-Conspiracy case to begin with; and with people now realizing almost all of Mueller investigative time was spent gathering evidence for an ‘obstruction case’; and with new revelations from Andrew McCabe, John Dowd and Mueller officialsoverlayed on the previous Strzok/Page texts; we can now clearly reconcile a previous issue:
..The May 16, 2017, Mueller meeting with President Trump in the Oval Office.
There has been a great deal of flawed interpretation of the May 16th meeting between President Trump, Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein and Robert Mueller. Some people even claimed that meeting showed Mueller and Rosenstein working to the benefit of President Trump. However, if you overlay all the information there is considerable evidence that interview was for the purpose of Mueller determining if he could achieve an ‘obstruction’ goal. Here’s how…
FBI Director James Comey was fired on Tuesday May 9th, 2017.
According to his own admissions (NBC and CBS), Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe immediately began a criminal ‘obstruction’ investigation the next day, Wednesday May 10th; and he immediately enlisted Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.
These McCabe statements line up with with text message conversations between FBI lawyer Lisa Page and FBI agent Peter Strzok – (same dates 5/9 and 5/10):
(text message link)
It now appears that important redaction is “POTUS” or “TRUMP”. [Yes, this is evidence that some unknown DOJ officials redacted information from these texts that would have pointed directly to the intents of the DOJ and FBI. WARNING: Don’t get hung on it.]The next day, Thursday May 11th, 2017, Andrew McCabe testifies to congress. With the Comey firing fresh in the headlines, Senator Marco Rubio asked McCabe: “has the dismissal of Mr. Comey in any way impeded, interrupted, stopped, or negatively impacted any of the work, any investigation, or any ongoing projects at the Federal Bureau of Investigation?”
McCabe responded: “So there has been no effort to impede our investigation to date. Quite simply put, sir, you cannot stop the men and women of the FBI from doing the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding the Constitution.”
However, again referencing his own admissions, on Friday May 12th McCabe met with DAG Rod Rosenstein to discuss the issues, referencing the criminal ‘obstruction’ case McCabe had opened just two days before. According to McCabe:
… “[Rosenstein] asked for my thoughts about whether we needed a special counsel to oversee the Russia case. I said I thought it would help the investigation’s credibility. Later that day, I went to see Rosenstein again. This is the gist of what I said: I feel strongly that the investigation would be best served by having a special counsel.” (link)
Recap: Tuesday-Comey fired; Wednesday-McCabe starts criminal ‘obstruction’ case; Thursday-McCabe testifies to congress “no effort to impede”; Friday-McCabe and Rosenstein discuss Special Counsel.
After the weekend, Monday May 15th, McCabe states he and Rosenstein conferred again about the Special Counsel approach. McCabe: “I brought the matter up with him again after the weekend.”
Now, overlaying the hindsight we did not know in 2018, to include the John Dowd interview and McCabe admissions, a very clear picture emerges.
So, he lied to Congress or he initiated an investigation on false pretenses? Which is it?
Even when they SET UP an obstruction trap, they can’t make an obstruction case. I guess they haven’t gotten the proper police state mentality yet. Or maybe our Justice system is still too open and transparent to bring charges that might be challenged with facts.
He doesnt want to answer the question.
When you knew the Dossier was political claptrap nonsense before the investigation, what took 2 years to confirm no collusion?