BREAKING: Robert Mueller is speaking right now, for the first time since the report was released

sadly some on both sides suffer from TDS, Trump does that to people

 

Well when they don't call the author of the report first is sort of makes you question the legitimacy of the hearings

 

So your elected officials believe he's committed impeachable offenses and aren't doing their duty. Maybe you think that'll play well with independents, good luck because without them your going to lose the house and the Presidency.

 

Ken starr also did not indict.... which did not make clinton innocent

 

False. Starr present 13 criminal charges and Robert Ray presented the indict as Clinton left office after the Democrats said presidents should not be removed for obstruction of justice and perjury.

 

Mueller says he could not reach a conclusion on Obstruction because of Policy, he was only allowed to clear him, he was not allowed to indict

that sounds more like he would of indicted if he could of - his hands were tied because of justice department policy

 

The indictment was held until he left office after the Democrats refused to remove him.

 

Wouldn't you want a special counsel fired that put together a team that hated your guts, who had every imaginable ax to grind, every motive to 'get' you? That you had every reason to believe would not be fair or honorable? And in your frustration you might even tell the White House Counsel to have him replaced, which probably did happen. Nobody has ever said President Trump wanted the investigation stopped nor did he ever try to stop it. He just wanted somebody to do it whose motive wasn't to find something with which to hang the President.

That is not criminal. That is entirely human.

The most important thing is that Mueller was not fired, was not replaced.

Even though he should have been.

 

Nadler called for Mueller to appear the day the redacted report came out... Officially... with a nice letter.. If he subpoena'ed on day 1, you guys would have flipped out, so he tried honey over vinegar...

But If Mueller won't answer the hypothetical question everybody wants answered (and he even used the hypothetical word today), all they can get out of him are his disagreements with Barr's misleading actions, and I'm not sure that's all worth it at the end...

Nadler up now.... we'll see how he wants to go...

 

Uh Bill Clinton plead guilty before he left office, you know this right?

 

If he could have told the AG, and in effect the Congress, here are the crimes committed and my office will prosecuted once Trump leaves office he would have.

 

Did I ask you about Starr? No. I ask you about what the DOJ policy was/is for Mueller.

 

Right because when you hear the words instead of writing them down, it didn't happen.

 

Of course he would have indicted if he was allowed to do so and had any evidence. But without power to indict the President, previous special counsels who found criminal activity spelled it out. They didn't indict or recommend indictment either, but they did identify specific crimes along with the evidence that crimes were committed. Then Congress can decide if it merits impeachment proceedings.

Mueller didn't do that. All he did was provide a huge amount of innuendo that the Democrats could use to keep the witch hunt going until the next election and maybe after.

What he did was wrong, despicable, indefensible.

 

Why would anyone have flipped out???

Logically Mueller writes a report and he should be the 1st person to testify before anyone else for 2 reasons, 1 to clarify some of his language and decisions and lack of decisions 2 for the demos pr it makes them look like they legit just want to clear things up.

 

It's not supposed to be a money waster either. BTW, I feel I could defend Trump in a court of law and get a not guilty verdict. The prosecution has completely failed to make an argument in anyway that they were obstructed, and they fail in several cases to make an argument for an attempt of obstruction.

 

did you actually watch him speak? he was quite clear that what you say is not the case

 

He didn't have to charge the President with a crime. All he had to do was specify a crime that the President had committed along with the evidence to back that up. He couldn't do that so he did the worst that he could do to the President, i.e. spew out a lot of innuendo as ammo the Democrats will use to keep the witch hunt going as long as they think it is politically expedient.

That was wrong. That was despicable. That was indefensible.

 

I stand by my post. What I said is very clearly the case.

 

I like it!

 

Even if your false narrative were true it only proves Mueller could have stated the charges that would be brought once Trump left office then up to Congress to remove him. As I cited the Constitution parties subject to impeachment remain subject to indictment and prosecution.

 

He addressed that. Did you miss it?

 

Same as with Clinton/Starr dodge noted.

 

"If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."

Trump Justice Department Special Counsel​

 

Baloney. There is no evidence that Mueller is a Republican now. The last anybody knows he was a registered Republican was in 2001 when he wanted a job under a Republican President.

And Lawrence Walsh neither indicted nor recommended indictment, but spelled out specific infractions committed by President Reagan and Vice President Bush.

Ken Starr neither indicted nor recommended indictment, but spelled out 13 specific crimes committed by President Clinton.

Robert Mueller did not have to indict or recommend indictment, but if he had any evidence of specific crimes committed by President Trump, he could have said so. He didn't. All he did in his report and again this morning with his self-serving little speech was offer a lot of innuendo to give the Democrats ammo to keep the witch hunt going into perpetuity.

That was wrong. That was despicable. That was indefensible.