cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Senior Contributor

Mueller's testimony

Well how is it going after Mueller's testimony?

11 Replies
Senior Contributor

Re: Mueller's testimony

I been to three county fairs, two goat ropins, and a skunk chase, but I ain't never, ever seen in all my life anything like today's grilling of the soon to be 75 year old, Bobby Three Sticks.

 

Not since Captain Queeg's riveting testimony during the Cain Mutiny hearings can I recall anything so oddly...well...odd, I suppose. But, even then, that was just in the Hollywood picture shows.

 

Ref: Cain Mutiny, 1954 w/Humphrey Bogart

Senior Contributor

Re: Mueller's testimony

Just in from a bunch of grass cutting and trimming up and by what the BBC says your post leaves me wondering what old movie stories you have been watching?

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-49100778

President Donald Trump's claim that he was "totally exonerated" by special counsel Robert Mueller was rejected by Mr Mueller in a hearing on Wednesday.

Appearing before Congress, Mr Mueller said he had not exonerated the president of obstruction of justice.

Mr Mueller spent two years investigating alleged collusion between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia.

He concluded that Russia interfered on Mr Trump's behalf but he was not able to establish collusion in a crime.

In all, 35 people and three companies were charged by the special counsel on matters relating both directly and indirectly to alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election. No members of the Trump family were charged.

Mr Mueller - a former FBI director - and his team concluded that they were unable to charge the president with a crime, but could not exonerate him either.

...........

Mr Mueller repeatedly stressed the importance of concerns over ongoing Russian interference in US democracy.

"Over the course of my career I have seen a number of challenges to our democracy. The Russian government's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious," he said.

He added: "Much more needs to be done in order to protect against this intrusion, by the Russians but others as well."

Advisor

Re: Mueller's testimony

Senior Contributor

Re: Mueller's testimony

Are you lefty's ready to stop beating this dead horse? Just how much humiliation can you take. 3 years and still zip!

Senior Advisor

Re: Mueller's testimony

If Mueller thought there was collision why did he not lay out his case? Him not laying out a case for collusion is an exoneration of Trump.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Mueller's testimony

TV was on during all that "testimony" today while was doing computer and paperwork.  Nothing new, just political spin and drama for the TV viewing audience.

First, there isn't a crime called "collusion", and even if there was some sort of "conspiracy", there still must be a crime that was committed.  In the case of the infamous meeting at the Trump Tower, even though Russians offered to provide info that could be damaging to Clinton, and even though Trump Jr and other Trump campaign people agreed to the meeting (which should have been reported to the FBI before agreeing to the actual meeting), and even though a meeting took place, there apparently was no damaging information shared (which would have been the crime).  Agreeing to or actually having a meeting was not a crime in itself.  There has been speculation about why the Russians initiated the request for the meeting, as well as the pretext upon which the meeting was based, and whether or not this was actually orchestrated by our own CIA or FBI counter-intelligence with the Russian players -- none of which was really addressed today.

Then, regarding "exoneration", there apparently is no authority to grant, nor is there a legal status for, "exoneration".  In the United States, our legal system finds people either "guilty" or "not guilty", with a presumption of innocence.  Our legal system does not "find people innocent", nor does it "exonerate" them.  If sufficient evidence does not propel the case to trial, then there was simply no finding of "guilty" nor "not guilty".  Therefore, it is obvious the Mueller Report did not proclaim or find anyone specifically "innocent", nor were they "exonerated".  At the same time, the Mueller Report also did not find anyone specifically "guilty" nor "not guilty", it simply reported the facts they gathered -- it forwarded certain parts of the cases to the courts where Mueller's team felt prosecution was justified, and those cases are either resolved or ongoing.  

 

Senior Contributor

Re: Mueller's testimony

My understanding was the thing that got them off from the meeting with the Russians was the finding they were ignorant did not understand the law so it was not 'deliberate'

 

And what he did find, report and confirmed today that if they had found him innocent, or able to exonerate him,  they would have stated that.

I guess if you are willing to just believe things counter to evidence then that is the way you will live your life but many of us like to stick to evidence and facts.

Senior Contributor

Re: Mueller's testimony

Well after a day it looks like the left just can't handle the facts and are now looking under more rocks for any possible bit of information that supports their inability to except that Trump is and will be the President. This next election is going to cause more fruit cakes to snap than the last one.

Advisor

Didn’t watched. Worked a double shift yesterday

Now I read that it was exceptionally boring Pleased that I had something constructive (and paying) to do:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/07/25/robert-mueller-hearing-was-awesome-227478