Meuller To Give 'Statement' (RIGHT NOW) From DOJ In Lieu Of Testifying Under Oath

[Crixus]

Open the books on the motherfucker. His whole career.

Volunteered for Vietnam. Battle tested Marine. But Trumpublicans have no trouble attacking decorated war heroes do you?

First off, fuck you, you never been there so anything you say on “battle tested” is nothing but bull shit picked up from playing call of duty. And I said above, and I’ll say it again, Robert Muller is nothing but a pretty boy shitting himself because his legacy is about to be crapped on.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. (Wednesday morning) amid pressure to testify

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to deliver his first public statement on his investigation into Russian interference during the 2016 presidential election on Wednesday at 11 a.m. from the Justice Department.

The Justice Department announced Mueller would make a statement on Wednesday morning--his first in the more than two years since he was appointed as special counsel."


Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. amid pressure to testify


It should be happening RIGHT NOW.....

Yup, listening now. Nothing but a slimy fucking lawyer. Tripping over his words. He is a piece of shit and I hope he dies.

Why is he allowed to speak even a single word without being under oath?

He didn't say anything different than what was in his report. Why should he have to be under oath?

Nothing-burgers for everyone!

 

[HappyJoy]

I think after that it's clear that Mueller was never going to indict a sitting president rather the constitutional remedy is impeachment. It was loud and clear if you have at least 2 brain cells.

 

[MisterBeale]

Mueller: Investigators did not have confidence the president did not commit a crime

“If we had confidence that the president had not committed a crime, we would have said so,” he said. He added, citing a DOJ policy: “Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.”



If Mueller and his team had confidence that the President HAD committed a crime he would have said so.

His protégé, Comey, stood up in front of the American people and declared Hillary Clinton DID BREAK LAWS...and then used the ridiculous, brain-dead excuses that she was TOO STUPID TO KNOW SHE WAS BREAKING LAWS (as if ignorance of the law is a defense for breaking them) as justification for HIS DECISION that Hillary should not be charged with a crime. (IT was NEVER his decision to make!)

Not being able to charge a President with a crime did not prevent him from making the definitive statement that he and his team came to the conclusion that the President Broke The Law - which he did NOT do - despite not being able to charge him with the crime!

Again this is another BS statement made without being under oath to substantiate and explain this false statement. Mueller just stated he did NOT declare President Trump had broken the Law in his report but wants to say 'but I thought he did...I just did not have the balls (or the evidence) to declare it openly.

If he wants anyone reasonable to believe this statement, all he has to do is agree to testify. (He had no problem grilling the sh!t out of Trump associates but he does not have the courage to testify to defend his findings under oath before Congress.

No, that is not what the HRC prosecution was about.

It was about INTENT. Did she have criminal intent? That is a subjective judgement.

Criminal INTENT is necessary to prosecute, and that is the same thing that is hinging on whether or not to prosecute Trump.

It is, in the end, all political.

Intention (criminal law) - Wikipedia

 

[The Original Tree]

He basically told America “it’s up to you to decide if we’re a country that wants a criminal as President or not.”

Impeach the motherfucker

sigh. SATISFY MY INNER EMO!!!! I DEMAND TO BE CALLED RIGHT!!!

WAUGHAUGH!!!!!!!

lord you suck.

PBS Twitter:
Robert Mueller says that "under longstanding" Justice Dept. policy, "a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional..." He adds later: "Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider"

“If we had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”

Go fuck yourself you piece of trash. IMPEACH

You cannot prove a Negative Dummy.

Mueller was a hack that even despite $40 Million Dollars, 500 Interviews, 2.500 Subpoenas could not prove a single crime The President or his family had committed.

There was no crime scene and no crime and no evidence to investigate. It was an investigation in search of a crime.

And that is why it FAILED.

If I had Confidence you did not commit a crime, I would not think you were an asshole.

Can you prove there is not a Santa Claus?

Can you prove to me you are NOT A CRIMINAL?

Can you prove to me you are NOT AN ASSHOLE?

 

[easyt65]

Battle tested Marine. But Trumpublicans have no trouble attacking decorated war heroes do you?

Did you seriously just try to pull the 'Battle-Tested' Viet Nam Vet' Card to defend / justify this JOKE'S clown show?

This 'Battle-Tested Viet Nam Vet' is the same POS who hid Russian crimes in 2014, the same POS who hid evidence proving the men he intentionally sent to jail anyway for decades were innocent, and is still the same POS who was called before a FISA Court to explain the 75 FISA Court Abuses when HE was FBI Director....but being a 'Battle-Tested Viet Nam Vet' is supposed to wipe all of that out?



.

 

[toobfreak]

Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. (Wednesday morning) amid pressure to testify

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to deliver his first public statement on his investigation into Russian interference during the 2016 presidential election on Wednesday at 11 a.m. from the Justice Department.

The Justice Department announced Mueller would make a statement on Wednesday morning--his first in the more than two years since he was appointed as special counsel."


Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. amid pressure to testify


It should be happening RIGHT NOW.....

Well, that's it. The report speaks for itself. There was sufficient grounds to charge Bill Clinton with obstruction, suborning of perjury, but there WASN'T in the case of Donald Trump. Otherwise Mueller would have done it.

 

[Foxfyre]

Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. (Wednesday morning) amid pressure to testify

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to deliver his first public statement on his investigation into Russian interference during the 2016 presidential election on Wednesday at 11 a.m. from the Justice Department.

The Justice Department announced Mueller would make a statement on Wednesday morning--his first in the more than two years since he was appointed as special counsel."


Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. amid pressure to testify


It should be happening RIGHT NOW.....

I had my questions about Mueller's motives once he assembled the team that he did, and he convinced me today that he is a totally unethical and unprincipled person.

Lawrence Walsh, special counsel in the Iran/Contra investigation, concluded that both President Reagan and Vice President Bush had violated rules/broken the law, but they were crimes for which there were no penalties. In other words, there was no point in prosecuting them. I don't even remember what those infractions were and don't care enough to look it up.

Ken Starr did not indict or suggest President Clinton should be indicted. But in his report he clearly indicated 13 specific crimes committed by President Clinton along with his evidence for that. It was then left up to Congress what to do with it.

Mueller had two years and millions of dollars to use to investigate. The White House provided him 1.4 million documents and refused him none. No executive privilege was evoked to prevent him from interviewing people or otherwise seeking evidence. He interviewed 500 people and indicted several--none for crimes that had anything to do with President Trump--dragged their names through the mud, broke them financially, ruined them professionally, and put unconscionable stress on their families trying to get some dirt on the President, and had the most maliciously partisan team hostile to President Trump and pro Hillary that he could have assembled.

And with all that, he could not point to any specific crime that President Trump had committed? He didn't have to indict. All he had to say is that he concluded that President Trump and/or members of his campaign colluded with Russians here and here and here. President Trump obstructed justice here and here and here. Mueller didn't do that.

But what he did do this morning was pour gasoline on the fire practically insisting that the Democrats keep up their witch hunt and go after the President.

That was dirty, slimy, unethical, and evil. Whatever respect I had for the man based on others' opinion of him is completely gone now.

 

[Crixus]

Open the books on the motherfucker. His whole career.

Volunteered for Vietnam. Battle tested Marine. But Trumpublicans have no trouble attacking decorated war heroes do you?

Let's see how truly blind you really are:


This Mueller????


Flatfooted Robert Mueller Surprised by Boston Marathon Bombers' Mosque's Terror Connections






This one????


FBI Director Mueller Doesn't Know Anything About IRS Investigation








Or this Mueller?

You will have more to post from this crooked cop here soon I’m thinking.

 

[Crixus]

Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. (Wednesday morning) amid pressure to testify

"Special Counsel Robert Mueller is expected to deliver his first public statement on his investigation into Russian interference during the 2016 presidential election on Wednesday at 11 a.m. from the Justice Department.

The Justice Department announced Mueller would make a statement on Wednesday morning--his first in the more than two years since he was appointed as special counsel."


Special Counsel Robert Mueller to make statement at Justice Dept. amid pressure to testify


It should be happening RIGHT NOW.....

Yup, listening now. Nothing but a slimy fucking lawyer. Tripping over his words. He is a piece of shit and I hope he dies.

Why is he allowed to speak even a single word without being under oath?

He didn't say anything different than what was in his report. Why should he have to be under oath?

Nothing-burgers for everyone!

Then why not under oath? Why would he refuse (before being asked) to testify? Muller is up in the smear machine and it’s about damn time.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Go fuck yourself you piece of trash. IMPEACH

For what crime?

Abuse of power and obstruction of Justice. Intimidating witnesses, bribing witnesses, withholding evidence, most of staff forgetting to disclose their ties to Russia.

Would love to hear from the 12 subpoena’d criminals that won’t testify because Russia is protecting Trump. Republicans cheer them for that, of course.

/——/ You forgot Area 51, The Tri Lateral Commission And “steel don’t melt.”

 

[The Original Tree]

I think after that it's clear that Mueller was never going to indict a sitting president rather the constitutional remedy is impeachment. It was loud and clear if you have at least 2 brain cells.

How do you indict someone over a Non Crime, when there wasn't even a Crime Scene, Nor Evidence of a NON CRIME COMMITTED for you to attempt to Indict them on?

Can anyone explain how an Investigation in search of a crime works?

Usually there is a Crime Committed, Evidence of a Committed Crime, and then an Investigation in to WHO Committed The Crime.

You don't for instance, just pick a person and say..... I think you committed a crime..... We don't know what it is.....but we are going to investigate you....to see if you did something.....even though we don't know if you did anything at all.

This is what The Soviet Union does, what people like Hitler and Nazi Germany did.

Now those on The Left are doing it.

 

[BlindBoo]

Here's the deal.

As far as Collusion, none was found. As far as obstruction, he made NO conclusion, so basically its OVER.

In the Ken Start Report, Clinton was labeled GUILTY five times. In the Mueller Report, Trump was never declared GUILTY of anything! That's telling!

Collusion is not a crime Mueller investigated. The report site many instances of collusion between Trump's campaign and Russians. Mueller was not able to conclude that there was a conspiracy or agreement between Trump and the Russian Government, but he certainly didn't find "no collusion". It's documented in the report

 

[easyt65]

Mueller: Investigators did not have confidence the president did not commit a crime

“If we had confidence that the president had not committed a crime, we would have said so,” he said. He added, citing a DOJ policy: “Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider.”



If Mueller and his team had confidence that the President HAD committed a crime he would have said so.

His protégé, Comey, stood up in front of the American people and declared Hillary Clinton DID BREAK LAWS...and then used the ridiculous, brain-dead excuses that she was TOO STUPID TO KNOW SHE WAS BREAKING LAWS (as if ignorance of the law is a defense for breaking them) as justification for HIS DECISION that Hillary should not be charged with a crime. (IT was NEVER his decision to make!)

Not being able to charge a President with a crime did not prevent him from making the definitive statement that he and his team came to the conclusion that the President Broke The Law - which he did NOT do - despite not being able to charge him with the crime!

Again this is another BS statement made without being under oath to substantiate and explain this false statement. Mueller just stated he did NOT declare President Trump had broken the Law in his report but wants to say 'but I thought he did...I just did not have the balls (or the evidence) to declare it openly.

If he wants anyone reasonable to believe this statement, all he has to do is agree to testify. (He had no problem grilling the sh!t out of Trump associates but he does not have the courage to testify to defend his findings under oath before Congress.

No, that is not what the HRC prosecution was about.

It was about INTENT. Did she have criminal intent? That is a subjective judgement.

Criminal INTENT is necessary to prosecute, and that is the same thing that is hinging on whether or not to prosecute Trump.

It is, in the end, all political.

Intention (criminal law) - Wikipedia

SO...

Hillary Clinton lying to the FBI by telling them thousands of e-mails she attempted to delete were 'personal' and not official documents does not prove an INTENT to Obstruct Justice?

Attempting to delete over 15,000 OFFICIAL SUBPOENAED e-mails - WHICH THE FBI DECLARED THEY SUCCESSFULLY RECOVERED - which proved Hillary Clinton violated both the FOIA and Federal Records Act by refusing to run in official documents for mandatory archival as required by both laws is NOT evidence of an INTENT to break the law?

ILLEGALLY smashing official government classified devices with hammers - in violation of the laws pertaining to the handling and destruction of classified - and the removal and refusal to turn in subpoenaed official SIM cards does not prove an INTENT to obstruct justice and break laws?

IN WHAT UNIVERSE?

Oh yeah, the SNOWFLAKE Alternate Reality Universe.

 

[The Original Tree]

Here's the deal.

As far as Collusion, none was found. As far as obstruction, he made NO conclusion, so basically its OVER.

In the Ken Start Report, Clinton was labeled GUILTY five times. In the Mueller Report, Trump was never declared GUILTY of anything! That's telling!

Collusion is not a crime Mueller investigated. The report site many instances of collusion between Trump's campaign and Russians. Mueller was not able to conclude that there was a conspiracy or agreement between Trump and the Russian Government, but he certainly didn't find "no collusion". It's documented in the report

So what Crime was Mueller Investigating?

You have to have committed a crime to have an investigation, since impeachment requires you be found guilty of High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Again, someone tell me why Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel at all, since he had No Crime Scene and No Evidence of a Crime to even Investigate?

 

[BlindBoo]

the President stands before us as pure as snow.

....Yeah sure, ....where the Husky's go!

President Golden Boy

 

[SAYIT]

Essentially, a "leave me alone" statement. The report speaks for itself, he will say nothing that is not in the report, and he sees no reason to give Nadler a circus.

He'll be too busy writing his book - as will others connected to his witch-hunt. You know … cashing in.

If you want the inside skinny you'll have to buy it.

 

[The Original Tree]

Let's put it in this context.

Appointing Mueller to Investigate a Non Crime with No Crime Scene, and No Evidence of a Crime Committed is like playing Clue and Accusing Colonel Mustard of Murdering Hillary Clinton in the Library with a Lead Pipe with Hillary Clinton right next to you alive and breathing, No Lead Pipe in sight, Colonel Mustard on vacation in Europe, and The Library is closed.

Again, why was Mueller even appointed by the Obama Administration in the first place?

 

[easyt65]

Collusion is not a crime Mueller investigated.

So you admit there should never have been an investigation to begin with....

Thank you for admitting there was NEVER any evidence of a crime committed by Trump or anyone on his team that warranted an investigation or Special Counsel appointment.

If it was OBVIOUS from the start that there was NO illegal collusion, as you state collusion is not a crime, then Mueller had to know almost immediately no crime had been committed, none worth an investigation and none worth his appointment as Special Counsel..

...and that has to mean he continued using 'Illegal Collusion' as an excuse to continue his Witch Hunt, digging into anything he could, allowing the FBI to try to set up Papadopoulos and others to provide Mueller with the opportunity to try to get 'process crimes' on Trump associates - crimes that had nothing to do with the investigation - so he could squeeze them to try to get them to provide evidence of any crime on Trump...something that he did not have....and could never come up with.

 

[BlindBoo]

Here's the deal.

As far as Collusion, none was found. As far as obstruction, he made NO conclusion, so basically its OVER.

In the Ken Start Report, Clinton was labeled GUILTY five times. In the Mueller Report, Trump was never declared GUILTY of anything! That's telling!

Collusion is not a crime Mueller investigated. The report site many instances of collusion between Trump's campaign and Russians. Mueller was not able to conclude that there was a conspiracy or agreement between Trump and the Russian Government, but he certainly didn't find "no collusion". It's documented in the report

So what Crime was Mueller Investigating?

You have to have committed a crime to have an investigation, since impeachment requires you be found guilty of High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Again, someone tell me why Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel at all, since he had No Crime Scene and No Evidence of a Crime to even Investigate?

Ignorance is bliss. Are you saying you don't know there is not a crime called collusion? Read the report and you too will know what crimes he was investigating.