Mueller had a choice here on what to say. He blew it. Barr literally handed him the opportunity to suggest a charging decision to the committee and expose Barr for not asking him why he wasn't making a charging decision when he turned in the report.
Have Republicans refuted any of the specific charges?
Mueller was not going to testify to anyone's satisfaction including mine and yours. What I did see is an opening for impeachment so large that a bus could be driven through it sidewise. There is no longer any justification for Pelosi to hold up impeachment proceedings. Further investigations can continue before and during impeachment. Will Nancy step up and strike while the iron is hot? I'd bet against it, but perhaps she will.
Have Republicans refuted any of the specific charges?
You're silly.Which charges again? The ones without sufficient evidence to bring? No one is refuting the charges that Clinton, members of the DNC, and senior officials of the DOJ colluding with foreign nationals to interfere with the federal presidential election process.
I'm giving my opinion on what I witnessed, that fact that you call it defeat says more about you than it does about me.
Unlike you, I don't have any ties or loyalty to the Democrat party, so my view is from a perspective unclouded by partisanship.
Maybe round two will be better but round one was, by Democrats own standards, a failure.
Mueller was not going to testify to anyone's satisfaction including mine and yours. What I did see is an opening for impeachment so large that a bus could be driven through it sidewise. There is no longer any justification for Pelosi to hold up impeachment proceedings. Further investigations can continue before and during impeachment. Will Nancy step up and strike while the iron is hot? I'd bet against it, but perhaps she will.
You're silly.
So, you're not a Democrat but you feel you can speak for Democrats? That's more than a little presumptuous.
Unlike the Liberal drones, Mueller built a wall to stop that illegal activity from happening. Any hope of the Dems having any legit reason for impeachment was destroyed by Mueller. In no way did he support obstruction conclusions presented by the Dems, but added that evidence and not policy is why Trump was not indicted.
Unlike the Liberal drones, Mueller built a wall to stop that illegal activity from happening. Any hope of the Dems having any legit reason for impeachment was destroyed by Mueller. In no way did he support obstruction conclusions presented by the Dems, but added that evidence and not policy is why Trump was not indicted.
It seems presumptuous that you can speak for anyone at all, including him.
What actually happened what that Mueller would not charge because of guidelines and explicitly said that Trump was not exonerated. Perhaps you recall that if Mueller said that if he was confident that Trump was exonerated he'd say so? It seems that reality was quite the opposite.
So, you're not a Democrat but you feel you can speak for Democrats? That's more than a little presumptuous.
Mueller has just walked back what he told Ted Lieu that he the president could have been charged with obstruction were it not for the OLC opinion: "We did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime." Ouchy!
I see you remain profoundly illiterate.
serious question: do you honestly think that the people that use this forum are as abjectly retarded as the people that populate the moron forums that feed you this nonsense?
Unlike the Liberal drones, Mueller built a wall to stop that illegal activity from happening. Any hope of the Dems having any legit reason for impeachment was destroyed by Mueller. In no way did he support obstruction conclusions presented by the Dems, but added that evidence and not policy is why Trump was not indicted.
“So it’s fair to say the President tried to protect himself by asking staff to falsify records relevant to an ongoing investigation,” Richmond said.
“I would say that’s generally a summary,” Mueller answered.
Richmond also asked if Trump’s attempts to get McGahn to create a false record were connected to the President’s concerns about Mueller’s inquiry into whether he committed obstruction of justice.
“I believe that to be true,” Mueller said.
Mueller has just walked back what he told Ted Lieu that he the president could have been charged with obstruction were it not for the OLC opinion: "We did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
They have to find sufficient evidence to bring charges, not find sufficient evidence not to bring charges.
I see you remain profoundly illiterate.
serious question: do you honestly think that the people that use this forum are as abjectly retarded as the people that populate the moron forums that feed you this nonsense?
What exactly was Mueller referring to here? It comes across as "both sides!".
Mueller says Russian hacking was intended to help Trump, but Clinton "was subject to much the same behavior"
Now here's a shocker. Fox News coverage is limited to "Mueller needed to have questions repeated" and the entire article just discusses the GOP reps asking him questions. Nothing of any substance at all.
He said he operated within the OLC guidelines preventing him making such a determination.
He said he operated within the OLC guidelines preventing him making such a determination.