mueller hearings
14 responses | 0 likes
Started by mcfarm - July 24, 2019, 9:36 a.m.

listening on the radio....Meuller sounds like a tottering old man with on set dementia....really embarrassing answers and lack there of

Comments
By WxFollower - July 24, 2019, 11:35 a.m.
Like Reply

mc,

 I think that’s unfair. I have a different take. Yes, Mueller sounds like he’s stumbling a lot, but I feel that he’s doing that because he’s being extra careful to answer the exact questions asked. I have no problem with his constantly asking for the questions to be repeated. I’d do the same thing myself if I were in his position. Part of the problem could very well be the committee members talking too fast or not clearly annunciating. The acoustics may not be too good. Maybe his hearing isn’t that good. Regardless, I fully expect Rush, Hannity, and other conservative hosts to harp on this like you did rather than items 1-3 I note below.


 Some key things I will note Mueller said:

1. Mueller clearly stated Trump was NOT exonerated on the issue of OOJ. So, Trump was wrong in saying this about Mueller.

2. Unsuccessful attempts to obstruct are still OOJ.

3. Mueller stated he couldn’t indict a sitting POTUS, which includes OOJ. So, it is quite possible that the only reason he didn’t is because he couldn’t due to this reason.

 On a different note: If I were on this committee, I’d like to ask Mueller whether or not someone can be guilty of OOJ if that person was exonerated with regard to the underlying thing being investigated (collusion). He’s implying Trump could still be guilty of OOJ or else he would have said Trump was exonerated of OOJ.

By metmike - July 24, 2019, 11:38 a.m.
Like Reply

I'm not going to speak to that  and I'm not going to answer that and I have nothing to add has been his favorite response to tough republican questions.

By WxFollower - July 24, 2019, 11:45 a.m.
Like Reply

Mike,

 In all fairness, Mueller said that to many Dem questions, too. 

By TimNew - July 24, 2019, 12:13 p.m.
Like Reply

"Mueller clearly stated Trump was NOT exonerated on the issue of OOJ."

This is a whole new twist in investigative procedure and I think Mueller and the dems may have invented it.  Previously, the role of an investigator/investigation was to prove enough guilt for an indictment/charge.  Then it goes to the courts. It's a true/false pass/fail kinda thing.   Never before have I heard an investigator say "We failed to prove his innocence".

By WxFollower - July 24, 2019, 12:31 p.m.
Like Reply

Tim said:

"'Mueller clearly stated Trump was NOT exonerated on the issue of OOJ.'

This is a whole new twist in investigative procedure and I think Mueller and the dems may have invented it.  Previously, the role of an investigator/investigation was to prove enough guilt for an indictment/charge.  Then it goes to the courts. It's a true/false pass/fail kinda thing.   Never before have I heard an investigator say 'We failed to prove his innocence'."

----------------------------------------------------------

Tim,

 This is not a normal situation, whatsover. Mueller appears to be saying that the only reason Trump wasn't charged with OOJ is that he's the current POTUS. Otherwise, he apparently would have been charged. Also, he said he could be indicted with OOJ after he leaves office.

 Overall, despite him confirming that there was no collusion (what we already knew), I think the testimony to the Judiciary Committee was damning to Trump with regard to OOJ. Not good for Trump. Therefore, I fully expect Hannity et al to emphasize Mueller's stumbling rather than the substance of his answers because the substance, itself, was overall not good for Trump.

By mcfarm - July 24, 2019, 12:33 p.m.
Like Reply

https://twitter.com/donaldjtrumpjr/status/1154023487700385793?s=12    all you really needed to hear of this mornings embarrassing performance by a figure head investigator

By TimNew - July 24, 2019, 12:46 p.m.
Like Reply

We'll have to agree to disagree WX. what Mueller "appears" to be saying in irrelevant. What he did say was there was no conclusive evidence with which to support an OOJ charge.  That is in his report and in his testimony.  

By WxFollower - July 24, 2019, 1:27 p.m.
Like Reply

 What did Mueller mean when he just said Hillary was subject to the same kind of behavior as Trump in this 2nd hearing regarding Russia. Did I hear/recall that correctly? Maybe it is insignificant.

By metmike - July 24, 2019, 2:14 p.m.
Like Reply

I rarely use Fox News as one of my sources but Chris Wallace is a fair/balanced guy there.

He nailed it today:

Chris Wallace: Robert Mueller hearing has been a 'disaster' for Democrats

https://www.foxnews.com/media/chris-wallace-robert-mueller-hearing-disaster-for-democrats

metmike: In my opinion, Mueller looked (very) incompetent, subjective and unwilling to answer any tough questions that we know he had the answers to.

By WxFollower - July 24, 2019, 2:27 p.m.
Like Reply

I earlier said this:

"Mueller appears to be saying that the only reason Trump wasn't charged with OOJ is that he's the current POTUS. Otherwise, he apparently would have been charged."

------------------------------

The above is from the 1st hearing. But from the 2nd hearing, Mueller corrected himself and said that it isn't true that Trump would have necessarily been charged with OOJ had he not been the current POTUS.

By WxFollower - July 24, 2019, 2:32 p.m.
Like Reply

metmike: "In my opinion, Mueller looked (very) incompetent, subjective and unwilling to answer any tough questions that we know he had the answers to."

--------------------------------------------------------------

 I agree that the optics for Mueller (stumbling) have been bad. And as I already said, I expect Hannity et al to focus on this rather than what Mueller actually did answer. But I in no way believe that Mueller is actually incompetent or biased. As I said, his hearing may not be that good, the acoustics may not be good, and some questioners may not be talking clearly and may be talking too fast. Also, I see no problem with asking for questions to be repeated. And as I said, he didn't answer a lot of questions from BOTH sides.

By metmike - July 24, 2019, 2:46 p.m.
Like Reply

Hi Larry,

We rarely disagree on things and usually just minor details.

This is an exception.

That doesn't mean that I'm right and I encourage you to continue to make your points to present your, always well thought out opinions.

By TimNew - July 24, 2019, 2:52 p.m.
Like Reply

Setting Mueller and his testimony,or lack thereof, aside,  let's not lose site of the fact that this is just another attempt at cheap theatrics by the left side of the aisle to try and fan the flames of a dying fire.  It's not going as well as they'd hoped and IMO, it's doing them a lot of harm.  

I think the left put an awful lot of hope into something of substance coming out of this investigation, and while it continues to go nowhere, they can't seem to let it go.   Meanwhile,  they offer little or nothing else of substance and baring some unforseen development or an economic collapse, they are likely to get Trumped on many levels in 2020. I think some of the more savvy members of the party are starting to realize this.

I make no secret of the fact that I am biased, and I don't always do a great job of keeping that from shaping my perception,   but I can't imagine how you could look at this any other way.

By metmike - Aug. 1, 2019, 6:59 p.m.
Like Reply

Just having some fun with a site that I found which has funny political cartoons!