Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
How come Nadler no longer wants Mueller to testify?
SFGbob
Member Posts: 33,188
in Tug Tavern
What happened libs? I thought you wanted transparency?
Comments
-
Mueller testified. It was just this morning.
-
Yeah, not under oath and he didn't have to face any questions. Why it's almost as if Nadler and Mueller worked out a deal. I never realized that making an unchallenged statement to the press was "testifying."HHusky said:Mueller testified. It was just this morning.
-
And you'd be totally fine with that, because you're all about "transparency" right O'Keefed?HHusky said: -
Mueller's report said: I can't vindicate him. I can't prosecute him. Congress can prosecute him.SFGbob said:
And you'd be totally fine with that, because you're all about "transparency" right O'Keefed?HHusky said:
Mueller today said: I can't vindicate him. I can't prosecute him. Congress can prosecute him. (And the evidence is preserved if a prosecutor want to level charges after he's out of office too.)
I suppose we could always listen to him say it again.
Of course I disagree with him (and the DOJ) on one point: that anything in the Constitution says a sitting President can't be indicted. The Constitution is silent about that and we know that the only reason that became DOJ lore was because of a memo written to support the notion that the then sitting VP, Spiro Agnew, could be indicted.
-
So Mueller was absolutely worthless. Got it. You guys wasted a lot of effort sucking his dick for two years. SadHHusky said:
Mueller's report said: I can't vindicate him. I can't prosecute him. Congress can prosecute him.SFGbob said:
And you'd be totally fine with that, because you're all about "transparency" right O'Keefed?HHusky said:
Mueller today said: I can't vindicate him. I can't prosecute him. Congress can prosecute him. (And the evidence is preserved if a prosecutor want to level charges after he's out of office too.)
I suppose we could always listen to him say it again.
Of course I disagree with him (and the DOJ) on one point: that anything in the Constitution says a sitting President can't be indicted. The Constitution is silent about that and we know that the only reason that became DOJ lore was because of a memo written to support the notion that the then sitting VP, Spiro Agnew, could be indicted.
We do in fact know that Trump could be indicted and Mueller could lay out things he could be indicted for. But he didn't because it isn't there. So he throws out some bullshit to the dupe and they lap it up
Public Service Reminder - these are the smart people -
Oh I know what the script says O'Keefed. I'd be interested in hear Mueller answer the questions that aren't on the script.
Did you look into the possibility that the Russians interfered in our election by providing disinformation that was paid for by Hillary and the DNC? Yes or No? And if no, why not? Wasn't the entire purpose of your investigation to look into Russian meddling in our election? Why did you ignore that? -
I suppose he was worthless to people he need a fucking road map to get to the bathroom.RaceBannon said:
So Mueller was absolutely worthless. Got it. You guys wasted a lot of effort sucking his dick for two years. SadHHusky said:
Mueller's report said: I can't vindicate him. I can't prosecute him. Congress can prosecute him.SFGbob said:
And you'd be totally fine with that, because you're all about "transparency" right O'Keefed?HHusky said:
Mueller today said: I can't vindicate him. I can't prosecute him. Congress can prosecute him. (And the evidence is preserved if a prosecutor want to level charges after he's out of office too.)
I suppose we could always listen to him say it again.
Of course I disagree with him (and the DOJ) on one point: that anything in the Constitution says a sitting President can't be indicted. The Constitution is silent about that and we know that the only reason that became DOJ lore was because of a memo written to support the notion that the then sitting VP, Spiro Agnew, could be indicted.
We do in fact know that Trump could be indicted and Mueller could lay out things he could be indicted for. But he didn't because it isn't there. So he throws out some bullshit to the dupe and they lap it up
Public Service Reminder - these are the smart people -
The Senate has subpoena power. Go for it!SFGbob said:Oh I know what the script says O'Keefed. I'd be interested in hear Mueller answer the questions that aren't on the script.
Did you look into the possibility that the Russians interfered in our election by providing disinformation that was paid for by Hillary and the DNC? Yes or No? And if no, why not? Wasn't the entire purpose of your investigation to look into Russian meddling in our election? Why did you ignore that? -
Appears Nadler and Mueller worked out a deal so Mueller could read from the script and not face any uncomfortable questions. How much money did we pay Mueller and the fucker goes unquestioned on anything?
Nadler spilled the beans last week when revealed why he thought Mueller didn't want to testify.
Mueller doesn't want to testify publicly
if the Republicans on the committee start asking him questions about the beginning of the — about this stuff, the beginning of the investigation.
