Mueller Spokesman Issues Clarification: OLC Opinion Had NO Impact On Mueller Decision

[Lesh]

I want to see Mueller in front of Congress.

He wants to be done with this mess.

Too bad. He'll BE subpoenaed

Graham will subpoena him but Nadler will never bring him in

And when he does testify in the House...you will of course apologize for your stupidity...right?

 

[Lesh]

Hilarious...Mueller's Office backtracked / issued a 'clarification' of what Mueller claimed in his 'Drive-By' press conference yesterday (and his report), contradicting his own statements while shooting a huge hole in the snowflake narrative of how Trump was not found / declared 'guilty' because of the OLC decision that sitting Presidents can not be indicted....

"Mueller refused to allege a crime. So evidence of something -- something that wasn’t prosecutable right now, and that Mueller refused to suggest amounted to a crime for the future. Mueller himself said the investigation was justified because perhaps it would have resulted in evidence that “could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.” But Mueller didn’t charge co-conspirators in obstruction."


"Mueller’s second justification is more obvious: he essentially said he was doing Congress’ impeachment groundwork for them. “The Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Mueller stated. This is an invitation to impeachment."


"A criminal investigation that cannot possibly result in charges is a conflict in terms. Mueller never should have agreed to such an investigation under the law, and Mueller’s own standard makes that clear."


DOJ, Mueller’s Office Release Joint Statement Clarifying Mueller’s Comments

How come you did not post the JOINT statement and instead pasted some guy named Shapiro's opinion instead?

Here is the joint statement:

The Attorney General has previously stated that the Special Counsel repeatedly affirmed that he was not saying that, but for the OLC opinion, he would have found the President obstructed justice. The Special Counsel's report and his statement today made clear that the office concluded it would not reach a determination - one way or the other - about whether the President committed a crime. There is no conflict between these statements.

Mueller's office in this statement with the Justice department, is saying EXACTLY what Mueller has said all along.... he did not make a determination on the obstruction, one way, or the other....

The easy solution is for Nadler to subpoena Mueller and have his testify under oath before Congress to make clear what he is claiming, to defend his decision and investigation, and to answer some questions....

Why is Mueller so afraid to / against doing so?

Why aren't snowflakes insisting he do so and are instead allowing Mueller to dictate what he will do and will not do?

Nadler claimed he wanted to know everything Mueller had to say in his report so badly that he demanded the US AG break the law by releasing Grand Jury information Mueller's team redacted and then voted to hold the US AG in 'Contempt' for refusing to break the law...WHEN ALL HE HAD TO DO WAS / IS SUBPOENA MUELLER AND have him testify under oath before Congress...

Why does he allow Mueller to tell him who can / can't and who should / should not testify under oath before Congress?

Simple, Because he does not want to answer the honest questions that would come from all the non-Dems. He would have to lie. Even under oath the snake would lie. Look what he does to innocent persons' he wants to use to frame others. He is a disgrace to rule of law...as many of them are.

"Innocent persons" like Manafort,Cohen et al?

 

[Dragonlady]

Hilarious...Mueller's Office backtracked / issued a 'clarification' of what Mueller claimed in his 'Drive-By' press conference yesterday (and his report), contradicting his own statements while shooting a huge hole in the snowflake narrative of how Trump was not found / declared 'guilty' because of the OLC decision that sitting Presidents can not be indicted....

"Mueller refused to allege a crime. So evidence of something -- something that wasn’t prosecutable right now, and that Mueller refused to suggest amounted to a crime for the future. Mueller himself said the investigation was justified because perhaps it would have resulted in evidence that “could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.” But Mueller didn’t charge co-conspirators in obstruction."


"Mueller’s second justification is more obvious: he essentially said he was doing Congress’ impeachment groundwork for them. “The Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Mueller stated. This is an invitation to impeachment."


"A criminal investigation that cannot possibly result in charges is a conflict in terms. Mueller never should have agreed to such an investigation under the law, and Mueller’s own standard makes that clear."


DOJ, Mueller’s Office Release Joint Statement Clarifying Mueller’s Comments

Bullshit from the Daily Pundit. Mueller isn’t a person who misspeaks and he was reading a statement he had written and carefully considered.

Barr is a lying piece of shit who has tried to undermine this investigation from before his appointment.

Mueller could not have been clearer in both his report and his statement. If not for DOJ policy, Trump would have been charged.

 

[caddo kid]

Hilarious...Mueller's Office backtracked / issued a 'clarification' of what Mueller claimed in his 'Drive-By' press conference yesterday (and his report), contradicting his own statements while shooting a huge hole in the snowflake narrative of how Trump was not found / declared 'guilty' because of the OLC decision that sitting Presidents can not be indicted....

"Mueller refused to allege a crime. So evidence of something -- something that wasn’t prosecutable right now, and that Mueller refused to suggest amounted to a crime for the future. Mueller himself said the investigation was justified because perhaps it would have resulted in evidence that “could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.” But Mueller didn’t charge co-conspirators in obstruction."


"Mueller’s second justification is more obvious: he essentially said he was doing Congress’ impeachment groundwork for them. “The Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Mueller stated. This is an invitation to impeachment."


"A criminal investigation that cannot possibly result in charges is a conflict in terms. Mueller never should have agreed to such an investigation under the law, and Mueller’s own standard makes that clear."


DOJ, Mueller’s Office Release Joint Statement Clarifying Mueller’s Comments

Barr is placing more 'spin' on the SC Mueller report which implies that the DOJ in it's current form & representation is nothing more than a mouth piece for Trump & for Trump's influence.

This is however no surprise; not to those of US that are actually paying attention, like myself.

Trump is getting very nervous & Barr is making attempts to sooth Trump's sore, *******, butt hurt ass.

Barr made the Constitutionally correct decision on obstruction since Mueller made NO DECISION AT ALL on it.
And the last time we checked, Mueller worked for the DOJ (you need reminding that the DOJ falls under the Executive Branch); even tho' Mueller had a senior moment believing that he worked for Congress!
Civics 101, you ass monkey.

So, you made two semi interesting points:

(1) please explain to us what you mean by "the Constitutionally correct decision"
(2) You state "Mueller worked for the DOJ" but then so, does Barr. What is your point there, if you actually have a point?

 

[caddo kid]

Hilarious...Mueller's Office backtracked / issued a 'clarification' of what Mueller claimed in his 'Drive-By' press conference yesterday (and his report), contradicting his own statements while shooting a huge hole in the snowflake narrative of how Trump was not found / declared 'guilty' because of the OLC decision that sitting Presidents can not be indicted....

"Mueller refused to allege a crime. So evidence of something -- something that wasn’t prosecutable right now, and that Mueller refused to suggest amounted to a crime for the future. Mueller himself said the investigation was justified because perhaps it would have resulted in evidence that “could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.” But Mueller didn’t charge co-conspirators in obstruction."


"Mueller’s second justification is more obvious: he essentially said he was doing Congress’ impeachment groundwork for them. “The Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Mueller stated. This is an invitation to impeachment."


"A criminal investigation that cannot possibly result in charges is a conflict in terms. Mueller never should have agreed to such an investigation under the law, and Mueller’s own standard makes that clear."


DOJ, Mueller’s Office Release Joint Statement Clarifying Mueller’s Comments

Barr is placing more 'spin' on the SC Mueller report which implies that the DOJ in it's current form & representation is nothing more than a mouth piece for Trump & for Trump's influence.

This is however no surprise; not to those of US that are actually paying attention, like myself.

Trump is getting very nervous & Barr is making attempts to sooth Trump's sore, *******, butt hurt ass.

Is "spin" a leftwing euphemism meaning "truth?"

Likely not; Barr doesn't actually understand what the term 'truth' means, or implies.

 

[task0778]

Snippet:

... if Team Mueller knew all along that the Constitution prohibited criminally charging a sitting president, why did they devote so much time and effort investigating the possible ways that Trump could have obstructed justice? Why did half of their written report go into such detail about Trump’s purported efforts to thwart their investigation? Why did they try to force the president to testify under oath? Were they using the obstruction investigation as a means of luring Trump into a perjury trap? But if Trump can’t be criminally charged, why set the trap? Just what was Team Mueller’s goal?


In his remarks, Mueller provided a not-so-subtle answer to all of these questions. “The Constitution,” he intoned, “requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.”

Anybody want to guess what “process” he’s talking about? Here’s a clue: it’s spelled with an “i”.

So now we know. For the last two years, the supposedly apolitical Department of Justice has spent tens of millions of our tax dollars to fund a pre-impeachment investigation of President Trump conducted by fervent and unabashed supporters of the candidate that he defeated at the polls. You might think that, under such grubby, shameful, and nakedly political circumstances, Mueller would have had the decency and sense to keep his mouth shut and quietly resign his position. Instead, by his public remarks, he has made a show of passing the impeachment baton to the Democrats in the House of Representatives.

But, in so doing, Mueller has divested himself and his cohort of Hillary Clinton sycophants of the last pretense of prosecutorial legitimacy. By his ill-advised farewell address, the special counsel has conclusively laid bare the true political purpose behind Team Mueller’s investigation as well as its detailed report. Thanks to Mueller’s speech, there can be no doubt remaining that Team Mueller’s two volume report is, for all intents and purposes, nothing more than a political manifesto calculated to advance the deep state’s ongoing conspiracy to undo the outcome of the 2016 election.

As such, the fact that this nakedly partisan political operation was publicly funded and allowed to pass itself off as a legitimate exercise of law enforcement power and authority marks an historical low point for the United States Department of Justice.
Mueller’s Shamelessly Corrupt Valedictory | The American Spectator | Politics is too important to be taken seriously.


I don't know about this deep state ongoing conspiracy thing, but clearly this was a 2-year investigation in search of a crime by people with a political ax to grind against Trump. Or at least to find any kind of politically damaging information they could hit him with to keep him from getting re-elected. This is not what our DOJ supposed to be doing, this is using gov't agencies for political purposes. Which to my mind totally outrageous.

 

[SAYIT]

...Democrats Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries have all declared it is NOT and that they want Mueller to testify. Funny how the very Democrats you seek to defend contradict your claims and prove you have only your own opinion, not fact.

Mueller suggested it be handed off, to the ONLY group of people who can do anything on it that our constitution provides, the congress..,

Incorrect again but at least you are consistent.

Mueller had the information & authority to determine & state in his report if his 2 yr, $35 million witch-hunt found evidence of Trump criminality. He did not but did include that "... this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..." and after all, wasn't that one of his main focuses?

 

[easyt65]

Hilarious...Mueller's Office backtracked / issued a 'clarification' of what Mueller claimed in his 'Drive-By' press conference yesterday (and his report), contradicting his own statements while shooting a huge hole in the snowflake narrative of how Trump was not found / declared 'guilty' because of the OLC decision that sitting Presidents can not be indicted....

"Mueller refused to allege a crime. So evidence of something -- something that wasn’t prosecutable right now, and that Mueller refused to suggest amounted to a crime for the future. Mueller himself said the investigation was justified because perhaps it would have resulted in evidence that “could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.” But Mueller didn’t charge co-conspirators in obstruction."


"Mueller’s second justification is more obvious: he essentially said he was doing Congress’ impeachment groundwork for them. “The Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Mueller stated. This is an invitation to impeachment."


"A criminal investigation that cannot possibly result in charges is a conflict in terms. Mueller never should have agreed to such an investigation under the law, and Mueller’s own standard makes that clear."


DOJ, Mueller’s Office Release Joint Statement Clarifying Mueller’s Comments

Bullshit from the Daily Pundit. Mueller isn’t a person who misspeaks and he was reading a statement he had written and carefully considered.

Barr is a lying piece of shit who has tried to undermine this investigation from before his appointment.

Mueller could not have been clearer in both his report and his statement. If not for DOJ policy, Trump would have been charged.

Of course YOU claim BARR is lying ... even though Democrats Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries have all declared Mueller's report is NOT enough, that questions remain, and Mueller should testify.

Instead of hearing from all the Trump-haters, I - like Nadler, Schiff, & Jeffries - would like to hear MUELLER explain himself, defend his investigation and his decision, and answer questions under oath.

WHY ARE YOU / SNOWFLAKES & MUELLER SO AFRAID / OPPOSED TO HIM DOING THAT....?

 

[NoVote]

I watched mule speak every word the other day. You know what it reminded me of? A 13 year old whacking off in the john and not realizing people were watching. I felt embarrassed for him, sort of.... Naaaaa, not really

 

[bripat9643]

Hilarious...Mueller's Office backtracked / issued a 'clarification' of what Mueller claimed in his 'Drive-By' press conference yesterday (and his report), contradicting his own statements while shooting a huge hole in the snowflake narrative of how Trump was not found / declared 'guilty' because of the OLC decision that sitting Presidents can not be indicted....

"Mueller refused to allege a crime. So evidence of something -- something that wasn’t prosecutable right now, and that Mueller refused to suggest amounted to a crime for the future. Mueller himself said the investigation was justified because perhaps it would have resulted in evidence that “could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.” But Mueller didn’t charge co-conspirators in obstruction."


"Mueller’s second justification is more obvious: he essentially said he was doing Congress’ impeachment groundwork for them. “The Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing,” Mueller stated. This is an invitation to impeachment."


"A criminal investigation that cannot possibly result in charges is a conflict in terms. Mueller never should have agreed to such an investigation under the law, and Mueller’s own standard makes that clear."


DOJ, Mueller’s Office Release Joint Statement Clarifying Mueller’s Comments

Barr is placing more 'spin' on the SC Mueller report which implies that the DOJ in it's current form & representation is nothing more than a mouth piece for Trump & for Trump's influence.

This is however no surprise; not to those of US that are actually paying attention, like myself.

Trump is getting very nervous & Barr is making attempts to sooth Trump's sore, *******, butt hurt ass.

Is "spin" a leftwing euphemism meaning "truth?"

Likely not; Barr doesn't actually understand what the term 'truth' means, or implies.

You mean Mueller doesn't. He also doesn't understand what the word "justice" means. Neither do you, for that matter.

 

[DJT for Life]

I want to see Mueller in front of Congress.

He wants to be done with this mess.

Too bad. He'll BE subpoenaed

Graham will subpoena him but Nadler will never bring him in

And when he does testify in the House...you will of course apologize for your stupidity...right?

The Dems have to invite him to the House. After having to walk back his farewell address today, you don't honestly
believe that Nadler wants him in front of Jim Jordan and Matt Goetz...do you?

The GOP will roast him

 

[Care4all]

It's already clear on what Mueller is stating on that....

OBVIOUSLY NOT...

Democrats Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries have all declared it is NOT and that they want Mueller to testify.

Funny how the very Democrats you seek to defend contradict your claims and prove you have only your own opinion, not fact.

Mueller suggested it be handed off, to the ONLY group of people who can do anything on it that our constitution provides, the congress... he did not make a decision on it, one way or the other.... it's up to others to decide wrong doing or not.... that's Congress.

Oh, and impeachment is not the only way for Congress to act, they could simply sanction a president for wrong doing,

YOU keep trying to claim 'this is what Mueller really meant / said' when Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries have all said Mueller's report is NOT enough and that he needs to testify under oath and answer questions....

Why are you and Mueller so against that?

I am NOT against Mueller testifying before congress silly one! I WANT him to.


--------------------------------------------
impeachment proceedings, is simply the grand jury gathering evidence, to determine if a law was broken and an indictment issued if there was.... like in any criminal case...

only with a president, it is the congress judicial committee that is the grand jury, and instead of indictments, it is articles of impeachment drawn up.... then the case goes to a criminal court, if a grand jury and not a president.... and if congress, it goes to the senate.

so, impeachment articles, is the same as indictments/charges, and the court where the accused can defend themselves, is in the senate, with our chief justice as the judge overseeing the trial, and each senator, is the 'jury'. IF convicted on the articles/indictments by 2/3's of the Senators, then, and only then, a president is removed from office. Nothing else can be done by congress.... they CAN NOT send anyone to jail for being impeached and/or removed

mueller is not ordering congress to write articles of impeachment, he is simply saying it is out of his hands, he investigated, he gathered the facts, now it is up to congress to decide on wrong doing or not.... is how I read it.

 

[easyt65]

mueller is not ordering congress to write articles of impeachment, he is simply saying it is out of his hands, he investigated, he gathered the facts, now it is up to congress to decide on wrong doing or not.... is how I read it.

No one said he is ordering Congress to Impeach the President.

Having failed to produce evidence of any crime by the President warranting an investigation or his appointment as Special Counsel...

Having failed to prove guilt - not getting 1 single indictment or conviction of anyone for collusion or obstruction...

Having CHOSEN to not make a decision either way on Obstruction against Trump ('failure to prove guilt) and deciding instead to leave it to others....and after telling Barr 3 seperate times the OCL decision played no part in his final decision (which his own spokesman reiterated in his 'clarification' of what Mueller actually said it meant to say in his presser)...

Mueller instead attempted to stir the pot, incite Trump-hating Democrats into initiating Impeachment proceedings, and arm them to do so, which the 2nd part if his report and this press conference was intended to do.

As R-Jordan stated, the only real thing we found out from Mueller during his ' drive-by' press conference is that Mueller really really really doesn't want to testify under oath before Congress.

 

[Care4all]

...Democrats Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries have all declared it is NOT and that they want Mueller to testify. Funny how the very Democrats you seek to defend contradict your claims and prove you have only your own opinion, not fact.

Mueller suggested it be handed off, to the ONLY group of people who can do anything on it that our constitution provides, the congress..,

Incorrect again but at least you are consistent.

Mueller had the information & authority to determine & state in his report if his 2 yr, $35 million witch-hunt found evidence of Trump criminality. He did not but did include that "... this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..." and after all, wasn't that one of his main focuses?

with the president, dept of justice rules state Mueller could NOT indict him for any crime, even if he committed one... A Special Counsel works for the DOJ, unlike an Independent Counsel who does NOT work for the DOJ, like Kenneth Starr... who had freedom to not follow DOJ rules.

IF Barr wants Mueller to break the DOJ rules and indict the president for his multiple obstruction felonies, I'm certain Mueller's Special Counsel, would be happy to oblige!!!

If Barr wanted Mueller to break ethics rules and accuse the President of a crime, without the president receiving official charges and a criminal trial to defend himself, then Barr, as Mueller's boss, should have ORDERED him to make the accusation....

END OF STORY

 

[Billy_Bob]

mueller is not ordering congress to write articles of impeachment, he is simply saying it is out of his hands, he investigated, he gathered the facts, now it is up to congress to decide on wrong doing or not.... is how I read it.

What is really funny with you idiots, you don't have clue that the law the democrats wrote forbids the report from being seen by anyone other than the DOJ Chief and his counsel. By LAW, BARR DID NOT HAVE TO DISCLOSE ANYTHING. He could of simply stated there was no evidence of any crime, case closed, had Barr followed the letter of the law. Mueller's grandstanding just proved he was severely biased and not performing as a neutral party as is required by law.

All Mueller did was discredit his own work and his legacy..... Stupid is as stupid does...

 

[Care4all]

Having failed to produce evidence of any crime by the President warranting an investigation or his appointment as Special Counsel...

There were over 10 separate instances where the President allegedly obstructed justice in the Mueller report, spelled out clearly, that even a third grader would understand...

READ IT

inform yourself

INSTEAD of being a mindless Trump lemming, pretty please!

 

[skye]

mueller is not ordering congress to write articles of impeachment, he is simply saying it is out of his hands, he investigated, he gathered the facts, now it is up to congress to decide on wrong doing or not.... is how I read it.

What is really funny with you idiots, you don't have clue that the law the democrats wrote forbids the report from being seen by anyone other than the DOJ Chief and his counsel. By LAW, BARR DID NOT HAVE TO DISCLOSE ANYTHING. He could of simply stated there was no evidence of any crime, case closed, had Barr followed the letter of the law. Mueller's grandstanding just proved he was severely biased and not performing as a neutral party as is required by law.

All Mueller did was discredit his own work and his legacy..... Stupid is as stupid does...

I agree.

 

[Care4all]

and after telling Barr 3 seperate times the OCL decision played no part in his final decision (which his own spokesman reiterated in his 'clarification' of what Mueller actually said it meant to say in his presser)...

can you link to him telling Barr 3 separate times of that? Because in the report, and again yesterday in person, and in the clarification, he did NOT say that the OLC rule had nothing to do with his decision not to make a decision, at all... you are lying again.

 

[easyt65]

...Democrats Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries have all declared it is NOT and that they want Mueller to testify. Funny how the very Democrats you seek to defend contradict your claims and prove you have only your own opinion, not fact.

Mueller suggested it be handed off, to the ONLY group of people who can do anything on it that our constitution provides, the congress..,

Incorrect again but at least you are consistent.

Mueller had the information & authority to determine & state in his report if his 2 yr, $35 million witch-hunt found evidence of Trump criminality. He did not but did include that "... this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime..." and after all, wasn't that one of his main focuses?

with the president, dept of justice rules state Mueller could NOT indict him for any crime, even if he committed one... A Special Counsel works for the DOJ, unlike an Independent Counsel who does NOT work for the DOJ, like Kenneth Starr... who had freedom to not follow DOJ rules.

IF Barr wants Mueller to break the DOJ rules and indict the president for his multiple obstruction felonies, I'm certain Mueller's Special Counsel, would be happy to oblige!!!

If Barr wanted Mueller to break ethics rules and accuse the President of a crime, without the president receiving official charges and a criminal trial to defend himself, then Barr, as Mueller's boss, should have ORDERED him to make the accusation....

END OF STORY

End of story because you keep saying the same bullshit over and over again as if it is the gospel....

Bwuhahaha

1. Nothing prevented Mueller from putting in his report that was supposed to go to the US AG only a declaration that the President had committed a crime.

2. Mueller told Barr 3 times that this decision played NO part in his decision NOT to render any decision, which his own office supported in their 'clarification' of what Mueller had REALLY said...

3. "If Barr wanted to violate ethics rules..."

Mueller DID violate prosecutorial ethics rules by attempting to incite Democrats into Impeachment on information he could / not clearly declare equated to a crime by the President...

Snowflakes claim Mueller could not declare Trump committed a crime...then claim that is what he did...TWICE...in the 2nd half of his report and in his ' drive-by' press conference...

'Wanted Mueller to commit an Ethics violation'? That's funny coming from snowflakes who defended Nadler and Pelosi who demanded the US AG break the law and then held him in 'Contempt' when he refused to do so...

4. As I pointed out, Democrats Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries all declared it is NOT 'end of story's because Mueller's report is NOT enough, because there are a lot more questions he needs to answer, and they want him to testify.....

So before we take your biased Trump-hating translation of what Mueller really did or said and agree based on THAT 'its over' why don't we support Nadler, Schiff, and Jeffries' call for Mueller to testify under oath before Congress do Mueller can say for himself what he meant and answer questions?!

 

[easyt65]

can you link to him telling Barr 3 separate times of that? Because in the report, and again yesterday in person, and in the clarification, he did NOT say that the OLC rule had nothing to do with his decision not to make a decision, at all... you are lying again.

It is in the transcripts of Barr's testimony under oath before Congress that he states Mueller told him the OLC decision had no impact on his decision not to make a call either way...

Versus Mueller's claim that he and his team knew going into the investigation that they would never be able to REPORT / conclude Trump committed a crime or be able to convict him, the 1st being BS....and corrected by his own office hours after his press conference....and while - unlike Barr - Mueller refuses to go on official record under oath in testimony before Congress....