Posted on 02/17/2018 1:26:00 PM PST by davikkm
Friday on Fox News Channel’s “The Ingraham Angle,” host Laura Ingraham gave her take on the indictments handed down by special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe regarding interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Ingraham told viewers the indictments illustrated how Russia was still a threat to the United States despite then-President Barack Obama’s dismissal during the 2012 presidential election. She also said Mueller should interview 2016 Democratic Party presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State John Kerry, former National Security Advisor Susan Rice, former Deputy National Security Advisor Ben Rhodes and former President Barack Obama as part of his investigation.
Partial transcript as follows:
INGRAHAM: We finally have indictments in the Mueller investigation related to meddling in the 2016 election and the only ones being charged are Russians. A federal grand jury has now indicted 13 Russian individuals and companies for interfering in the 2016 election.
They are charged with a bunch of things like creating fake ads, staging pro and anti-Trump campaign events and also setting up bogus-run organizations, but they’re not accused of rigging the election for Trump, but instead of waging information warfare to sow discord in the political system.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein announced the indictments and added this important caveat.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Mueller and his merry band of lefty lawyers must be disbanded. A new Special Counsel must be appointed as Mueller and Co. may be subject to some inquiry themselves.
Someone needs to get this news to Mad Maxine.
Why? Did not Mueller act as the go-between for Her Majesty
and the Russians? Was not Mueller the mule for
delivering captured fissile U back to Russia
or its internal terrorists so that NK, Iran,
and the clowns could murder Americans .... by the millions.
They already know each other.
And any 5th grader knows they both are guilty.
She has been silent for awhile, wonder why?
Why would Mueller interview his buddies, who are also his partners in crime?
YEP.
True. If Mueller fails to do a credible and thorough investigation on how that fake Russian dossier was constructed and used to obtain warrants, the plot behind it and the culpability of the Obama administration, he will forever be remembered as an incompetent, biased failure.
Agree...but it will never happen.
Mueller the Impotent indicts to 13 people he cannot extradicte to prosecute. This is an exercise of prosecutorial masturbation.
Mueller the Impotent indicts 13 people he cannot extradicte to prosecute. This is an exercise of prosecutorial masturbation.
Mueller needs to be in GITMO!!
The fact that the mueller coup is still up and running after a year should give everyone pause.
WTF is Laura thinking? Interview? He should be indicted for high treason.
Forget Mueller. Trump promised an investigation into Hillary’s dealings during the campaign. I’m still waiting for a special prosecutor to be named for her. It’s Trump’s Justice Department. I can’t see any reason for Sessions to recuse himself on this matter. What’s the hold up?
The ventriloquist is on break ...
People who skate away from the crimes that they commit, do it silently.
Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on the Nomination of Sen. Sessions to be Attorney General
Day 1 : January 10, 2017
GRASSLEY: During the course of the presidential campaign, you made a number of statements about the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, relating to her handling of sensitive e-mails and regarding certain actions of the Clinton Foundation. You weren't alone in that criticism.I was certainly critical in the same way as were millions of Americans on those matters, but now, you've been nominated to serve as attorney general. In light of those comments that you made, some have expressed concerns about whether you can approach the Clinton matter impartially in both fact and appearance. How do you plan to address those concerns?
SESSIONS: Mr. Chairman, it was a highly contentious campaign. I, like a lot of people, made comments about the issues in that campaign. With regard to Secretary Clinton and some of the comments I made, I do believe that that could place me objectivity in question. I've given that thought.
I believe the proper thing for me to do, would be to recuse myself from any questions involving those kind of investigations that involve Secretary Clinton and that were raised during the campaign or to be otherwise connected to it.
GRASSLEY: OK. I think, that's -- let me emphasize then with a follow up question. To be very clear, you intend to recuse yourself from both the Clinton e-mail investigation and any matters involving the Clinton Foundation, if there are any?
SESSIONS: Yes.
GRASSLEY: Let me follow up again, because it's important. When you say you'll recuse, you mean that you'll actually recuse and the decision will therefore fall to, I assume, a deputy attorney general? I ask because after Attorney General Lynch met with President Clinton in Phoenix, she said she would, quote/unquote, "defer to the FBI," but she never officially recused.
SESSIONS: No, she did not officially recuse. And there is a procedure for that, which I would follow. And I believe that would be the best approach for the country because we can never have a political dispute turn into a criminal dispute. That's not in any way that would suggest anything other than absolute objectivity. This country does not punish its political enemies, but this country ensures that no one is above the law.
"People who skate away from the crimes that they commit, do it silently."
Exactly, and where is Billy-boy? He always has something to say. There are a lot of Clintonistas who have gone silent since Mueller's indictments. This is just the beginning of this whole sordid affair. The FBI is no longer off the hook due to their total disregard for all the info they had on the Parkland shooter. People are now looking and shaking their heads.
I've even seen highly partisan Libs and MSM pundits wondering, "what the hell?". Sorry to say, but that horrific massacre may prove to have a silver-lining by exposing the corrupt FBI/DOJ. Still, I'd rather it not have occurred and America using the current exposes' to clean out the FBI/DOJ swamp.
According tohttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3632886/posts?page=39#39
that could happen due to the recusal of the judge who accepted Michael Flynn’s guilty plea. The judge who replaced the original judge in the case is the same judge who was infuriated when he found out that the conviction of Senator Ted Stevens before him was obtained improperly. He has had a bee in his bonnet about prosecutors making full disclosure of exculpatory information ever since, and he is already killing the Flynn conviction.
Judge Sullivan has done such a thing as siccing a special prosecutor on a prosecutor who withheld evidence in order to get a conviction . . . and that couldn’t happen to a nicer </sarcasm> guy than Mueller.
It’s time Jeff Sessions flushed Mueller.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.