Posted on 05/01/2019 5:39:47 PM PDT by dontreadthis
When the Mueller Report was released on April 18th, most commentators focused on the “explosive” factual allegations. But other than the shocking revelation that the President once used an expletive in private, very few of those facts were novel; most were leaked long ago.
At the end of Volume II of the Mueller Report, however, there were 20 pages of genuinely new material.
There, the former FBI director turned Special Counsel Robert Mueller defended his “Application of Obstruction-Of-Justice Statutes To The President.” These overlooked 20 pages were dedicated to defending Mueller’s interpretation of a single subsection of a single obstruction-of-justice statute: 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2).
That’s quite strange, but you know what’s stranger still?
In June 2018, Bill Barr, then in private practice at Kirkland & Ellis, wrote a detailed legal memorandum to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. This memo came to light in December, when Barr was nominated for Attorney General.
The subject was Mueller’s interpretation of the aforementioned 18 U.S.C. § 1512(c)(2).
(Excerpt) Read more at humanevents.com ...
Excellent article. Thank you for posting it.
Not one Democrat had an exit strategy because Hillary was going to win. Oops!!!!
Firing Mueller would have been perfectly legal but politically disastrous. In fact, I suspect that one reason the investigation dragged on for so long was that Mueller and/or some of his team WANTED Trump to fire them.
There is one other.
And don't forget Sara Carter, Jon Solomon, and Hannity. Word around the campfire is that they are dialed in to "Trump's team" and have been given tons of "insider information" all along.
"Trump's Team" has another name.
long, but fascinating if you like this kind of thing
—
Indeed. Thanks for posting.
Interesting read. Defense is a lot easier if your client didn’t do anything wrong. Trump’s lawyers found themselves in that (all too) unique situation and they played it pretty well. There were plenty of chances to screw it up, but they ultimately won.... So far.
Big,BIG difference.
It seems Geraldo is his new best liberal apologist, almost co-host bud (what happened to Juan and Joe Lieberman? He even mentioned how much he likes Donna Brazzile. ...give me a break Hannity.
Fascinating indeed! That’s the first word that came to mind upon conclusion. Trump’s legal team deserves all the credit on this one. Barr is quite the legal mind and there is no doubt Mueller was planning to devour Sessions.
Trust Sessions.
Ok. I’m disappointed that my fine senator appears to be flat as AG. I do hope to read one day, many years from now that he did something important yet took the character of bumbling fool. I can hope.
Brilliant! It is a shame that it takes that kind of skill and luck to fend off a coup.
He was and is worthless. Trump showed very bad judgement in his nomination but barr shows that trump doesn’t make the same mistake twice.
What a great article. You are not going to scan it. But well worth the read.
Brilliant piece. Pretty much blows Q/Sessions “secret sting” out of the water.
Sessions is a complete traitor.
The only way the Russian collusion accusations can harm Trump is if there is a very partisan, anti-Trump investigation.
Sessions did not have to recuse himself. If he, or anyone even moderately reasonable handles the investigation the "no collusion" conclusion comes out early and it is over, except for punishing the guilty.
The only way it can hurt Trump is if someone partisan who is adept at generating process crimes runs the investigation. Enter Mueller and his band of RAT lawyers.
Sessions knew this going in and allowed it to happen...
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Now for the good news. The guilty parties prolonged the investigation, hoping to escape justice. But, they committed even more crimes while doing it.
Sessions was wimpy.
I see others overtalk their guests as well. I see the guests do it too.
Unless you’re in the studio, the ear piece unfortunately, has a delay, and because of that delay, either party can overtalk the other and not realuze it.
Otoh, the host may need to gain control of the interview for various and sundry reason such as timing. It seems to happen more frequently when the guest is a slow talker, or is straying from the main point, or a commercial break is coming up. It also happens when a guest has an opposing pov.
Hannity can be irritating, but Laura Ingraham is even worse, especially with her screachy vocal tone.
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.