Posted on 05/30/2019 11:41:00 AM PDT by Kaslin
RUSH: Now, let me go back to another point I want to make about Mueller. I watched it again when I got home last night without the presence of timely pressure.
I was watching Mueller at 11 o’clock yesterday — and I’ve gotta watch it, digest it, do a whole bunch of stuff to get ready to talk about it an hour later. I went home yesterday; I looked at it without any kind of pressure attached to it. Obviously, I had a little more time to start-stop it, replay various things that caused red flags, and basically absorb it. When I did that, I could not get over how many things Mueller said that just sounded weird and bizarre, legally. For instance — and everybody knows this because it’s been trumpeted out there ever since this happened.
Mueller said (and he gave the impression) that the only reason he didn’t indict Trump is because he can’t indict a sitting president because of the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines — which, again, were written in 1979 and say you cannot indict a sitting president. Let me tell you the reason for that. Not to get sidetracked here, but the reason you can’t is if you can indict a sitting president, all you would need is a renegade lawyer from the opposition party filing a lawsuit! Or filing any kind of indictment. You could stop the president cold. You could shut him down.
This is the reason for it, and because there’s a constitutional remedy for an out-of-control president called impeachment. So it’s not because we have a king. It’s not because we have somebody who’s above the law. You can’t even indict and seal it for after he leaves office. If you want to take legal action, you gotta wait ’til he’s out of office or you have to impeach. But it’s not because we treat the president as a king. A lot of people are making the mistaken assumption that the Office of Legal Counsel says you can’t indict a president ’cause you can’t indict a king.
It’s not that.
It’s so that you cannot paralyze the duly elected president of the United States using the legal system as a political weapon, pure and simple.
Well, what the hell are they doing? They’re trying to turn the legal system into a political weapon to stop Trump and to get rid of him. Now, back to what Mueller said. He said he didn’t indict Trump because you cannot indict a sitting president because of the OLC guidelines, and because it would be unconstitutional. He left the impression (impression), “If I coulda, I woulda. If I coulda creamed this guy, I woulda done. But I can’t! I can’t! The guidelines! The Constitution!” And yet? And yet Mueller left it up to the attorney general to determine whether there had been obstruction of justice.
Remember, Mueller would not come to a conclusion in the report. He claimed there was no collusion. But obstruction, he would not come to a conclusion on. He left it up to Barr. Well, now, wait a minute. Wouldn’t Barr be under the same OLC guidelines and constitutional restraints? If Mueller can’t indict a sitting president, how the hell could the attorney general? So why leave it up to Barr? In the report, it’s clearly stated (summarized), “We make no finding here on obstruction.”
But the point was made, “We’re not sayin’ the president didn’t do it. We’re just saying that the evidence is inconclusive and insufficient and what have you. We’re leaving it up to the attorney general.” So the attorney general looks at it and says, “I see no evidence of obstruction here,” and we’re off and running. Well, why leave it up to anybody if you can’t anyway? Also, as we noted yesterday, Mueller said that it would not be fair — fairness was a big deal to Robert J. Mueller III. He said it would not be fair to indict Trump since Trump couldn’t have a trial.
Trump would not be able to take the occasion of a trial to prove his innocence or to establish his innocence and refute the charges. So it wouldn’t be fair. (impression) “It wouldn’t be fair to him! Even if I could, I wouldn’t, because he wouldn’t have a trial, wouldn’t have a chance to refute the charges.” But wait. Mueller indicted a bunch of Russians knowing they would never have a trial. In fact, that’s why he indicted ’em. The Russian troll farms that he indicted? He knew that they were never gonna come to court. He knew that Putin would never extradite them.
He indicts these guys; he doesn’t care whether they are treated fairly. Robert J. Mueller III is perfectly fine with everybody thinking the Russians did it. “Go ahead! The Russians did it. I indicted ’em; they’re guilty.” But, Mr. Mueller, they’re not gonna get their day in court because the Russians aren’t gonna extradite them. My point is, it didn’t stop him from indicting the Russians, this so-called fairness business. He couldn’t have cared less whether they got their day in court.
In fact, he knew they weren’t gonna come to court so he could have charged them with anything! He could have charged them with obscuring the name USS John McCain on the battleship over there in Japan and the Russians would not have come to court to defend themselves, because they were never gonna be extradited. So where is his concern for the Russians? And then Mueller went out of his way to say the Russians were innocent until proven guilty! He said, “Let everybody understand here, these indictments do not represent guilt.”
He wanted to make sure everybody knew the Russians were innocent until proven guilty, but he said practically the opposite about the president of the United States! When it comes to the president of the United States, he said, “Just because we haven’t found any evidence that we can indict doesn’t mean the president didn’t do it.” And that’s where he clearly stood the presumption of innocence on its head and took it away from Donald Trump while anointing the Russians with it.
I’ll tell you, Trump must be a stable genius. He’s able to collude with the Russians, then prevent the FBI and Robert Mueller from investigating him and finding out about it. Mueller and his 19 lawyers and 50 FBI agents and 500 witnesses could not find a single crime, and yet they are convinced that Trump did it. In fact, I don’t even think this is the Mueller report. This is the Weissmann dossier. It’s what we ought to call this damn thing.
Also, yesterday I made a point of pointing out, ladies and gentlemen, that the media was gonna run with this disparity between Barr and Mueller over why Mueller didn’t indict. Grab sound bite number 3. This is the attorney general under oath, folks. He’s at the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 1st. Here is a portion of his testimony under oath.
BARR: Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting in response to our questioning that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction. He said that in the future the facts of a case against a president might be such that a special counsel would recommend abandoning the OLC opinion, but this is not such a case.
RUSH: Let me translate this and parse this, ’cause this is even bigger than what it sounds like. Mueller said — and this was the second occasion. And Mueller had witnesses. He had Rosenstein. Barr’s lieutenants are in the meeting with him when Mueller presents his findings. And what Barr is saying here, that Mueller was asked three different times if the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines on not indicting a sitting president had anything to do with Mueller not finding evidence of obstruction.
And Barr says that Mueller said three different times zip, zero, nada, had nothing to do with it. The Office of Legal Counsel guidelines on not indicting the president had nothing to do with the fact that I find no evidence to charge obstruction. But to add to that, Barr says that Mueller told him and his people that there may be a case someday where the president is in such gross violation of the law that you have to ignore the OLC guidelines and go ahead and indict, because it’s so outrageous. But that’s not the case here with President Trump.
So that’s Barr. Said it twice. Yesterday Mueller shows up and contradicts that as bigly, as largely as can be disagreed with and did so — this is what I think is Mueller going rogue. He contradicted Barr as big as you can. He went out and said, “The only reason we didn’t indict, the only reason is because of the OLC guidelines. If the president didn’t do it, we would have said so.”
So somebody here is lying and this is not a small lie. It’s not a misunderstanding lie. This is a huge disagreement. And Barr’s out there in Alaska while this is all happening? This was a political press conference yesterday. We all know what this was.
Mueller is scum.
He improved?
Congress, specifically the House, doesn't have that constraint. They can hold a kangaroo-court under political chicanery, and whip up a furious public reaction in the media and by those who hate Trump. That reaction doesn't make it any more legitimate.
Congress would like Mueller to take a more firm stance behind his investigation's findings...to come out and make a specific charge of a crime. That would give Congress the cover it needs to proceed with impeachment, but there's no "there," there.
I'm not sure of the exact penalty, but Mueller can't connect the dots for Congress. He's given them a bunch of ammunition in the nuanced way his report was written, but he can't go further, lest his own legal reputation be sullied.
Mueller is playing with fire and may get burned before this is over.
The Senate needs to bring Mueller in to the Justice Committee under oath to give his testimony and answer why he contradicts himself constantly.
“...lest his own legal reputation be sullied.”
Lest??
We got real trash on that trash.
Slime, raised to a very large power.
When Will we see indictments???? until this, all this gonna happen, coming soon, etc, etc is BULL KRAP!
Scum is offended by the comparison.
All involved in this coup attempt, and that is exactly what it is, by the illegal use of weaponized federal police and Intel organizations, are guilty of actual treason.
And if liberty and America is to survive, all of these who were absolutely involved in this true consiracy, must be dealt with as is called for.
No one who vows loyalty and “allegence to the same” (our Constitution and country), and “our way of life”, can dismiss or ignore this without becoming complicit with the enemies who have been, and are trying to carry it out!
Furthermore, if this is not dealt with, by by the full weight of the law, including it’s capital consequences, our liberty and Constitution are completely dead, and we all become slaves to our new master, who desires (like Stalin) to eliminate all who could pose a potential threat to their totalitarian sovereignty over us.
We will in very short order, see these same ilites, call for our lives, and the lives of our families.
Likewise the smirking Strzok. He had said during his testimony that he would ‘love’ to say more, but was legally limited because all that information was classified. Well, it’s not classified anymore and given his stated preference that he would love to say more, let’s hear it!
That's what I said yesterday. Rush must have read my post.
I think a lot of things Mueller thinks have been successfully hidden about his career are about to become very public and very embarrassing
these are themselves paraphrasing Muller, not quoting him verbatim:
When it comes to the president of the United States, he said, “Just because we haven’t found any evidence that we can indict doesn’t mean the president didn’t do it.” ...He went out and said, “The only reason we didn’t indict, the only reason is because of the OLC guidelines. If the president didn’t do it, we would have said so.”
having established that, i am not certain muller deserves defending if what muller is actually doing is impugning guilt in any way. and apparently muller is impugning guilt without explicitly saying so.
He might sully his pants when he ends up on the tree...
It was, and that was inappropriate unless this person supports using government agencies for political purposes, and he does. Shameful, we've lost our country.
Has anyone noticed the deafening silence from the Vice President of the US about all of this bullying and hounding of the President? Has he come to the President’s defence at any time during this whole witch hunt? He should know what went on in the campaign. Mr. “Purer Than The Driven Snow” is the guy who would be president if the hounds succeed in forcing President Trump from office. He has skin in the game.
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.