Posted on 07/01/2019 10:38:40 AM PDT by detective
When Democrats heard last week that Robert Mueller would testify before the House judiciary and oversight committees on July 17, they were as giddy as a 72-year-old Jerry Nadler waiting to question Hope Hicks. But unless committee Republicans botch the hearing—something entirely possible—the left’s strategy of placing Mueller center stage in their continued attempts to underdo the results of the 2016 presidential election will backfire bigly.
Why? For the simple reason that Mueller’s 400-plus page report presented the worst the special counsel could muster against Trump, so any new revelations will play to the president’s advantage.
So, what should Republicans do to make the most of Mueller’s appearance, both politically and from an oversight perspective? Two things: (1) Leave the political grandstanding to the Democrats and (2) Ask the right questions.
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
“When did you stop being a Weasel?”
I don’t see spineless republicans asking about the multiple inconsistencies in the weissmann report.
I’m still not fully convinced that Mueller will testify.
He seems to prefer complaining behind the scenes.
“Did you ever find that anthrax guy?”
“Did you drive a man to suicide?”
Most FReeper predictions of people not testifying usually turn out to be wrong. Just sayin'.
Skip Congress completely.
Its all talk and no action, all designed to protect Congress.
Start arresting Senators and Congressmen.
Starting with Lindsey Graham....
The chicanery with which the DemoKKKrats and the Special Counsel’s office “agreed” to the format drastically limits Republicans’ time.
The Republicans need to voluntarily give up their time to Jim Jordan so that he can hone in on 2-3 issues.
I disagree. Someone needs to out the left for their lunacy:
Mr. Mueller - a member of this committee went on the nightly news repeatedly claiming to have irrefutable evidence of Russian collusion. At what point did your team speak to this individual to discuss his evidence?
If “we didn’t:” You mean to tell us that this individual who claimed to be in possession of irrefutable evidence, and fully aware of your investigation, never reached out to provide that evidence? Was this person trying to obstruct justice by not providing the evidence he claimed to have? Was he lying about having evidence at all?
If “we spoke:” And yet your investigation found no case for collusion. Is it safe to say that this evidence was a giant nothingburger and that the individual claiming to have it is full of... oh, I see my time has expired.
By Congressional rules, you can’t name Schiff by name, but we all know what he did.
Mistakes have been made.
Nadler and Schiff won’t allow any hard questions.
They will gavel the Republicans ‘Out of Order’ and take away their time...............
They don’t have to limit the questions to the special counsel investigation. Someone should ask whether he has any knowledge of Kimberly Strassel being spied on. If he lies he will have perjured himself.
There’s plenty of things he’d rather not talk about. For example, they could ask whether the Trump Tower meeting was set up by Steele. Mueller had little to say about that in the report, which is curious.
More to the point, this is the DEMOCRATS we're talking about. They know how to play the game and are not afraid to lie, cheat, steal and change the rules of the game to accomplish their goals. They are running the show, and they will do all they can to sabotage and stifle the Repubs at every turn.
Are we naive enough to believe they haven't already huddled-up with Mueller to assure him that they'll take care of him and prevent the pubbies from extracting an ounce of damaging truth?
My (unfortunate) prediction: Nothing good will come from this. It will simply be used to throw 'impeachment' red meat to the kooks in the House and their insane base. Look for an attempt by Mueller and the Dems to inflict maximum damage on President Trump, and covering up everything the Deep State criminal gang has done for the past 4 years.
What did you know and when did you know it that the FISA application contained lies for the purpose of spying on the Trump campaign?
Trump should release all three of the Rosenstein Scope memos in underacted form the day before Mueller testifies.
Was it your task to find out if President Trump peed on anybody?
Is he shitting on you now?
Yes, I can see it happening now just the way you stated. And our side can’t do anything about it.
My most important questions to Mueller....
When did you know that there was no Trump/Russia collusion.
Once you knew there was no collusion, why did you continue the investigation?
Once you knew there was no collusion, did you continue the investigation in order to trap Trump into a lie?
Once you knew that there was no collusion, why didn’t you refer the fake charges to the DOJ/FBI for investigation into those who attempted to frame Trump? Why didn’t you ask questions related to why the investigation was undertaken in the first place?
Why did you choose only democrats/liberals as investigators to go after Trump? Why didn’t you ask to continue the investigation into the REAL collusion which occurred in the Hillary campaign and in the Obama White House?
Did you not see a conflict of interest in taking over the task of investigation Trump after the main character requesting the investigation was/is a friend of yours, namely, James Comey?
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.