Why didn't Mueller charge Joseph Mifsud for lying to the FBI?
Why didn't Mueller charge Joseph Mifsud for lying to the FBI?
With liberty and justice for all...must be 18, void where prohibited, some restrictions may apply, not available in all states.
Why did a Republican not ask Mueller how a President can reasonably be accused of obstruction of justice by exercising his Article II Constitutional powers?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Any legal information I may post is general information, and is not legal advice. Such information may or may not apply to your specific situation. I am not your attorney unless an attorney-client relationship is separately and privately established.
This was asked, but a non answer was given.Originally Posted by Bart Carter
https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morri...d-obstruction/
Yeah...the whole "know nothing" about Fusion GPS--this is either a perjury-level lie or a sign of immense sloppiness and lack of diligence in Mueller's work.
My whole take on this is...the Democrats are getting some richly deserved poetic justice here. The Hillary-loving-James-Comey got Hillary off the hook so she could ostensibly take her walk right into the oval office. They lost and ginned up a Russia collusion conspiracy. In the process they tried to set a trap for Trump to fall into with obstruction. They set a bar so high for conduct in such circumstances that almost no one would have come out clean.
I can see Steve Lieu on CNN commenting on a video of Trump and Mueller nearly running into each other: " You see this was intentional action by the president to get Mueller to trip or fall. Maybe he was looking for Mueller to fall down and get injured thereby sabotaging the investigation. Either way stepping front of special counsel is certainly evidence of obstruction."
They certainly would not have set such high standards for Hillary or Obama...else both would be subjected to weaponized investigations. As a result of the "obstruction" and "Russia" narratives, the media became similarly obsessed with taking down Trump.
The investigation didn't do what it was supposed to do. They wasted over 2 years on this with nothing to show for it. Even worse, they look like utter fools-- and a hapless, confused, and joke of a political party. 2 years wasted on a Russia investigation instead of trying to counter Trump on various issues. I think moderate Democrats and independents will see this and once again either stay home or hold their nose and vote against the Democrats.
With "the squad" being the unofficial face of the democrat party, hyper obsessed with race and other social engineering concepts derived in universities, the situation looks even more bleak for the Democrats.
I mean really...free health care for illegal immigrants? Felons voting? Yeah...keep it up guys...this is how you get 4 more years of Trump.
Serious food for thought for the folks whom haven't been paying attention to this farce:
A lot of attention has been paid to the infamous Trump Tower meeting between Trump Jr and the Russian lawyer. Why did said Russian lawyer have dinner with Glenn Simpson of Fusion GPS before and after the Trump Tower meeting?
#RESIST
This doesn't not make sense. And on cnn.com no less. As a cousin of mine remarked, an admission contrary to self interest is of note.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/19/opini...-st=1564052632A legitimate question Republicans are asking is whether the potential "collusion" narrative was invented to cover up the Obama administration's failures. Two years have been spent fomenting the idea that Russia only interfered because it had a willing, colluding partner: Trump. Now that Mueller has popped that balloon, we must ask why this collusion narrative was invented in the first place.
Given Obama's record on Russia, one operating theory is that his people needed a smokescreen to obscure just how wrong they were. They've blamed Trump. They've even blamed Mitch McConnell, in some twisted attempt to deflect blame to another branch of government. Joe Biden once claimed McConnell refused to sign a letter condemning the Russians during the 2016 election. But McConnell's office counters that the White House asked him to sign a letter urging state electors to accept federal help in securing local elections -- and he did. You can read it here.
I guess if I had failed to stop Russia from marching into Crimea, making a mess in Syria, and hacking our democracy I'd be looking to blame someone else, too.
But the Mueller report makes it clear that the Russian interference failure was Obama's alone. He was the commander-in-chief when all of this happened. In 2010, he and Eric Holder, his Attorney General, declined to prosecute Julian Assange, who then went on to help Russia hack the Democratic National Committee's emails in 2016. He arguably chose to prioritize his relationship with Putin vis-à-vis Iran over pushing back against Russian election interference that had been going on for at least two years.
Most likely because Mifsud was a CIA asset.
Last edited by TCinVA; 07-25-2019 at 07:42 AM.
3/15/2016
Moreover, why were a lot of the same contacts with these sorts of people by the Clinton campaign completely ignored by just about everyone?
I mean, if these were Russian agents looking to hijack our democracy and contact with them is grounds for suspicion why was the suspicion so carefully targeted?
Looking into Russian "interference" with the election would certainly extend to efforts aimed at the other campaign, right? So how is that was never examined?
And that doesn't begin to get into why we would hire as investigators people from that campaign who are all mixed up with the very same contacts that are supposed to be involved in Russian collusion.
Last edited by TCinVA; 07-25-2019 at 07:49 AM.
3/15/2016
I'm sure looking "senile" was vastly preferable to having to actually answer questions about the foundation and methods of his investigation.
And senility isn't a prosecutable offense like perjury is, so...
3/15/2016
"No Jell-O??? But...they promised!"
There's nothing civil about this war.
Reply With Quote
