The Mueller Hearing And The Theater Of The Macabre

Below is my column in The Hill on today’s hearing with former Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The hearing will no doubt be lively as a couple dozen members of the House Judiciary Committee struggle to stand out in less than five minutes to make the cut for a clip on evening news. That means that you have to be more outraged than every member who came before you. It should all prove to be a true theater of the macabre. I will be covering the hearing for CBS News and BBC.

I have previously published 3 questions, 5 questions, and 20 questions for Mueller. You can choose but none are likely to be answered.

Adding to the drama is the disclosure of a demand by Mueller that an aide be sworn in and allowed to testify with him. The move drew vocal objections from Republicans who suggested that Mueller may not have a good handle on the Report — reinforcing claims that his key staff aides actually controlled the investigation. It also has been reported that it was Mueller who asked for the letter limiting his testimony.

Here is the column:

Weeks like this make me regret there’s not a Wimbledon-like “performance rule” for politics, as when Australian tennis player Bernard Tomic was fined $56,100 for not trying hard enough to win his match against Jo-Wilfried Tsonga.

For more than two years, I’ve written that congressional Democrats never had the slightest intention of impeaching President Trump and, instead, have been running out the clock while pretending to build a case against him. Now, with former special counsel Robert Mueller scheduled to testify before Congress on Wednesday, this match is getting even more embarrassing than Tomic’s fiasco at Wimbledon. The problem is that this match has lasted roughly 580 days rather than 58 minutes.

The Mueller hearing is shaping up to be more of an autopsy than an exploration. Committee members will ask Mueller about his findings, and Mueller will read the findings as if he is recording an audio book for the visually impaired. In the meantime, courts and prosecutors have left various allegations against Trump in legal tatters:

Collusion 

After two years of pundits and politicians assuring us that crimes linked to collusion were well-established, Mueller found there was no basis to bring a charge on any collusion-related grounds.

Pundits and trolls have engaged in open denial, claiming Mueller was holding such indictments and slamming those who state otherwise as “Trumpsters” or “apologists.” That group now includes Mueller, who stated after an exhaustive two-year investigation that he could “not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

Of course, this all began with collusion allegations and how Trump worked with Russians to undermine our democracy. Now members of Congress rarely discuss collusion.

Obstruction

Democrats reportedly plan to focus on obstruction, which Mueller surprisingly left unresolved. I will not repeat why Mueller’s position was incomprehensible and unsupportable. However, Attorney General Bill Barr and his then-deputy, Rod Rosenstein, accepted the entirety of Mueller’s report and evidence, yet still concluded there was no case for an obstruction charge.

The reason was simple: Mueller detailed non-criminal motivations behind Trump’s actions, a record that would create an easy defense case on the issue of intent. 

Democrats are now adopting their own version of “Lock her up!” chants, with promises of prosecution if only people will vote for them. For example, Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) has declared her Justice Department would “have no choice” but to prosecute Trump if she is elected president. That, of course, will not happen, any more than Hillary Clinton was ever at real risk of incarceration.

Moreover, it would be implausible to remove a president under a criminal-obstruction theory rejected by the Justice Department — including Rosenstein, who was long lionized by Democrats.

Campaign finance 

Democrats have highlighted the fact that newly released court records show Trump and his aides were directly involved in the effort to pay money to porn star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy bunny Karen McDougal to keep them silent about affairs. For two years, there has been a constant cable-news drumbeat from legal experts, saying such payments were undeniably crimes for those involved, from Trump aides to Trump lawyer Michael Cohen to Trump himself.  

The problem is, those documents being exhaustively covered this week were released because there were no charges to be brought on campaign finance crimes. This is a bit of a surprise, since Cohen included the payoffs in his plea deal; the other alleged culprit in that exchange was Trump.

One could argue that an indictment against Trump may be waiting until he leaves office, under Justice Department rules. However, there have been no charges against any other person associated with the payoffs, including various Trump Organization figures. The fact is, campaign finance charges are rare and hard to prove, as shown by the failed prosecution of former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.

Emoluments 

With the collapse of collusion, various Democrats and lawyers have pushed the claim that Trump’s D.C. hotel is a giant “emolument” magnet. 

Article 1, Section 9, prohibits emoluments, which cover compensation or gifts tied to a person’s public office, but it has never been well-defined. For example, Benjamin Franklin received a diamond-encrusted box from the King of France while serving as U.S. ambassador; Congress told him to keep it.

Arguments that the Trump family’s hotel constitutes an emolument are something of a stretch. Still, filings to that effect have been made by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) board chairman and vice-chairman Norman Eisen and Richard Painter, constitutional law scholars Erwin Chemerinsky, Laurence H. Tribe and Zephyr Teachout, and Deepak Gupta of Gupta Wessler PLLC.

While District Court Judge Peter Messitte unwisely ruled that these groups had standing and a meritorious claim, the Fourth Circuit recently dismissed the action as unsupportable. The court was equally dismissive of the theory that the hotel benefits from Trump’s name since many people, including diplomats, likely avoid it due to it association.

Judges in both Washington and New York also have rejected such lawsuits.

Since standing was never established, Congress could argue that there were unconstitutional emoluments lurking in these cases. However, there is no clear precedent to support that theory and, despite good-faith arguments, no president has been impeached on such uncontested legal grounds.

In the meantime, Congress again overwhelmingly rejected impeachment with a vote this week in which members tried to add bigotry as an impeachable offense. It failed, 332-95.

So if these crimes and impeachable acts have been largely negated, what is Congress planning to do on Wednesday? The answer is play … just not well.

Mueller has made it clear that he does not want to testify and will decline to give any information beyond his report. He has held up the hearing for weeks, first by declining to testify and then unilaterally maintaining that he would testify for only two hours before the House (an agreement was later reached on a longer format). Witnesses — particularly private citizens, as Mueller now is — usually are not given such leeway. One would think that after accepting the special counsel’s job and spending millions of public dollars, Mueller would have less, not more, ability to stipulate limits.

Yet, Democrats have yielded to his demands with only a slight increase in time, divided into the ridiculous five-minute segments of most congressional hearings.

Most members will prance and pose for four minutes in just introducing themselves. For his part, Mueller will continue his performance as the “American Sphinx,” even though there is much he should answer about his own conduct, let alone his conclusions (or lack thereof).

It will be nothing but “puddlers” — chip and drop shots — but it won’t matter. The same analysts who have been wrong for two years will give the same breathless courtside commentary. And the members of the congressional committees will scream like John McEnroe — while playing like Bernard Tomic. Of course, unlike Tomic, those members will continue the match despite it having been called weeks ago.

The play is and always has been for 2020. That is why there is no performance fine in politics because the score is entirely irrelevant — and you are never sure of what game is actually being played.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can follow him on Twitter @JonathanTurley

217 thoughts on “The Mueller Hearing And The Theater Of The Macabre”

  1. Sounds like the Brainless Wonder might already be playing with Diane. It’s great when two whacko’s get together.

    It seems like Diane has again been thrown off the blog as her posting has disappeared.

  2. Professor Turley: You are wasted on CBS, where you get less air time and operate in an environment not entirely comfortable with your honesty, perspicuity and objectivity. Come back to that network where things are “fair, balanced and unafraid.”

    1. CNN doesnt want to lead their news shows today to discuss Mueller. This morning while at the gym the TV monitors were displaying CNN and Fox News shows and at the top of the hour, 0600, Fox News began with the Mueller hearings. CNN began and maintained their lead story for 5 minutes on the imminent resignation of Democrat Governor of Puerto Rico, Ricardo Rossello

      Because PR >>>> Mueller in everyones minds today

      😉

  3. Late last night the tv networks, even the Dem networks, were saying that the Dems lost in this interview with Mueller in Congress.
    My take is that Nancy Pelosi was smart to not push for impeachment.
    Trump will win the 2020 election and Pence will win 2024. The Dems are Much Ado About Nothing. The Gang of Four has already destroyed the Dem Party. For those of you who wish to stick with the scarf heads I suggest that you “go South”. Not to South America but to South City of NYC. Cut your artFays where other people do not smell or care.

  4. Thank God that the democrats spent the last 3 years going after Trump. They could have been passing legislation that could be harmfull to us. I love gridlock. We’re safe.

  5. Saw the whole testimony

    It was the body language of Mueller that stood out. Early stage of dementia?
    My dad & mom had it. Those blank stares. Been in enough nursing homes as a POA.

    1. Jerry—-Exactly what I said. Years spent volunteering in nursing homes……….that blank stare is a giveaway.

    2. Grandpa Muler barely got through his 9 minute “press conference” in May and at that time made it made it crystal clear that he did not want to testify before Congress. Fat Jerry should be charged with elder abuse – this public embarassment of Muler has done harm to his legacy and health, and hurt his family.

  6. The way CNN has set up the emoluments case, if a President put his chain of breakfast cafes into a blind trust, he could still be found guilty if a foreign ambassador stopped in for pancakes and bacon. Such a president would have to post a sign out front, “No foreigners.” Then he would promptly be labeled a bigot.

    The truth is that Democrats cannot accept the outcome of the last election. They have spent years fighting it, and this is just the latest endeavor. It doesn’t matter what Barr or Mueller find. They’ll keep digging forever.

    It is very troubling that so many Democratic candidates are running on an impeachment platform without evidence. Between that and their open support of illegal immigration, in essence, they are the antithesis to law and order, and justice.

    It should trouble every American that when Mueller could not prove a crime, there are many who would press more with harassment for political reasons.

    “could not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”

    The Russia conspiracy, which so many pundits were absolutely sure about, is now little mentioned. It will go on the heap along with all the other accusations, promptly forgotten.

    1. The ’emoluments’ bushwah is another improvisation by people who have no fixed principles at all. To the degree it isn’t, it reflects the ambient idea in the Democratic Party that public office should be limited to people drawn from the occupations common in the personal histories of Democratic officeholders. You look at the set of notable presidential and vice presidential candidates in the Democratic Party in the last fifty years and the only current and quondam businessmen you see are Bob Kerrey, Lloyd Bentsen, Paul Simon, Jimmy Carter, Sargent Shriver, and (just under the envelope) Hubert Humphrey. Shriver was an executive employee of his father-in-law’s real estate firm, Hubert Humphrey had worked for his father, and Lloyd Bentsen and Paul Simon had long since sold their businesses when they were running for office. And, as we can see from Natacha’s commentary, the little rubrics Jimmy Carter employed are a sufficient fig leaf for partisan Democrats.

    2. Karen’s low standards lead her to claim it’s nothing to collude with a foreign adversary busy illegally interfering in our elections for your benefit, up to and including still doing nothing about that adversary’s continued actions and publicly defending them. If that’s not treason, please help me with that word.

      Yesterday the GOP blocked an election security bill in the Senate – one cosponsored by Cotton of Ark.

      https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/454635-gop-blocks-election-security-bills-after-mueller-testimony

    3. Do you just sit around and take notes from Hannity? The “outcome of the last election” was the historic routing of Republicans from the House that Trump declared was a referendum on him. The last presidential election saw Hillary Clinton win the popular vote, but lose due to cheating by Trump and his campaign. Robert Mueller made that clear yesterday. It’s not politics–it’s facts: Trump’s campaign funneled sensitive, inside polling information that Russians used to target key precincts in key states. Trump has every intention of doing this again. Republicans will enable this, as shown by Cindy Hyde-Smith killing 2 separate bills to help avoid this again. Also, his campaign lied about this, and several of them are doing time for perjury, among other crimes. This, too is a fact. Where the hell do you get off claiming that Democrats are “the antithesis to law and order and justice”?

      Democrats do not support, openly or otherwise, illegal immigration. That is another Hannity lie. They are against abusing people seeking asylum in this country, as most sane, compassionate people are.

      You say Democrats are running on an “impeachment platform without evidence”, and that “every American” should be troubled that Mueller could not prove a crime. Was your head up your ass yesterday? Mueller did prove obstruction of justice, and made clear that Trump can be arrested and prosecuted after he gets put out of the White House. This was in response to a question by a Republican. He also testified that Trump wouldn’t cooperate by sitting for a deposition, and that his written answers to questions from his office were incomplete and untrue. Because he couldn’t obtain all of the evidence, he couldn’t prove conspiracy. That is absolutely not the same thing as there being NO evidence in existence, or that, having all available possible evidence, the evidence proved there was no crime. Mueller made clear Trump was NOT exonerated. His investigation was neither a “witch hunt” nor “hoax”. Didn’t Hannity cover this?

      The Russia conspiracy, as you call it, was front and center yesterday. One of the more alarming matters Mueller testified to was the fact that not only did Russia interfere to sway the election in favor of Trump, it is still doing it. Republicans are doing everything possible to make sure that Democrats cannot prevent outside foreign influences from interfering with the next election because they know that Russians own Trump and that Trump defers to them. Nevertheless, they want to keep those tax breaks roll backs of protections for the environment and consumers, and to stack the federal bench with pro-corporation judges. We Americans who are patriots, which is the majority, don’t find this acceptable, but you be sure to tune in tonight for your daily affirmation, Karen Honey.

      1. Hillary did not win a majority and there was no cheating. It doesn’t matter how many shrill lies you tell. Reality is what it is.

      2. “Democrats do not support, openly or otherwise, illegal immigration. ”

        HA YOUR BIGGEST WHOPPER YET

        it’s their obvious strategy to grow a whole new generation of voters to replace the older ones who don’t like them

  7. These hearings tessellated into 5 minute shards are often sound bite generators more than investigations.

      1. All you Leftist who do nothing but attack people, are “being the same old you again”.
        Grow up little children. You lost the election, you can’t stand it, you loose trying to argue talking points, you can’t stand it, you loose at basic conversation and can’t stand that either. The last resort of the bully on the playground, attack the messenger, not the message.
        I think it’s wonderful how silly and incompetent the Left makes itself look. Keep up the great job!

        1. Agreed. If I had to go by the people who comment here, I’d have to say the Democratic Party has turned into a collecting pool of all the damaged people in America.

          1. Let’s fix that for TIA x X:

            “If I had to go by the people who comment here, I’d have to say the Republican Party has turned into a collecting pool of all the damaged people in America.”

            Most of those who post comments to JT’s blog are misfits and that would include TIA.

            1. There are about 5 wonderful folks here, who appear to be Democrat volunteers tasked with cluttering up this blog with Democrat talking points, apology, and on a day like this when the Dem mischief has failed so badly, their job is to go generate a lot of smoke and fog so the leadership can beat a retreat for the time being.

              Their sense of partisan volunteerism is most admirable! If we could get Republican leaning people to launch themselves out into hostile sections of the internet to spew propaganda every day it might help.

  8. Let’s face it folks. This should be called the Weissmann report. Because it’s obvious Mueller doesn’t know what’s in it.

    And despite it’s weakness, there’s no way a character like Weissmann should have had the lead on this.

    Hopefully, we can move on from this fiasco. And perhaps Weissmann will get something more than just an admonishment this time — though I doubt it.

    What do you have to do to get these kinds of “prosecutors” suspended for a while — or at least fined?

    1. See “Hill’s” comments where he suggests that Mueller was putting on a ‘befuddled old man’ act today. I think he may be right. It explains a lot. How on earth could Mueller not know about Fusion GPS??? It’s not possible. Two years of this investigation and Mueller did not know key facts and key players central to the entire investigation?? Not possible. He pulled a Christine Blasey Ford “act.”

      1. Keep in mind Rosenstein was supervising Mueller and the investigation. One wonders if Rosenstein saw signs of cognitive decline in Mueller. Or is this an act? Or was Mueller used and manipulated by Weismann and his team of lawyers? Mueller is a savvy political swamp dweller who knows how the game is played…was this “act” to secure a “leave the feeble old man alone” buy-in by the public? Just let the old man retire, he’s been through enough? The sympathy route? Was this “act” a keep out of jail card for himself and the fraud he oversaw for two years? so many questions…

  9. MUELLER CONTRADICTS TRUMP: NEVER INTERVIEWED FOR FBI

    Trump has argued that Mueller was conflicted, in part, because he interviewed at the White House for the job of FBI director shortly before becoming special counsel. Before the hearing, reports indicated that Mueller disputed this claim, and Trump took to Twitter to challenge Mueller to testify under oath on it.

    — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 24, 2019
    “Hope he doesn’t say that under oath in that we have numerous witnesses to the . . . interview, including the Vice President of the United States!” Trump said.

    Mueller did just that, twice. He stated that he visited the White House about the job search, but “not as a candidate.” He later reiterated that the meeting “was about the job but not about me applying for the job.”

    This contradicts months of Trump’s claims, and Mueller said so under penalty of perjury.

    Edited from: “6 Takeways From Robert Mueller’s Testimony”

    Today’s Washington Post
    ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Someone’s lying here. And I suspect it isn’t Mueller.

    1. “Someone’s lying here. And I suspect it isn’t Mueller.”
      *********************
      Then you should have watched teh hearing today. Based on today’s performance, I suspect Mueller can’t remember what he had for lunch. Pence was a witness to the interview and through a spokesperson confirms it was a pitch by Mueller for the job.

      1. Mespo, let’s go with that. Let’s say Mueller lied. ‘He really did interview for the FBI Directorship’. If that’s true, A G William Barr should indict Mueller tomorrow. First thing in the morning we should see Robert Mueller under arrest for perjury. Trump has all the witnesses lined up against Mueller.

        That won’t happen, though. Barr and Mueller are old buddies. Everyone knows that, too. Everyone knew all along Robert Mueller was a Republican. And he might fear that Trump would deliberately bring on a constitutional crisis.

        Trump would do exactly had Mueller named him for ‘Obstruction’. It’s something Mueller has had to wrestle with since taking the Special Counsel’s job. He knows by now that Trump would fight impeachment with scorched earth ferocity. That might bother an old Marine from Vietnam.

        So somewhere Mueller decided that ‘lack of clarity’ might be the safest course. Just come across as slightly befuddled. A man with virtually no personality. Who tells us with absolute certainty Russians meddled in our election. A point that Trump has only joked about; winking at Putin before global news cameras.

        Since Day 1 Donald Trump has been totally dismissive of Russian interference. It’s either ‘fake news” or a “hoax”. Or a “What about?” No genuine effort to express sincere concern over foreign meddling. Trump just blows it off like, “So ‘what’??”

        Donald Trump is rarely sincere. Sincerity is not the essence of his character. Trump was hilarious at being ‘insincere’. That’s why viewers watched “The Apprentice”. Trump was a rich old blow hard yelling at people. A debauched playboy with penthouse on a tower bearing his name.

        And such an arrogant-sounding name. That was funny too. Trump’s ceaseless bragging and self-promotion made that name a franchise gold mine. Franchising the name became Trump’s biggest revenue stream. But Trump didn’t achieve that by acting the gentleman. No one watches reality shows to see gentlemen behave!

        1. Ah, so you’re saying you think Mueller put on an act playing the part of “befuddled old man” today? Interesting strategy.

          1. “So somewhere Mueller decided that ‘lack of clarity’ might be the safest course. Just come across as slightly befuddled. A man with virtually no personality.”
            *******************
            If so, he deserves an academy award. Olivier had nothing on this guy.

            1. Agreed. Yet the more I mull the shocking “Mueller performance,” I can see how this was indeed an “act”….

              Playing the part of “befuddled old man” was his off ramp. Mueller knows he was overseeing a fraud investigation and covering for bad actors and bad actions. Mueller knows he lied through his teeth. He knows his buddy Bill Barr is about to blow the lid off the whole sham and this “old man act” was Mueller’s off ramp.

              He played the ‘sympathy for the senile old man’ role….poor guy, he was a hero….who served his country well…and now let the feeble old man ride off to his sunset years….

              Really? When the lid is blown off this sham, this fraud, Mueller will now get a pass? Feeble old man gets to ride off to his sunset and not face consequences for his part in this coup?

              I’m more and more convinced that Mueller knows the whole coup plot is about to blow wide open and he needed a way out. Playing the part of “beffudled old man” was preferable to jail time.

              1. beffudled old man”

                Lots of ageism on display today. How did we come to this?

                Mueller wasnt acting for 8 hours, or however long the hearings were, that he was confused, had difficulty following the questioning and appearing disoriented. The fact that he had a wet nurse with him tells us a lot. Mueller struck me as truly out of it and given he had weeks of preparation time to rehearse, and he knew all too well he was facing a hostile crowd, his performance tells the trained eye something has gone terribly wrong with Mueller, or perhaps he wasnt really competent to lead this investigation. People should go with that instead of pulling the ageism card which is less than helpful and hardly a reliable diagnostic

                1. Too bad no one will ask Rosenstein if he ever thought Mueller wasn’t up to the job of running this investigation. Did Rosenstein see that he was in cognitive decline and should not have been Special Counsel in charge of such a matter? All these players just let the witch hunt continue knowing Mueller was in decline?

                  1. I would hope AG Barr or some other entity are busily investigating the investigators.
                    As to cognitive decline no can really know what Mueller’s cognitive situation is without a face to face visit by a competent professional assessing these things but clearly his performance yesterday sent up red flags. You cant act demented, confused or disoriented under millions of watchful eyes for a sustained period of time. Not even Meryl Streep is that good. Mueller must be very concerned about how he did

                2. Pick a leader that has a lot of bipartisan respect but can be lead by the nose. Then pick someone to run the investigation that is known to be unscrupulous. Make sure that all the cards are fixed in their proper positions and make sure everyone on the top knows one another to the core of their depravity. Mueller, Comey, Rosenstein, along with Lisa Barsoomian who is a silent partner to the affairs.

              2. My bet is Mueller was brought in by trusted friends and former colleagues and was sold on the false collusion narrative. They appealed to his sense of duty to become the face of this operation, without having to be concerned with actually running it. That would be taken care of by Weissmenn and the pit bull team he’d put together. That crack team failed and the face of this investigation is having to answer for the work of others. Time will tell just how honorable this veteran really is. Will he be the first to try and clear his own name?

                1. It makes me wonder about AG Bill Barr. These guys are all old friends. They are all “honorable” swamp dwellers who served the country. They’ve got each others backs, right? How much of an ‘act’ is Bill Barr putting on when he talks about going after the bad actors? The coup plotters? Will he really go after Mueller’s team? Comey’s team? Or will Barr buy into Comey’s “higher loyalty” schtick and let them all skate?

                  1. I understand your point and time will tell. I believe AG Barr and others have already concluded the full story on what happened. The questions that were posed yesterday reflect an understanding of the known and verifiable events that were evidently never investigated. Those questions are on the record and answers will come. I suspect what we aren’t able to see is the case AG Barr is carefully building on the suspected bad actors. When Horowitz and Durham provide their reports, what happens when those questions get answered? Indictments? A speech by President Trump saying our long, national nightmare is over?

              3. I think of how they threw the book at Manafort but referred Tony Podesta’s similar crimes to SDNY. I think of Paul Manafort rotting in prison, in solitary confinement. I think of how Mueller’s team tried to get Manafort moved to Rikers. I think of the vindictiveness of Mueller’s team of prosecutors and what they did to ruin Trump and anyone around Trump. I think of Mueller’s team of lawyers and staff leaking and lying without consequence.

                Yep. Mueller was facing questions that would expose the coup plot, the lies, the coverup, the sham investigation — and he didn’t even have to answer most of them!!! He said “not my purview” and they all let him slide!

              4. Here we find many comments from our Trumpster Anonymous. But no comments from the ever-active Alan. How odd!

                Perhaps Alan forgot he was using ‘Anonymous’ here?

                1. It’s one of his current games. He needs to work out some of his issues by cleaning his mother’s basement.

                2. Nope, not me Peter. It doesn’t even sound like me. However, since I am having problems with wordpress I thank you for letting me know when you think I wrote something and it is not under my name.

                  We agree on one thing. Anyone that doesn’t distinguish their posts from others is a nuisance and not one to be respected. Almost everyone is anonymous but we should maintain a singular identity.

                  1. Says the guy — Allan — who has always been careful to color within the lines, one suspects. He likes the “singular identity” approach because it’s a better match for his “attack dog” approach to commenting; he loves to try to make it personal.

                    1. Yes, Brainless, I like to respond in kind to nasty people that haven’t learned proper behavior likely due to bad upbringing. …And yes again I like to make it personal with Stupid people that can’t even be decent enough to have a distinct identity on a blog where people interact. You are one of the worst offenders, but you get by because you are so darned stupid.

                  2. Allan is amusing, at times, if nothing else. It’s good that he spends a lot of time on JT’s blog where he can’t do any damage.

                    1. Brainless, you keep running after me because I am amusing. How nice. Why not play with Diane? She seems to be more your type. You even watch out for how much time I might spend on the Internet. No I do not have time left for you. Play with Diane.

                    2. A Brainless retort from the Brainless Wonder.

                      I see your whacko buddy was thrown off the blog again.

                    3. “I see your whacko buddy was thrown off the blog again.” — Allan: one of the biggest whackos

                      And who would that be, Allan.

                    4. “And who would that be, Allan.”

                      The Brainless Wonder is trying to think and the smoke is preventing her from seeing what was written in another post. We had two whacko’s, Diane and the Brainless Wonder. No we are left with only one whacko.

        2. You know what the perjury would be for? Mueller denying that the sole reason for his odd 9 minute press conference last month was to avoid contempt charges by the DC judge who warned the DOJ not to make the claims about Russia being behind the troll farm without any evidence.

        3. Everyone knew all along Robert Mueller was a Republican.

          Since he was perfectly willing to act as a front man for Andrew Weissman, this hardly matters. Just out of curiosity, where was he registered to vote, Peter? And, before you answer that question, recall that the ‘Republican’ James Comey was registered in Virginia which has no party registration and is currently registered in DC, but not as a Republican.

        4. Where’s the proof, the evidence, that Russia hacked the DNC server? Or Podesta’s emails? The Obama intelligence agencies said so? Brennan, Clapper, Comey, et al. That’s the proof we should accept?

          Nope.

        5. Damn- this Hill guy has drunk the Koolaid. Absolute irrationality mixed with pure hatred. Dude you need to take BStreisand’s advice move to Canada and chill out – I hear they have a prime minister you’d just love.

        6. “Since Day 1 Donald Trump has been totally dismissive of Russian interference.”

          No he hasn’t. He has been dismissive of Russian interference on his part but not on the parts of Obama, Hillary, Bill, Biden, etc. all who have done the things he was accused of. Shill is always painting pictures that never existed but is completely blind to those things that did. That is why Peter is known as the Shill.

    2. “Mueller did just that, twice. He stated that he visited the White House about the job search, but “not as a candidate.” He later reiterated that the meeting “was about the job but not about me applying for the job.””

      The Shill keeps pedaling his wears but no one is buying. …it was about a job but not that job…under which President was I first appointed?…I don’t know. …huh… I never heard of Fusion GPS…. Question: What are you going to have for lunch? Mueller: That’s not in my purview.

  10. IMO>>>> Mueller is not a well man. You can see it in his blank stares. I would say some kind of dementia.or medication?? Those blank stares and pauses were troubling.
    But even so, Mueller is responsible for his actions!

    1. He’s old, daft and was manipulated by his “woke” staff. They destroyed and are destroying lives needlessly and for sport. I have no sympathy for him or his band of legal marauders.

      1. You’re exactly right…I, too have no sympathy for him. I just don’t think he is well….but he has to take responsibility for that as well as what he says and does. He almost ruined our country!

      2. “No pity, my children. I’ll shoot the first man with pity in his eyes.”

        Field Marshal Blucher upon surprising Napoleon’s Frech at Waterloo.

    2. Cindy, you are perceptive. His facial features revealed an older man not fit for the job he should have refused because of a lack of arms length distance from the events and players. His answers weren’t totally compatible with such a picture. While I believe age caught up to him I believe that his unvarying appearance was in part used wilfully by him when answering questions. He was both old and hid behind the screen of age.

Leave a Reply