# Special Counsel Robert Mueller testifies before Congress **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [July 24, 2019, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542 "2019-07-24T12:33:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/141 "2019-07-24T22:08:07Z")
Just heard on AP Radio News a clip of the current occupant of the White House saying Mueller made a fake appearance. Reminds me of 9/11 Truthers: it was all done with holograms! ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/142 "2019-07-24T22:09:58Z")
> [@Lamoral](#): > > Sometimes I feel like I’m the only person who’s been paying attention during the past 3 years. I’ve been hearing non-stop from everyone how Muller was going to bring Trump down any day now, and I maintained the entire time that it would amount to nothing, and nobody believed me. I said, “Trump’s ONLY TALENT is avoiding consequences.” They all said, “nah, this guy Muller, he’s very thorough, he’s a real badass, he’s gonna bring it all toppling down.” Actually, they all said “Trump isn’t even going to run, come on, you know that means he’d have to disclose his taxes.” I said, “he doesn’t give a fuck, he’s not gonna play by the rules,” and surely enough he didn’t. Then they all said “the GOP will freeze him out, he’ll never get the nomination, not a chance in hell” and…“Hillary will mop the floor with him”. > > What people don’t understand is that attempting to find loopholes to make this nightmare disappear is never going to work, and only makes his detractors look incompetent. Trying to impeach him will just be setting up for failure, and it will have the same result. The only way to beat him is to beat him. I don’t know that I would completely agree with this sentiment, but I certainly do believe that the Democrats have not done themselves any favors by allowing themselves to jump into the “Collusion or Bust” trap. It was plausible that Manafort might have flipped and, if there were genuine communications between the camps, offered proof of them. But, even if that existed, the threat of being murdered by the Russians was probably too high to make it worth doing. And, outside of Manafort, likely only Russia would have known anything and certainly they’re not going to talk. The Russia investigation was never liable to win. Any strategy that relied on it proving true was never going to have much hope. The Democrats should have passed on it and waited until something easier to prove came along. Now they’re stuck with an albatross around their neck if they try to go after Trump for anything else. The one good thing is that the FBI is still investigating Trump - even if we have limited information on that topic. Whether they decide to prosecute or not will strongly depend on what they find and, similarly, whether they decide to bring it to the attention of anyone outside of the FBI until after Trump is out of office. The next President, whether it be in 2020 or 2024, will have to decide whether to prosecute a former president. That’s a hairy ball to contend with. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/143 "2019-07-24T22:25:51Z")
> [@Skywatcher](#): > > Just heard on AP Radio News a clip of the current occupant of the White House saying Mueller made a fake appearance. Maybe that explains the communication difficulties— faulty AI. He even sounded like ELIZA at times. NADLER: Director Mueller, the president has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him, but that is not what your report said, is it? ELIZA: Are you worried about someone else’s report said ? NADLER: Now, reading from page 2 of Volume 2 of your report that’s on the screen, you wrote, quote, “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment,” close quote. Now does that say there was no obstruction? ELIZA: What do you feel in your body, right now ? NADLER: In fact, you were actually unable to conclude the president did not commit obstruction of justice, is that correct? ELIZA: By the way, please understand that I can’t always give you an attuned response. – But, please go on. NADLER: And what about total exoneration? Did you actually totally exonerate the president? ELIZA: I do not answer questions, sorry. But, why does that matter to you ? NADLER: Now, in fact, your report expressly states that it does not exonerate the president. ELIZA: What makes you think of my report expressly states that it doesn’t exonerate the president ? ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/144 "2019-07-24T22:43:42Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > My favorite line: > Mueller: I’m not going to discuss that. > Congressman: You put in your report. Page 196. > In general Mueller came across as your grandfather when you start looking for a home. > > This is absolutely a disaster for the Dems. No new information came out and from what little I heard Mueller came across as evasive and dottering. When he evaded the issues on the Steele Portfolio and the Clinton campaign’s relation to the Russians and there was a person who reported contact to the Russians (forgot the name - sorry) who later lied to the investigators three times and was NOT indicted. Really shows favoritism. > > I know the Dems wanted Mueller to say “Trump is guilty of obstruction but I can’t indict him” but he didn’t and at a few points implied Trump didn’t obstruct. IMHO impeachment is now off the table. Impeachment was never on the table - not over Russia-gate. It was never on the table; it’s just that today we got a glimpse of how impeachment proceedings might actually work, and this proves once and for all, that the Dems aren’t gonna achieve shit with impeachment over something that’s been in the news non-stop since day one of his administration. So all this “We’re gonna impeach the mother fucker” trash talking and shot calling needs to end, and the Democrats who keep banging on that drum need to let it sink in. Having said that, they should still keep investigating, still investigate Trump’s business dealings, still request his tax records, and still have hearings as appropriate. I know we want to believe that we live in a country that won’t turn a blind eye to Trump’s corruption, but as I told you all a long time ago: president’s don’t get impeached or forced from office over high crimes and misdemeanors; they get pushed out of office for the same reasons they lose re-election: the country’s in a shitty mood. Impeachment just helps us get rid of someone faster. But the main takeaway here is that Nancy Pelosi is right once again: we should continue with impeachment light, not impeachment itself. Now if the economy goes into the tank, we can probably impeach him for wearing the wrong tie. Maybe something else could do it too, like a botched response to a natural disaster, a disastrous war with Iran, or maybe something so outrageous that it pisses off the average American. But Mueller’s old news. Time to move on. ---
**Author:** ![OldGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/3bc359/32.png) [@OldGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OldGuy)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/145 "2019-07-24T23:29:34Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > the Dems aren’t gonna achieve shit with impeachment over something that’s been in the news non-stop since day one of his administration. So all this “We’re gonna impeach the mother fucker” trash talking and shot calling needs to end, and the Democrats who keep banging on that drum need to let it sink in. Why exactly? Have Republicans and Trump stopped banging on the “Lock her up” drum or the “Send them back drum.” It may keep the base riled up to come out to vote. ---
**Author:** ![FavreCo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a698b9/32.png) [@FavreCo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FavreCo)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/146 "2019-07-24T23:47:56Z")
How many times can these idiot Ds come to the plate and strike out? They are batting ZERO against Trump now for over 2.5 years. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/147 "2019-07-24T23:50:47Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > as I told you all a long time ago: president’s don’t get impeached or forced from office over high crimes and misdemeanors; they get pushed out of office for the same reasons they lose re-election: the country’s in a shitty mood. I don’t think that held for Nixon, did it? I wasn’t around back then but Nixon presided over the moon landing, he opened up China, he ended the Vietnam War, created the EPA, and generally did a lot of good stuff. And Nixon won re-election in a landslide. If he hadn’t totally screwed everything up with Watergate, I don’t think he would have been pushed out of office at all. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![FavreCo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a698b9/32.png) [@FavreCo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FavreCo)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/148 "2019-07-24T23:51:18Z")
Can you confirm that your name is Bob? I cant get into that ---
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [July 24, 2019, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/149 "2019-07-24T23:58:48Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I don’t think that held for Nixon, did it? I wasn’t around back then but Nixon presided over the moon landing Grandfathered from Johnson, and before him, Kennedy. > [@](#): > > he opened up China Well, he had to do _something_ besides being remembered for Watergate. Google “Hail Mary pass” > [@](#): > > he ended the Vietnam War, After escalating it to unprecedented levels. And we still lost. Plus, there was the Arab oil crisis, which led to gasoline going over a dollar a gallon for the first time in history. Not saying that was Nixon’s fault, but it did put the country in a shitty mood. People don’t like to wait in hour-long lines to get gas. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/150 "2019-07-25T00:08:19Z")
> [@CaptMurdock](#): > > Plus, there was the Arab oil crisis, which led to gasoline going over a dollar a gallon for the first time in history. Not saying that was Nixon’s fault, but it did put the country in a shitty mood. People don’t like to wait in hour-long lines to get gas. Good point, I had totally forgotten about the oil crisis. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/151 "2019-07-25T00:09:35Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Impeachment was never on the table - not over Russia-gate. … So all this “We’re gonna impeach the mother fucker” trash talking and shot calling needs to end, and the Democrats who keep banging on that drum need to let it sink in. I would like to see less chest-thumping. The assumptions that Pelosi and those opposing ‘impeach NOW’ are doing so for dishonorable reasons—‘weak’ or ‘saving their own political future’ and what-have-you, are unsupported by the facts, and massively illogical to boot. ‘Saving their own political future’ being somehow entirely unconnected from ‘saving the USA from a Republican House and from Trump re-election’ makes not one lick of sense. But the chest-thumping is not only trendy, but also easily ginned-up by malign forces. It’s _pleasurable_ to declare ‘those Democrats are such weak losers!’ because the declaration carries the unspoken underpinning ‘and I am NOT a weak loser, which qualifies me to pass judgment on them!’ Everyone enjoys being in that one-up position of sitting in judgment on others…particularly on others who have higher status. '_It’s up to ME to decide if that old biddy is doing the right thing or not!'_—what fun! How _powerful_ that makes me feel! Love it! …Anyone who thinks these anti-Congressional-Democrat sentiments aren’t being actively encouraged by those who want to see Trump remain in office, is delusional.\* > [@asahi](#): > > Having said that, they should still keep investigating, still investigate Trump’s business dealings, still request his tax records, and still have hearings as appropriate. … Yes. And note that such investigations will cease the moment Trump is acquitted in the Senate. How can anyone investigate a man declared innocent by the Unites States Senate?? \*_Criticism_ of members of Congress is one thing—and it’s entirely appropriate. But what the keep-Trump-in-power forces are encouraging, under the guise of being “fellow-Democrats,” is _contempt_ for members of Congress. That’s how you know you’re being manipulated: if you’re encouraged to join in expressions of scorn and derision. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/152 "2019-07-25T00:12:46Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > My favorite line: > Mueller: I’m not going to discuss that. > Congressman: You put in your report. Page 196… Cannot find. Can you shed some light on the nature of the question? That would be helpful. > [@](#): > > …When he evaded the issues on the Steele Portfolio… He did not have instruction to investigate the Steele Portfolio. He was not supposed to investigate the Steel Portfolio. He was not in a position to offer any worthwhile information about the Steele Portfolio. If we are charitable, we can assume that any question about the Steele Portfolio was a question founded on ignorance, rather than malice. > [@](#): > > …and the Clinton campaign’s relation to the Russians… What was that “relation to the Russians”? You got, you bring. You got? > [@](#): > > …Really shows favoritism… Does that change any of the facts delivered to us? If Rudy G. had delivered this report, it would be more convincing? More to the point, can you refute any of the facts as delivered? > [@](#): > > …I know the Dems wanted Mueller to say “Trump is guilty of obstruction but I can’t indict him” but he didn’t and at a few points implied Trump didn’t obstruct. IMHO impeachment is now off the table. He couldn’t indict a sitting President. Period. Full stop. You didn’t know this? And yet, in the same breath, you tell us that he “implied Trump didn’t obstruct”. Some reference to those strong and definitive insinuations would be helpful. Again, you got, you bring. Further, there are clear and documented examples of such obstruction, centering around Don McGahn. These are somewhat more than insinuations, don’t you think? Or don’t you? I had been wondering why there was so little defense offered for Il Douche, it seemed rather unfair, that we witch hunters general had dominated the conversation. Thank you for relieving that concern ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/153 "2019-07-25T00:15:58Z")
> [@AHunter3](#): > > With a shovel, a baseball bat, or a less illegal and more procedural kind of assault weapon? Just what procedure do you have in mind here? I’ve a mind to join a club and beat him over the head with it. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/154 "2019-07-25T00:18:30Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > I wish that one of these last people would say, “You’ve been interrupted and cut off several times by my Republican colleagues, when you were attempting to clarify issues of conflict of interest. What were you attempting to say?” I refer you to my report. > [@QuickSilver](#): > > Has anyone straight up asked Mueller why: “…we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime…”? I will not get into charging decisions. I refer you to my report. The whole thing was a partisan waste of time. I expected: Q: Good morning, Mr. Mueller. How are you today? A: That is outside the scope of my report and will not comment on it. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/155 "2019-07-25T00:18:55Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > This is absolutely a disaster for the Dems. How so? AFAICT, they aren’t any worse off than they were yesterday. They may not be any _better_ off, but I don’t think many people expected they would be. ---
**Author:** ![Bijou\_Drains](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bijou_drains/32/2814_2.png) [@Bijou\_Drains](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bijou_Drains)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/156 "2019-07-25T00:20:38Z")
> [@FavreCo](#): > > How many times can these idiot Ds come to the plate and strike out? They are batting ZERO against Trump now for over 2.5 years. At this rate they will keep it up right through his 2nd term and will still bat 0 for both terms… ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/157 "2019-07-25T00:35:44Z")
The Republicans aren’t making any sense on the whole “exonerate” / “doesn’t exonerate” thing. When Mueller says that the report doesn’t exonerate Trump, the Republicans get upset and say that it’s not Mueller’s job to exonerate. Well… yeah, they’re right. It’s not Mueller’s job to exonerate, therefore his report can’t, and doesn’t, exonerate. What’s the argument here? Trump seems to think that it is Mueller’s job to exonerate and that he did so. He’s wrong but other Republicans seem almost more confused than him (if that’s possible). ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/158 "2019-07-25T00:37:18Z")
Very anti-climactic, the whole thing. Really just an attempt by Democrats to publicly highlight key sections of the report for illiterate dumbasses, for all the good that will do. And Republican lunatics like Gohmert and Jordan to make asses of themselves on national TV, which only causes their acolytes to admire them more. I’m surprised at Mueller’s reticence to actually say anything – I’m not sure I really understand the nature of the restrictions that were put on him. Surely the national interest is best served by getting at the truth. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/159 "2019-07-25T00:55:52Z")
> [@FavreCo](#): > > How many times can these idiot Ds come to the plate and strike out? They are batting ZERO against Trump now for over 2.5 years. Well, we did keep the GOP from killing the ACA in 2017. But the Dems really are 0-for-2019, when they’ve actually had some power. Yesterday, I called up my (Dem) Congressperson over the debt ceiling deal, and literally asked, “Can’t anybody here play this game?” They’re spineless, gutless, and clueless. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2019, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542/160 "2019-07-25T00:56:52Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > The Republicans aren’t making any sense on the whole “exonerate” / “doesn’t exonerate” thing. > > When Mueller says that the report doesn’t exonerate Trump, the Republicans get upset and say that it’s not Mueller’s job to exonerate. > > Well… yeah, they’re right. It’s not Mueller’s job to exonerate, therefore his report can’t, and doesn’t, exonerate. What’s the argument here? > > Trump seems to think that it is Mueller’s job to exonerate and that he did so. He’s wrong but other Republicans seem almost more confused than him (if that’s possible). They’re seeming to make the point that, because “exonerate” isn’t a legal term, he shouldn’t have used it, as though he must limit his vocabulary to words defined in a legal dictionary. It’s super stupid. The point he was clearly making is that there’s plenty of evidence for obstruction, and that his refusal to indict shouldn’t be taken as an indication of lack of evidence. I don’t think anyone honestly misunderstands that point. At one point he was trying to explain why his position was unique among prosecutors, and the Republican hurriedly interrupted him on this explanation. They certainly didn’t want that coming out. I think it was a missed opportunity for Democrats to follow up. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/special-counsel-robert-mueller-testifies-before-congress/837542.md?page=9)