I’m shocked – SHOCKED! – that conservatives aren’t going to hear these damning affirmations from the Mueller Report.
Yeah, but it only really shoots them down for people who see the “solid, short, factual sound bites,” and are willing to listen to them.
As I suggested in my previous post, and as wguy123’s most recent post shows, the people who get their news from FOX aren’t going to suddenly receive a new and more honest summary of the report just because Mueller has appeared in front of a congressional committee.
A question I thought of while watching the questioning: Why doesn’t Mueller have someone beside him flipping to the appropriate parts of the Report, so Mueller doesn’t have to do it himself? He’s concentrating on finding the correct page and not listening to the Congressmen.
It will be hard to ignore all of these, but I guess they’ll find a way. Probably by calling them fake librul media.
I like that he is taking his time and setting his own pace. Why should he hurry just because his questioners are in a hurry? Let the panel dance to his tune at his tempo. He’s not in a position to reveal much that’s new, so at least he can remain in control in this way. How would it look if he rushed and had his aide flip pages-- to me it would be like “yassuh, yassuh, I’m goin’ as fast as I can.” Screw that. Make them wait while he finds the place. The man has a hell of a lot of gravitas.
If they believe that Mueller is a compromised Trump-hating liar, then the contents of his report and/or his statements during this hearing won’t even matter.
True, but that is the crowd that would still cheer him on during his hypothetical shooting of somebody in the middle of 5th Avenue. There is literally, at this point, NOTHING that would sway that group of Americans.
Correct. They are not the audience for the report or for the hearing. They are lost.
I like these questions from Rep Jeffries, he’s trying real hard to get Mueller to put the pieces together in his own words. He’s going to run out of time though.
Paraphrased from my immediate memory:
Cedric Richmond: “Is it accurate to say that the President tried to force McGahn to say something McGahn did not believe was true?”
Mueller: “That is accurate”.
Gah, and then Mueller specifically says he doesn’t support that analysis. What a dick.
Me too, except for the part where he cut of Mueller. It was one of the only times so far Mueller started elaborating on his testimony.
Sara Huckabee tweets:
Hakeem Jeffries is one of the next generation of Democratic House leaders, and if I had to guess the next Democratic speaker after Pelosi, I’d guess it will be him.
The Republican before Democrat Cicilline (I didn’t catch his name) seemed to follow a line of questioning that hurt Trump, no? (IT was about the OLC decision not to indict a sitting President.)
From CNN live coverage:
He won’t take anyone’s bait. Sound bites live forever.
He’s already gotten his win, and proclaimed it to the treetops.
What was absent when the Mueller Report came out, that made it convincing in the public mind, was the absence of any pushback from the Dems. Trump and the GOP were claiming exoneration, and the Dems were kinda shrugging…Trump and the GOP won because they showed up and the Dems didn’t. With respect to public opinion, it’s as if there’s a bipartisan consensus that Trump hasn’t done anything all that bad, which is the worst place public opinion can be.
The point of impeachment is that, no matter how the Senate vote comes down (spoiler: it won’t), the advocates of impeachment would make the case for impeachment with the nation watching: first in the Judiciary Committee, then on the floor of the House. (And then on the floor of the Senate, if there’s actually a trial, but McConnell may be evil but he’s not stupid: there won’t be one.) No matter what Trump claims then, he will look a lot worse then than he does now.
Yes. I think he was trying to say that it was improper for Mueller to say all of those bad things about Trump if he wasn’t going to indict him, but all he did was reiterate that Mueller said a bunch of bad things about Trump and then wasn’t able to indict him. Seems like a blunder.
I liked Rep Cicilline’s questioning too, in the same vein as Rep Jeffries if maybe a bit sloppier. I think Ds need to continue to try and get Mueller to say in his own words that Trump committed obstruction. He probably won’t, but he does seem to be receptive now to agreeing with all of the elements.
Solid soundbite from a Republican questioner, no less:
https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1154038990003036161
Congressman: “Could you charge the President with a crime after he left office?”
Mueller: “Yes.”
Congressman (Buck, I think): “You could charge the President with obstruction of justice after he left office?”
Mueller: “Yes.”
I agree that today’s hearing won’t move the needle much on public opinion. The time for that was back when the Mueller Report came out, before people had opinions about it in the first place.
But it might get a few dozen Dem Congresscritters off the fence, by giving them enough backing to make them feel comfortable with actually, you know, taking a stand. (A scary thing for far too many Dems.) That’s about as much as I’m hoping for right now.
Ted Lieu: “The reason you did not indict the sitting President was because of the OLC memo?”
Mueller: “That is correct”.
(from memory, just a few moments ago…)