Send a Tweet
- Advertisement -
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 8 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H2'ed 7/26/19

Democrats Blowing on Embers With a Politicized Mueller

By       (Page 1 of 3 pages)     (# of views)   1 comment
Author 16373
Follow Me on Twitter     Message Joe Lauria
Become a Fan
  (3 fans)

From Consortium News

Robert Mueller takes questions for seven hours from two committees
Robert Mueller takes questions for seven hours from two committees
(Image by YouTube, Channel: ABC News)
  Details   DMCA
- Advertisement -

Former Russia-gate special counsel Robert Mueller's appearance before the Democratic-controlled House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees on Wednesday was an exercise by the Democrats of trying to extract statements that would keep Russia-gate alive and an attempt by the Republicans to finish off the story once and for all.

Appearing to be feigning, or actually suffering early signs of senility, the nearly 75-year old Mueller disappointed both parties and the public. He declined to answer 198 questions, according to a count by NBC News. When he did answer he was often barely intelligible and mostly stuck to what was in his final report, though he often had to fumble through pages to find passages he could not recall, eating into committee members' five-minute time limit.

Mueller especially refused to comment on the process of his investigation, such as who he did or did not interview, what countries his investigators visited and he even dodged discussing some relevant points of law. It was an abdication of his responsibility to U.S. taxpayers who footed his roughly $30-million, 22-month probe.

- Advertisement -

But when it came to making political statements, the former FBI director suddenly rediscovered his mental acuity. He went way beyond his report to say, without prosecutorial evidence, that he agreed with the assessment of then CIA Director Mike Pompeo that WikiLeaks is a "non-state, hostile intelligence agency."

Mueller called "illegal" WikiLeak's obtaining the Podesta and DNC emails, an act of journalism. In the 2016 election, the Espionage Act would not apply as the DNC and Podesta emails were not classified. Nor has WikiLeaks been accused by anyone of stealing the emails. And yet the foremost law enforcement figure in the U.S. accused WikiLeaks of breaking the law merely for publishing.

Though Mueller's report makes no mention of The Guardian's tale that former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort visited WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy, when questioned on this, Mueller refused to refute the story, for which there isn't a scrap of evidence. That was another purely political and not legal intervention from the lawman.

- Advertisement -

Russia, Russia, Russia

Mueller: Came to when he wanted to make a political point.
Mueller: Came to when he wanted to make a political point.
(Image by (C-Span screenshot))
  Details   DMCA

While Mueller concluded there was no evidence of a conspiracy between Russia and the Trump campaign to throw the 2016 election, he has not let up on the most politicized part of his message: that Russia interfered "massively" in "our democracy" and is still doing it. There was no waffling from Mueller when it came to this question.

He bases this on his indictment of 12 GRU Russian military intelligence agents whom he alleges hacked the DNC emails and transmitted them to WikiLeaks. Mueller knows those agents will never be arrested and brought to a courtroom to have his charges tested. In that sense the indictment was less a legal than a political document.

Among the inaccuracies about Russia-gate that were recycled at the hearing is that the St. Petersburg-based Internet Research Agency spent $1.25 million in the United States to influence the election. That figure belonged to a unit that acted worldwide, not just in the U.S., according to Mueller's indictment. In fact it only spent $100,000 on Facebook ads, half coming after the election, and as even Mueller pointed out, some were anti-Trump.

- Advertisement -

Cambridge Analytica, by contrast, had 5,000 data points on 240 million Americans, some of it bought from Facebook, that gave an enormous advantage for targeted ads to the Trump campaign. It paid at least $5.9 million to the company co-founded by Trump's campaign strategist Steve Bannon. But we are supposed to believe that a comparatively paltry number of social media messages from the IRA threw the election.

Mueller implied in his testimony that there was a link between the IRA and the Russian government despite an order from a judge for him to stop making that connection. In focusing again on Russia, no member of Congress from either party raised the content of the leaked emails.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3


- Advertisement -

Rate It | View Ratings

Joe Lauria Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Joe Lauria has been a independent journalist covering international affairs and the Middle East for more than 20 years. A former Wall Street Journal United Nations correspondent, Mr. Lauria has been an investigative reporter for The Sunday Times (more...)

Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Giuliani Says Assange Should Not Be Prosecuted

A History of 'Fear'

A New Twist in Seth Rich Murder Case

Bernie Sanders's Hopes and Regrets

Is an Independent Europe Possible?

Obama's Last Stand Against War on Syria


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments

Aleksandar Sarovic

Become a Fan
Author 513600
Follow Me on Twitter
(Member since May 24, 2019), 11 articles, 125 comments
Facebook Page Twitter Page Linked In Page Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Add this Page to Facebook! Submit to Twitter Share on LinkedIn Submit to Reddit

  New Content

It was just a huge prank created by the rich. Here is what it was about.

No president of the US has ever been a more evident supporter of corporations than President Trump. Among other things, he relieved the corporations by lowering their taxes and privileged them by reducing free trade. He waged a trade war with China, economically sanctioned Russia, blindly supported Israel, pressured Venezuela and Iran politically and economically. President Trump can hardly support the rich more and the rich can hardly find a better president for themselves. And yet, the corporate media owned by the rich have been attacking President Trump from the beginning of his mandate. I know, Trump has a weird character and lies a lot. But why would the rich attack their best asset in the US?

Another question is why the rating of President Trump increases with a policy which is traditionally despised by people. His policy should have been rated low. But with a low rating, Trump would not be able to support the rich. I think this is the reason the rich have created a conspiracy which increased Trump's rating by misleading the American people completely. I have created a conspiracy theory which presents how it was done. It is a brilliant deception of the American people.

The rich have invented the Russian meddling into the US election and falsely accused Trump of cooperation with the Russians. Then the rich assigned a special prosecutor, Robert Mueller, to investigate the Russian "interference" in the 2016 United States elections and "suspicious" links between Trump associates and Russian officials. The investigation lasted two years, and the opposition welcomed it hoping Trump with his awful policy will be impeached. During this time, the rich have encouraged the opposition to attack President Trump claiming that the proof of Russian support for Trump in the election will emerge in just a matter of time. The media controlled by the rich hysterically covered every event which rose suspicion about Trump's cooperation with Russia. This fooled the people.

Finally, after two years of hard investigation, the Mueller report stated that they did not find proof that President Trump's campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russians; neither did they find that Trump obstructed justice. Of course, they could not possibly find proof for it because the rich people invented it. The Mueller report has made President Trump innocent after two years of accusations. It has increased Trump's rate so that he is welcome to continue performing his terrible policy. The rate of the opposition dropped because it lost credibility by two years of supporting the false accusations of President Trump. The rich won again by fooling people.

Submitted on Saturday, Jul 27, 2019 at 10:02:54 PM

Author 0
Add New Comment
Share Comment
Reply To This   Recommend  (0+)

Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment