House Democrats step in it by subpoenaing Robert Mueller

5 minute read

June 26, 2019 |

Breaking news in a week that promises to be full of breaking news: In what surely will be a case of “Be careful what you wish for,” Democrats Jerrold Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Adam “Shifty” Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, announced Tuesday night that special counsel Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify in a public hearing on Wednesday, July 17, after being subpoenaed to appear.

Nadler and Schiff said in their statement, “Americans have demanded to hear directly from the special counsel, so they can understand what he and his team examined.”

News flash:  Plenty of Americans are not demanding this at all –-- in fact, they’re more than ready to be done with this and for Mueller to go away (as he is supposed to) –- but it’s obvious why Democrats are salivating at the thought of Mueller testifying. They want to get him on the record saying that the reason he made no decision on a case for “obstruction” was that a sitting President can’t be indicted. Two problems with that: 1) Mueller told Barr, repeatedly, in front of witnesses, in response to Barr’s specific question that this was not the case; and 2) Republican committee members have plenty of questions THEY will take the opportunity to ask.

Here are just a few possibilities: “Mr. Mueller, since it can be demonstrated that you HAD to have known early on that there was nothing to the Trump/Russia “collusion” story, why did you continue with the investigation and keep pushing at Trump’s attorneys to try to get him to testify in person?” And, “Why did you decide to include that line about not exonerating the President, when that’s not what a prosecutor does and the whole idea runs afoul of our Constitution and justice system?” Also, (my personal favorite), “If you were really so concerned about Russian interference, Mr. Mueller, why did you waste time on unrelated process crimes? Why did you not instead request that the scope of your investigation be enlarged to include the role of Hillary, the DNC and Fusion GPS in the use of foreign spies linked to Russia to create the outrageous ‘dossier’?”

It’s too bad that Trump attorney Jay Sekulow can’t be in the room to question Mueller, because he’s come up with a great one: “How did Peter Strzok’s phone, when it was turned in to the special counsel’s office [after he was dropped from the team] get wiped out and nobody kept a record of what was on it? How is that even possible?” Well, I’ll bet somebody asks that!

Pam Bondi also has a really solid one: “The second you knew that information about how that FISA warrant was obtained, by false information --- and [you] knew it --- why did you not go back to that court? You had an obligation as the chief prosecutor on this case, an ethical and moral obligation to take it back to the FISA court and [you] did not do that as far as we know.”

We know Mueller would have been aware from almost the beginning that the Steele “dossier” was a ridiculous hoax because Andrew Weissmann, his right-hand man, was briefed on it in 2016. He was hired to be on Mueller’s team several months into 2017. And then it was only a couple of months later when he found out about the Strzok-Page texts, which revealed what they’d been up to at the FBI. Yet never mind that; it was full-speed ahead with the “investigation.”

Mueller will likely try to present reasons why he can’t answer certain questions (“That information remains classified...” or “My answers must be confined to what is in the report...”) while offering the Democrats what they want. That will really make this hearing look like the kangaroo court it is. This new bit of theater is not going to turn out well for him –- any more than that press conference of his did, during which he appeared quite shaky and didn’t answer ANY questions –- or for those legal geniuses, Nadler and Schiff, who subpoenaed him. They are so overcome with Trump-hatred and delusions of power that they can’t see it.

Rep. Mark Meadows, who no doubt will be loaded for bear that day with some powerful questions for Mueller –- says Nadler and Schiff broke House rules with this and that he’s not even sure if it’s a valid subpoena when it comes from two separate committees with two separate jurisdictions. “Bob Mueller better be prepared,” Meadows said on Tuesday’s THE INGRAHAM ANGLE, because I can tell you, he will be cross-examined for the first time, and the American people will start to see the flaws in his report.”

Speaking of rules, Alan Dershowitz pointed out that it’s against Justice Department “rules and traditions” for Mueller to testify at all about the report. As a prosecutor, he is bound to submit his report and never to say a word about it beyond that. By subpoenaing him, Nadler and Schiff are making him break the rules. But what do the Democrats care about rules? (Hard to believe Dershowitz can still be a Democrat after all this.)

Robert Mueller agrees to testify before joint House panel July 17 after subpoena, Nadler and Schiff announce


Commentary continues below advertisement


 

Chad Pergram: Media coverage of Mueller testimony will be 'off the Richter scale'

Something else is brewing this week: Investigative reporter John Solomon will have more breaking news tomorrow, as he has finally received the documents relating to former U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power’s massive unmasking of American names caught up in the FBI’s foreign surveillance. These names would otherwise have remained redacted. Some names, like “Michael Flynn,” were not only unmasked but were illegally leaked to the press. We’ve been wondering for a long time why on earth someone who normally would have nothing to do with this would want to unmask these names.

Solomon said he’d need another day to go through all the documents on Power, but he reported Tuesday night on HANNITY that he’s already seeing the same kind of anti-Trump bias in her official State Department emails and text messages that we’ve seen from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page at the FBI. Big surprise.

We had the story yesterday about the rush at the end of Obama’s second term to expand the number of agencies that could have access to raw intelligence. I assume that includes all those unredacted names. If that’s the case, then this is a perfect example of how various activities within the "deep state" worked synergistically to damage Donald Trump and those associated with him.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 26-35 of 35

  • Jay Taylor

    06/26/2019 01:52 PM

    I never thought that I would be living through the chaos inside a Banana Republic but I think we are there.

  • Gloria Ure

    06/26/2019 01:38 PM

    You are right and well said, I love getting your news letter everyday. I just hope that they have to pay back what was spent with our tax dollars. I also want them punished to the greatest exstint of the law.

  • Linda M Springer

    06/26/2019 01:32 PM

    Thank you for your news letter, it gives me hope that the evil in our government will be brought out into the open.

  • Douglas Bradley

    06/26/2019 01:21 PM

    All this being true, why have Republicans/bi-partisan Patriots not gone legally after the empowered Constitutional law betrayers behind the anti-President activity? ..even the small fry? ..and build to the predatory shark-like Hillaries, Comeys, etc?!?

  • Judy Ann Evans

    06/26/2019 01:18 PM

    Stop this witch hunt. Do the real work of the people. We are tired of this waste of time and money. OUR money by the way NOT your's.

  • William T Howell

    06/26/2019 01:15 PM

    Mueller should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, including fraud & waste of taxpayer funds.

  • Sherry Stone

    06/26/2019 01:14 PM

    Dear Mr. Huckabee, what is the President going to do about Google hacking the 2020 presidential election? They were caught on camera saying that they were doing it right now. Project Veritas secretly taped them admitting it. Is anything going to be done about this?

  • janice gavin

    06/26/2019 01:00 PM

    I am hoping that after they ask their questions they wait for an answer even if it means to wait in silence as long as it takes.....

  • Kathy Dix

    06/26/2019 12:52 PM

    No need to have Mueller tell us what's in the Mueller "Russian / now obstruction " Report. We can watch the liberal actors do their "Reading of the Mueller Report " , right ? I'm sure all liberals will drool over that false narrative.

  • Floyd Unger

    06/26/2019 10:50 AM

    Very nice report. Filled with info not just dripping with anger.

House Democrats step in it by subpoenaing Robert Mueller

5 minute read

June 26, 2019 |

Breaking news in a week that promises to be full of breaking news: In what surely will be a case of “Be careful what you wish for,” Democrats Jerrold Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Adam “Shifty” Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, announced Tuesday night that special counsel Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify in a public hearing on Wednesday, July 17, after being subpoenaed to appear.

Nadler and Schiff said in their statement, “Americans have demanded to hear directly from the special counsel, so they can understand what he and his team examined.”

News flash:  Plenty of Americans are not demanding this at all –-- in fact, they’re more than ready to be done with this and for Mueller to go away (as he is supposed to) –- but it’s obvious why Democrats are salivating at the thought of Mueller testifying. They want to get him on the record saying that the reason he made no decision on a case for “obstruction” was that a sitting President can’t be indicted. Two problems with that: 1) Mueller told Barr, repeatedly, in front of witnesses, in response to Barr’s specific question that this was not the case; and 2) Republican committee members have plenty of questions THEY will take the opportunity to ask.

Here are just a few possibilities: “Mr. Mueller, since it can be demonstrated that you HAD to have known early on that there was nothing to the Trump/Russia “collusion” story, why did you continue with the investigation and keep pushing at Trump’s attorneys to try to get him to testify in person?” And, “Why did you decide to include that line about not exonerating the President, when that’s not what a prosecutor does and the whole idea runs afoul of our Constitution and justice system?” Also, (my personal favorite), “If you were really so concerned about Russian interference, Mr. Mueller, why did you waste time on unrelated process crimes? Why did you not instead request that the scope of your investigation be enlarged to include the role of Hillary, the DNC and Fusion GPS in the use of foreign spies linked to Russia to create the outrageous ‘dossier’?”

It’s too bad that Trump attorney Jay Sekulow can’t be in the room to question Mueller, because he’s come up with a great one: “How did Peter Strzok’s phone, when it was turned in to the special counsel’s office [after he was dropped from the team] get wiped out and nobody kept a record of what was on it? How is that even possible?” Well, I’ll bet somebody asks that!

Pam Bondi also has a really solid one: “The second you knew that information about how that FISA warrant was obtained, by false information --- and [you] knew it --- why did you not go back to that court? You had an obligation as the chief prosecutor on this case, an ethical and moral obligation to take it back to the FISA court and [you] did not do that as far as we know.”

We know Mueller would have been aware from almost the beginning that the Steele “dossier” was a ridiculous hoax because Andrew Weissmann, his right-hand man, was briefed on it in 2016. He was hired to be on Mueller’s team several months into 2017. And then it was only a couple of months later when he found out about the Strzok-Page texts, which revealed what they’d been up to at the FBI. Yet never mind that; it was full-speed ahead with the “investigation.”

Mueller will likely try to present reasons why he can’t answer certain questions (“That information remains classified...” or “My answers must be confined to what is in the report...”) while offering the Democrats what they want. That will really make this hearing look like the kangaroo court it is. This new bit of theater is not going to turn out well for him –- any more than that press conference of his did, during which he appeared quite shaky and didn’t answer ANY questions –- or for those legal geniuses, Nadler and Schiff, who subpoenaed him. They are so overcome with Trump-hatred and delusions of power that they can’t see it.

Rep. Mark Meadows, who no doubt will be loaded for bear that day with some powerful questions for Mueller –- says Nadler and Schiff broke House rules with this and that he’s not even sure if it’s a valid subpoena when it comes from two separate committees with two separate jurisdictions. “Bob Mueller better be prepared,” Meadows said on Tuesday’s THE INGRAHAM ANGLE, because I can tell you, he will be cross-examined for the first time, and the American people will start to see the flaws in his report.”

Speaking of rules, Alan Dershowitz pointed out that it’s against Justice Department “rules and traditions” for Mueller to testify at all about the report. As a prosecutor, he is bound to submit his report and never to say a word about it beyond that. By subpoenaing him, Nadler and Schiff are making him break the rules. But what do the Democrats care about rules? (Hard to believe Dershowitz can still be a Democrat after all this.)

Robert Mueller agrees to testify before joint House panel July 17 after subpoena, Nadler and Schiff announce


Commentary continues below advertisement


 

Chad Pergram: Media coverage of Mueller testimony will be 'off the Richter scale'

Something else is brewing this week: Investigative reporter John Solomon will have more breaking news tomorrow, as he has finally received the documents relating to former U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power’s massive unmasking of American names caught up in the FBI’s foreign surveillance. These names would otherwise have remained redacted. Some names, like “Michael Flynn,” were not only unmasked but were illegally leaked to the press. We’ve been wondering for a long time why on earth someone who normally would have nothing to do with this would want to unmask these names.

Solomon said he’d need another day to go through all the documents on Power, but he reported Tuesday night on HANNITY that he’s already seeing the same kind of anti-Trump bias in her official State Department emails and text messages that we’ve seen from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page at the FBI. Big surprise.

We had the story yesterday about the rush at the end of Obama’s second term to expand the number of agencies that could have access to raw intelligence. I assume that includes all those unredacted names. If that’s the case, then this is a perfect example of how various activities within the "deep state" worked synergistically to damage Donald Trump and those associated with him.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 26-35 of 35

  • Jay Taylor

    06/26/2019 01:52 PM

    I never thought that I would be living through the chaos inside a Banana Republic but I think we are there.

  • Gloria Ure

    06/26/2019 01:38 PM

    You are right and well said, I love getting your news letter everyday. I just hope that they have to pay back what was spent with our tax dollars. I also want them punished to the greatest exstint of the law.

  • Linda M Springer

    06/26/2019 01:32 PM

    Thank you for your news letter, it gives me hope that the evil in our government will be brought out into the open.

  • Douglas Bradley

    06/26/2019 01:21 PM

    All this being true, why have Republicans/bi-partisan Patriots not gone legally after the empowered Constitutional law betrayers behind the anti-President activity? ..even the small fry? ..and build to the predatory shark-like Hillaries, Comeys, etc?!?

  • Judy Ann Evans

    06/26/2019 01:18 PM

    Stop this witch hunt. Do the real work of the people. We are tired of this waste of time and money. OUR money by the way NOT your's.

  • William T Howell

    06/26/2019 01:15 PM

    Mueller should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, including fraud & waste of taxpayer funds.

  • Sherry Stone

    06/26/2019 01:14 PM

    Dear Mr. Huckabee, what is the President going to do about Google hacking the 2020 presidential election? They were caught on camera saying that they were doing it right now. Project Veritas secretly taped them admitting it. Is anything going to be done about this?

  • janice gavin

    06/26/2019 01:00 PM

    I am hoping that after they ask their questions they wait for an answer even if it means to wait in silence as long as it takes.....

  • Kathy Dix

    06/26/2019 12:52 PM

    No need to have Mueller tell us what's in the Mueller "Russian / now obstruction " Report. We can watch the liberal actors do their "Reading of the Mueller Report " , right ? I'm sure all liberals will drool over that false narrative.

  • Floyd Unger

    06/26/2019 10:50 AM

    Very nice report. Filled with info not just dripping with anger.

House Democrats step in it by subpoenaing Robert Mueller

5 minute read

June 26, 2019 |

Breaking news in a week that promises to be full of breaking news: In what surely will be a case of “Be careful what you wish for,” Democrats Jerrold Nadler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, and Adam “Shifty” Schiff, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, announced Tuesday night that special counsel Robert Mueller is scheduled to testify in a public hearing on Wednesday, July 17, after being subpoenaed to appear.

Nadler and Schiff said in their statement, “Americans have demanded to hear directly from the special counsel, so they can understand what he and his team examined.”

News flash:  Plenty of Americans are not demanding this at all –-- in fact, they’re more than ready to be done with this and for Mueller to go away (as he is supposed to) –- but it’s obvious why Democrats are salivating at the thought of Mueller testifying. They want to get him on the record saying that the reason he made no decision on a case for “obstruction” was that a sitting President can’t be indicted. Two problems with that: 1) Mueller told Barr, repeatedly, in front of witnesses, in response to Barr’s specific question that this was not the case; and 2) Republican committee members have plenty of questions THEY will take the opportunity to ask.

Here are just a few possibilities: “Mr. Mueller, since it can be demonstrated that you HAD to have known early on that there was nothing to the Trump/Russia “collusion” story, why did you continue with the investigation and keep pushing at Trump’s attorneys to try to get him to testify in person?” And, “Why did you decide to include that line about not exonerating the President, when that’s not what a prosecutor does and the whole idea runs afoul of our Constitution and justice system?” Also, (my personal favorite), “If you were really so concerned about Russian interference, Mr. Mueller, why did you waste time on unrelated process crimes? Why did you not instead request that the scope of your investigation be enlarged to include the role of Hillary, the DNC and Fusion GPS in the use of foreign spies linked to Russia to create the outrageous ‘dossier’?”

It’s too bad that Trump attorney Jay Sekulow can’t be in the room to question Mueller, because he’s come up with a great one: “How did Peter Strzok’s phone, when it was turned in to the special counsel’s office [after he was dropped from the team] get wiped out and nobody kept a record of what was on it? How is that even possible?” Well, I’ll bet somebody asks that!

Pam Bondi also has a really solid one: “The second you knew that information about how that FISA warrant was obtained, by false information --- and [you] knew it --- why did you not go back to that court? You had an obligation as the chief prosecutor on this case, an ethical and moral obligation to take it back to the FISA court and [you] did not do that as far as we know.”

We know Mueller would have been aware from almost the beginning that the Steele “dossier” was a ridiculous hoax because Andrew Weissmann, his right-hand man, was briefed on it in 2016. He was hired to be on Mueller’s team several months into 2017. And then it was only a couple of months later when he found out about the Strzok-Page texts, which revealed what they’d been up to at the FBI. Yet never mind that; it was full-speed ahead with the “investigation.”

Mueller will likely try to present reasons why he can’t answer certain questions (“That information remains classified...” or “My answers must be confined to what is in the report...”) while offering the Democrats what they want. That will really make this hearing look like the kangaroo court it is. This new bit of theater is not going to turn out well for him –- any more than that press conference of his did, during which he appeared quite shaky and didn’t answer ANY questions –- or for those legal geniuses, Nadler and Schiff, who subpoenaed him. They are so overcome with Trump-hatred and delusions of power that they can’t see it.

Rep. Mark Meadows, who no doubt will be loaded for bear that day with some powerful questions for Mueller –- says Nadler and Schiff broke House rules with this and that he’s not even sure if it’s a valid subpoena when it comes from two separate committees with two separate jurisdictions. “Bob Mueller better be prepared,” Meadows said on Tuesday’s THE INGRAHAM ANGLE, because I can tell you, he will be cross-examined for the first time, and the American people will start to see the flaws in his report.”

Speaking of rules, Alan Dershowitz pointed out that it’s against Justice Department “rules and traditions” for Mueller to testify at all about the report. As a prosecutor, he is bound to submit his report and never to say a word about it beyond that. By subpoenaing him, Nadler and Schiff are making him break the rules. But what do the Democrats care about rules? (Hard to believe Dershowitz can still be a Democrat after all this.)

Robert Mueller agrees to testify before joint House panel July 17 after subpoena, Nadler and Schiff announce


Commentary continues below advertisement


 

Chad Pergram: Media coverage of Mueller testimony will be 'off the Richter scale'

Something else is brewing this week: Investigative reporter John Solomon will have more breaking news tomorrow, as he has finally received the documents relating to former U.S. Ambassador Samantha Power’s massive unmasking of American names caught up in the FBI’s foreign surveillance. These names would otherwise have remained redacted. Some names, like “Michael Flynn,” were not only unmasked but were illegally leaked to the press. We’ve been wondering for a long time why on earth someone who normally would have nothing to do with this would want to unmask these names.

Solomon said he’d need another day to go through all the documents on Power, but he reported Tuesday night on HANNITY that he’s already seeing the same kind of anti-Trump bias in her official State Department emails and text messages that we’ve seen from Peter Strzok and Lisa Page at the FBI. Big surprise.

We had the story yesterday about the rush at the end of Obama’s second term to expand the number of agencies that could have access to raw intelligence. I assume that includes all those unredacted names. If that’s the case, then this is a perfect example of how various activities within the "deep state" worked synergistically to damage Donald Trump and those associated with him.

Leave a Comment

Note: Fields marked with an * are required.

Your Information
Your Comment
BBML accepted!
Captcha

Comments 26-35 of 35

  • Jay Taylor

    06/26/2019 01:52 PM

    I never thought that I would be living through the chaos inside a Banana Republic but I think we are there.

  • Gloria Ure

    06/26/2019 01:38 PM

    You are right and well said, I love getting your news letter everyday. I just hope that they have to pay back what was spent with our tax dollars. I also want them punished to the greatest exstint of the law.

  • Linda M Springer

    06/26/2019 01:32 PM

    Thank you for your news letter, it gives me hope that the evil in our government will be brought out into the open.

  • Douglas Bradley

    06/26/2019 01:21 PM

    All this being true, why have Republicans/bi-partisan Patriots not gone legally after the empowered Constitutional law betrayers behind the anti-President activity? ..even the small fry? ..and build to the predatory shark-like Hillaries, Comeys, etc?!?

  • Judy Ann Evans

    06/26/2019 01:18 PM

    Stop this witch hunt. Do the real work of the people. We are tired of this waste of time and money. OUR money by the way NOT your's.

  • William T Howell

    06/26/2019 01:15 PM

    Mueller should be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, including fraud & waste of taxpayer funds.

  • Sherry Stone

    06/26/2019 01:14 PM

    Dear Mr. Huckabee, what is the President going to do about Google hacking the 2020 presidential election? They were caught on camera saying that they were doing it right now. Project Veritas secretly taped them admitting it. Is anything going to be done about this?

  • janice gavin

    06/26/2019 01:00 PM

    I am hoping that after they ask their questions they wait for an answer even if it means to wait in silence as long as it takes.....

  • Kathy Dix

    06/26/2019 12:52 PM

    No need to have Mueller tell us what's in the Mueller "Russian / now obstruction " Report. We can watch the liberal actors do their "Reading of the Mueller Report " , right ? I'm sure all liberals will drool over that false narrative.

  • Floyd Unger

    06/26/2019 10:50 AM

    Very nice report. Filled with info not just dripping with anger.