Truthful News

Post-Mueller: What Was It All About, Anyway?

ZOOMING IN with Simone Gao

0 149

There are many things to reflect on after Robert Mueller finally concluded there was no collusion between President Trump and Russia. Most importantly, who was behind the Russian collusion hoax, which included a presidential campaign, the FBI, the Justice Department, and their allies in the media? In this episode, we look for lessons learned post-Mueller.

Today’s Guests:

 

Congress is being used as a weaponized tool

Do you think the Attorney General should and would hand over the full Mueller report to the House Judiciary Committee?

Christopher Farrell: Well there’s a process for the attorney general to handle the Mueller report, and that process is governed by law. It’s also governed by regulations that come from the law itself. It’s very specific and it has a number of requirements that the attorney general must fulfill. And so in doing that, you know there’s sort of this political sideshow, this political theater that’s taking place in the House Judiciary Committee which has little or nothing to do with the law that governs the attorney general’s conduct. And so the attorney general is currently reviewing Mueller”s report. He has already pledged to make it public. But there are constraints on what he can make public.

Politics vs. Law

So you are specifically saying they are violating the law by asking for an unredacted version?

Christopher Farrell: Well they can ask for whatever they want. There’s a difference between politics and law. In this case they sort of intersect. You have politicians with their own political agenda trying to use a legal tool to force the attorney general to violate the law. There’s an incredible contradiction in this and it’s nonsensical. But it’s not intended to make sense. It’s intended as a propaganda tool. It’s intended as a fundraising tool.

All these politicians are going to go out and try to do fundraising off of, “They are fighting to get the report.” No, they’re not. They’re doing a political stunt to generate and to energize interest in their political base. — Christopher Farrell

Can a Sitting President Be Indicted?

Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert is a former state judge and one of the most senior Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee. Any move to impeach President Donald Trump must go through his committee. He told “Zooming In” that Democrats are not moving on from their efforts to undermine the president. But the mood in Congress is not for impeachment either at this moment.

Louie Gohmert: Well as far as impeachment I don’t think that’s at all practical anymore. There are rumors from people within the special counsel’s office that are leaking out that there’s more than the summary indicated. But you also have to understand anybody in the special counsel’s office that’s leaking that information may well be criminals themselves for leaking that information. So if you want to take the word of potential criminals who were working in the special counsel’s office then that’s fine. But I think we need an investigation into all the leaking that’s going on by criminals that are supposed to be ferreting out and punishing (in)justice when actually they’re the perpetrators.

 

Is the Deep State the New Fourth Estate?

Sidney Powell is the author of Licensed to Lie. She served in the Department of Justice for ten years in Texas and Virginia, and has been lead counsel in more than 500 appeals in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Powell told me she knew for the past two years that the collusion narrative was groundless.

Sidney Powell: I’ve known for two years that they made up the entire collusion narrative. That was obvious for me from the beginning because I know Andrew Weissmann, the lead prosecutor on Mr. Mueller’s task force. He’s actually the lead villain in my book License to Lie: Exposing Corruption in the Department of Justice, that came out in 2014. And he’s very capable of making things up. He made up crimes against Arthur Andersen and destroyed that company and 85,000 jobs only to be reversed by the Supreme Court unanimously three years later. And he made up crimes against four Merrill Lynch executives and sent them to prison for a year for nothing. So I’ve seen his work up close and personal. And I could just tell from the things they said and the way they went about doing it, especially when I saw the heavily redacted FISA application, the one on Carter Page, that they didn’t have anything. No judge should have signed off on that. It was absolutely appalling. So I was expecting a finding of no collusion with Russia. But I was also expecting because it was Weismann and a group of people who absolutely loathe President Trump that Mr. Mueller picked for his special council operation, that they would throw all kinds of red meat to the Democrats to try to give ’em fodder for the impeachment effort. So I’m not surprised that they didn’t affirmatively say there was absolutely no evidence of obstruction of justice. Although that’s what they should have said. They essentially said that they’re not suggesting that he be indicted for that. That’s the same thing as an exoneration really. But yet they go on to throw red meat to the Democrats by saying well we can’t really exonerate him. That’s just baloney.

Press play to listen. What do you think about the Russia hoax? Please comment below.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.