15 votes

The most revealing exchange of the Mueller hearing

6 comments

  1. [6]
    Loire
    Link
    For those who could not take the time to watch the hearing today, this article covers the most important portions (I believe) along side of Mueller clarifying that he did not exonerate Trump in...

    For those who could not take the time to watch the hearing today, this article covers the most important portions (I believe) along side of Mueller clarifying that he did not exonerate Trump in any fashion. All in all the hearing was a dud, as Robert Mueller continues to perform this anti-Starr pantomime where he refuses to say in plain language whether or not the President has performed an illegal act. The linked article describes how Democrats had to coax the witness into confirming the three elements of obstruction of justice occurred, only for him to equivocate on intent when realizing what he said.

    When asked directly why he would neither accuse nor exonerate the president of a crime, Mueller replied in legalese:

    The finding indicates that the president was not exculpated for the act he allegedly committed

    At one point Mueller confirmed to Representative Ted Lieu that it was “correct” that the reason he did not seek to charge Trump with obstruction of justice was the Office of Legal Counsel opinion that a sitting president could not be indicted. Which he then proceeded to walk back later in the day, in typical fashion.

    Fortunately, Mueller did confirm that the Russian attack on the 2016 election was not a hoax and followed up with:

    Over the course of my career, I’ve seen a number of challenges to our democracy. The Russian government’s effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious,”

    In the end, just as promised, Robert Mueller would not speak beyond the report, and what his team had established in their two years creating it. Democratic Representatives will have to do their job, if this President is going to be held accountable.

    7 votes
    1. [3]
      alyaza
      Link Parent
      i honestly cannot imagine the democratic house managing to effectively parlay this into any sort of accountability. so far they've been at best hasty and at worst actively adversarial to the idea...

      Democratic Representatives will have to do their job, if this President is going to be held accountable.

      i honestly cannot imagine the democratic house managing to effectively parlay this into any sort of accountability. so far they've been at best hasty and at worst actively adversarial to the idea of things like impeachment, and i'm skeptical that any of the investigations are going to hold trump any more accountable than the mueller report can--which is to say, the buck stops with the house again and the house hasn't shown great signs of being able to handle this all in an effective manner.

      7 votes
      1. [2]
        Loire
        Link Parent
        I want to believe that this was some sort of breaking point. The average person won't read the report, but soundbytes on television can sway public opinion. I doubt that will be the case though...

        I want to believe that this was some sort of breaking point. The average person won't read the report, but soundbytes on television can sway public opinion. I doubt that will be the case though and agree that the house will undoubtedly fail to handle the president in an effective way.

        1 vote
        1. stu2b50
          Link Parent
          I doubt this will have any affect. Impeachment just isn't popular with the American public, it's polling in the ~40% range. With the next presidential election coming up, there's no way Pelosi...

          I doubt this will have any affect. Impeachment just isn't popular with the American public, it's polling in the ~40% range. With the next presidential election coming up, there's no way Pelosi would rock the boat and hope somehow that the when they actually do impeach him, public opinion sways.

          Impeaching him also wouldn't do anything. Obviously the senate will not move forward with charges, and as we've seen historically just impeachment doesn't necessarily mean anything.

          2 votes
    2. [3]
      Comment deleted by author
      Link Parent
      1. [2]
        Loire
        (edited )
        Link Parent
        The President placed in the White House, the congressmen placed in the Capitol and the Supreme Court justices that result from both, greatly dictate the direction we move in concerning all those...

        All this noise about holding the President accountable and blah blah blah isn't getting us any closer to fixing that infrastructure I mentioned before, much less serious social issues like homelessness, poverty, the prison-industrial complex, opioid addictions, job loss, etc.

        The President placed in the White House, the congressmen placed in the Capitol and the Supreme Court justices that result from both, greatly dictate the direction we move in concerning all those topics. Consider what got done under Obama's first few years with a Democratic Capitol vs what has gotten done in the ten years since and tell me that foreign interference, in that it helped elect a specific group, is not a major detriment to those goals.

        The Republican party will not suddenly begin improving the American condition simply because the media focused on infrastructure, homelessness, poverty, the prison-industrial complex, opioid addictions, job loss, etc. (which it has in the past).

        5 votes
        1. [2]
          Comment deleted by author
          Link Parent
          1. Loire
            Link Parent
            Sure it does, but it also means that, had the interference not occurred, we wouldn't be dealing with this accelerationist bullshit, the fascist roaches would have gone back into their hidey-holes,...

            The fact that this foreign interference was enough to tip an already close election between a run-of-the-mill establishment candidate and a racist, misogynistic demagogue indicates that we have greater problems to be worrying about than that same foreign interference, namely the fact that millions of Americans basically voted for proto-fascism.

            Sure it does, but it also means that, had the interference not occurred, we wouldn't be dealing with this accelerationist bullshit, the fascist roaches would have gone back into their hidey-holes, and American governmental bodies wouldn't be getting gutted at a critical period. Do you think we're going to be able to face the oncoming climate catastrophe with organizations like the EPA and USDA gutted to 70% of their pre-Trump functionality?

            Shining the light on American authoritarians wasn't important.

            I'm not entirely sure what you're responding to here since I don't believe that I suggested what you say here, but I will say that I don't think that the media dictates the political agenda through what it chooses to portray, rather that what the media chooses to portray comes down from on high by political and business elites that own those media, a group that includes both Republicans and Democrats. If you'd like me to clarify any points I was unclear on please let me know.

            You're oroginal post seemed.to suggest had the media not pursued the Russian angle we would be working on more important problems. My mistake.

            But how?

            I mean I've seen the media (with the exception of Fox of course) discuss decriminalization in Portugal, the climate crisis, opioids, foreign universal healthcare policies etc. No it's never at 6 pm with Anderson Cooper, and sure they could do more to push it to the forefront. Climate get's a significant amount of coverage on the center to "left" sources. The opioid epidemic gets frequent specials where those affected are presented. CNN's non-primetime bread and butter is effectively having Dr. Sanjay Gupta talk about this shit for hours.

            Is it enough? Certainly not. And it would mean more to have it in primetime with Don Lemon. But at what point does it become American's responsibility to desire more than car crashes and mass shootings?

            2 votes