Did Robert Mueller Defy A Court Order To Stop Lying About Russian Companies?

IG report delayed because of new cooperating witnesses.

Supposedly, Barr and the DOJ to start dropping bombs and releasing documents that will be unclassified, this week. As early as tonight.

 

Andrew Jackson and Natty Bumpo have done a great job in this thread.

 

Indeed. If this is a question between the honesty and integrity of Mueller and Trump, Bob wins hands down. Even Gingrich states that Mueller "is a superb choice to be special counsel. His reputation is impeccable..."

 

They bailed just like you did. Mueller probably plead "diminished mental capicity" to avoid being jailed on contempt charges. Anyone still denying Bob's criminal conduct in re CR 57.7 ought to invoke that defense themselves.

 

Mueller's integrity has held up just fine, there is no case for contempt charges, and anyone's arguments attacking Mueller's conduct are flatly wrong. Bullet Bob did not let Trump slither away, thank heavens. He is still on the hook.

 

Nonsense.

 

I do not find any such phony accusation by the FBI, NSA, CIA, Republican-controlled Senate Special Committee on Intelligence, or in the Trump Justice Department's Republican Special Counsel's report. It appears to be typical of Fake Don's childish "I know you are but what am I" lies that his bum kissers parrot.

 

If that is you sentiment, so be it.

I won't resort to projecting mine onto you.

 

You are not making any sense. Are you denying the DNC didn't work with Russia, Great Britain and Australia to produce the fake Steele Dossier and spy on Trump?

 

Not as far as I am aware. Please document your claim by providing the finding of the FBI, NSA, CIA, Republican-controlled Senate Special Committee on Intelligence, or in the Trump Justice Department's Republican Special Counsel, or other investigatory agency regarding it..

 

Yes, you are aware of the Steele Dossier and it's infamous roots.

If you need directions to the DNC and their Steele Dossier at this point, then you are clearly in no position to discuss much of anything. Bill Barr will be reminding you very shortly of all the bad actors in the DNC and their attempted coup.

Please stay tuned!

 

Apparently, you are unable to sustain your hyper-partisan conspiracy buffoonery with any document by the FBI, NSA, CIA, Republican-controlled Senate Special Committee on Intelligence, the Trump Justice Department's Republican Special Counsel, or any other investigatory agency regarding it.

No surprise there.

The FBI investigated every line your Steele dossier. The Mueller Report (https://www.justice.gov/storage/report.pdf) contained passing references to some of the dossier's allegations but little mention of its more sensational claims. Some aspects of the dossier have been corroborated, however much of the dossier remains unverified. One allegation was rejected by the Mueller Report.

It was not the basis of the Trump Justice Department's appointment a Special Counsel "to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters."

Contrary to repeated phony assertions by Trump, Fox News, and many of his parrots, the dossier was not the impetus for the opening of the FBI's "Crossfire Hurricane" counterintelligence investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election campaign.

Trump operative Papadopoulo pleaded guilty to making false statements to FBI agents about the timing and the possible significance of his contacts in 2016 relating to U.S.-Russia relations and the Trump presidential campaign. On or about May 10, 2016, at London's Kensington Wine Rooms, Papadopoulos allegedly told the top Australian diplomat to the United Kingdom, Alexander Downer, that Russia was in possession of emails relating to Hillary Clinton. In July, after the DNC hacking had become known, the Australians told U.S. authorities about Papadopoulos's comment, leading the Federal Bureau of Investigation to open a counterintelligence investigation into the Donald Trump presidential campaign on July 31, 2016.

 

lol

Says the that guy that reads and quotes the "Daily Stormer". Not only are your posts hyper partisan but they are laced with complete fabrications.

 

Hmmm...

So?

That is how you see it? Huh?

Anyway, back to the OP, please notify me when Mueller actually faces judicial sanctions.

Until then?

 

Yes, I accurately cite a broad range of media, including Trump's neo-nazi supporters at Daily Stormer.

Your fake claim that I post your "complete fabrications" is one you cannot support, of course.

 

Sorry, but BX4 is correct, and what you linked DOES NOT contain the language or assertions of the OP. This part, however, is interesting:


The Court initially chose to resolve this matter under seal to protect Concord’s interests
and enable a candid discussion of the redactions to the Special Counsel Report. However,
Concord now objects to that decision and requests that the Court unseal the May 28, 2019
hearing transcript, the Court’s May 29, 2019 Order, the parties’ supplemental briefs, and
presumably this decision as well. Concord’s Supp. Br. at 11–15. The government has requested
an opportunity to brief the issue before the Court decides whether to unseal these portions of the
record. Gov’t’s Response to Concord’s Supp. Br. at 9.
Before acting on Concord’s request, the Court will give the government an opportunity to
file an objection and propose any redactions if the materials are to be released. If the
government objects to releasing the materials, in whole or in part, it should address in its
opposition the public’s right to access those materials and any First Amendment concerns that
might arise from maintaining them under seal.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it is
ORDERED that Concord’s motion for an order to show cause why Special Counsel
Robert S. Mueller, III and Attorney General William P. Barr should not be held in contempt is
DENIED;
ORDERED that the Court’s May 29, 2019 Order shall remain in effect through trial;
ORDERED that, on or before July 5, 2019, the government shall file under seal any
opposition to Concord’s request to unseal (1) the May 28, 2019 hearing transcript, Dkt. 144; (2)
the Court’s May 29, 2019 Order, Dkt. 137; (3) the parties’ supplemental briefs, Dkts. 139, 140,
142, 143; and (4) this Memorandum Opinion and Order. Concord shall file any response to the
government’s opposition on or before July 11, 2019. Both parties shall include in their
respective filings any proposed redactions to these materials in the event they are released.

 

JakeStarkey said: Mueller's integrity has held up just fine, there is no case for contempt charges, and anyone's arguments attacking Mueller's conduct are flatly wrong. Bullet Bob did not let Trump slither away, thank heavens. He is still on the hook.

Trump is hooked and he can't slip it.

 

Mueller has a criminal record. Team Weissmann scored another conviction! Bob Mueller's.

 

Mueller violated criminal statute CR 57.7 it's indisputable. Per supporting what I claimed, which was Mueller barred from implyin Russia / Kremlin / Spies "sweeping systematic" ... note that the court ruling cites specific statements made publicly, and or released to MSM. The content of those statements / releases is the "sweeping systematic" spiel that resulted in the defense motion, and the courts order prohibiting that "sweeping systematic" Russia / Kremlin / Spies narrative from being repeated. The story and facts do not begin and end with judge Friedrich decision.

 

Negative

 

Mueller certainly could be disbarred concerning his actions both in the report and his public statements.

 

Negative. You are incorrect.

 

So you don't believe in any standards for lawyers. Fascinating.

 

I do. Mr Mueller didn’t violate anything from your paragraph.

I am fascinated by the fact today’s Republicans will go to great lengths to support and defend our enemies, while attacking our war hero's.

 

LOL, he did exactly that in part 2 of the report and by linking a Russian company to the Russian government with zero proof.