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

His report and his testimony.

 

His report could not have violated any court order. He delivered a confidential report to Bill Barr. Mueller didn't make it public. So that is one down.

The judge said that Mueller was very careful in his press conference on May 29 NOT to violate 57.7. Do you have a quote from Mueller's testimony that you say is a breach of 57.7? The fact that he talked about Russian interference isn't enough. He talked about that in his press conference and the judge said that was fine.

 

A report he anticipated would be released and written with that in mind.. Read the OP and link.

 

An investigative report. Again even the Judge disagrees with you.

 

It is really ridiculous. These RW blog sites are the biggest purveyors of fake news and their followers lap it up, get proven wrong then rush back for more lies.

 

He violated a court order that's why. We can all violate court orders now?

 

If that has to be explained to you I can't help you.

 

So did Barr. The judge is letting it slide. Who cares?

 

It was Mueller's investigation which Barr was reporting, Mueller is the one in hot water. I don't think the judge has issued a ruling.

 

And in excruciating detail too.

 

Parsing, oversimplifying and selective fact choices do not make a true narrative.

The Mueller Report does not contain false claims about Russian government involvement. Quite the contrary, there are 200 pages of it, with footnotes and appendices.

The judge dismissed the DNC lawsuit because the plaintiffs named could not be prosecuted under US law, not because there was no merit to the charges. And, due to the fact that many major players in the Trump/Russia affair were cut outs or operatives without official title, or employed by the campaign, the judge could not assess the direct criminality of Trump because there isn’t a smoking gun (yet).

We’ll wait till Don Jr tries to take the Fifth before the House Judiciary or Intelligence Committees.

And that day is coming.

 

The OP has not been supported conclusively.

 

Seems to me this is legal hairsplitting at it's finest...

Mueller can refer to "Russians" when it refers to Concord or the IRA but not if it references any possible connection between the Russian government and those companies??

Is that a fair summary??

If that's the case, I think what he said to Congress in both occurences in the OP are fine, since nobody brought up the Russian government. When Mueller says Russians, it's in direct answer to the questions about the IRA, which is a known Russian company.

I guess going forward, the only way to avoid this issue and be safe is to say Russian companies when referring to Concord and the IRA...

 

No it's called cutting to the chase and I note you didn't refute what I said

Read what the judge said it did not contain instead of your strawman.

Because they were not involved in a crime as party to obtaining. Had it not been been dismissed as meritless then every newspaper that posted them could be charged with a crime.

There was no Trump/Russia affair as Mueller's investigation and Rosenstein's statement when he issued the indictment clearly stated.

What is the purpose of calling him before Congress again? Was he charged with a crime by Mueller?

 

Indicted Company in Junk Russian Bot Case Slams Mueller AGAIN in Court Filing — Spent ONLY $3,000 in Online Ads That Mueller Claims Disrupted Election!