...and that's why he didn't interview any of the Trumps. Particularly Jr in relation to the Trump Tower Meeting.

I know everyone says ignorance of the law is not a defense. That's really not the case. US law is massive and complicated. It's impossible to expect anyone to be familiar with all of it.

I think he didn't waste time on Jr. because Jr. really was too stupid to know what he was doing was wrong. To get an indictment and conviction he would have had to convince the grand jury and then Jr.'s lawyers to take a plea. He'd have to make the case Jr. knew what he was doing wrong and still did it anyway.

As much as I dislike Jr. I'd be pretty hard-pressed not to believe that he was ignorant of what he was doing.

a private citizen by then, presumably. I may be missing something, but I don't think he would be able to specify or select any questions.

... that question.

This is some bullshit

I'm disappointed in Mueller

Follow the finances and see if Donnie was up to his ears in Debt to people who want to be paid back in Rubles????

No direct interviews of Trump Family syndicate ???

What exactly did Flynn do to go scott free....?????

there is an ongoing process to determine if Congress will get the underlying evidence, and that process does not involve him. Hence, he is not able to discuss that information -- unless the Congress gets access to it, either by negotiation with the DOJ or by way of the judicial system. It is important to understand that he is not saying he has made the decision to not address things other than the report. That is the current DOJ policy.

And read my post again. I am correct. It's really simple.

... he didn't qualify his words.

If that's what he means I'd like to hear it from him but for right now I have his answer "... ANY appearance before congress."

There's a guy on FAUX News right now saying totally opposite of what Mueller said this morning and is currently stating Mueller would've said there were crimes if there were crimes.

That's not what Mueller said and what you're saying is not what Mueller said.

Mueller said ... "...in any appearance before congress"

are not only opting to ignore all that he said, you are refusing to.

.... when I have transcripts right in front of me.

you see Mr. Mueller saying about the issue of the underlying information that Congress is seeking, and if he is in any way involved in the current negotiations between Congress and the DOJ.

Then, without emotion, apply that in a rational manner to what you are focused on. Keep in mind that Mr. Mueller is going by DOJ policy, as he notes.

.... before, please no second hand accounts.

As I said, look at what he said specifically about the underlying evidence, and the negoiations between Congress and the DOJ. It's pretty simple. No "second hand accounts" needed. Just a quote that you continue to ignore:

"In addition, access to our underlying work product is being decided in a process that does not involve our office."

Also -- not second hand -- Mr. Mueller stated at least three times that he is guided by DOJ policy. You know that the DOJ has NOT turned over that information. Hence, Mr. Mueller believes -- no matter if you or I think he's right or wrong -- that he is prevented by the current DOJ policy. Until there is a resolution to the conflict between the House and DOJ, he will not answer those questions.

This does not mean the sky is falling. The courts will resolve it in the Democrats' favor.

... and I'm literally sick of trying to figure out what a grown ass'd man is supposed to be saying.

I'm even sicker of hearing other people interpretations

I do understand this

And the report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before congress

I got the same pushback.

... telling congress that he's not going to give testimony is some bullshit.

How in the world do we make an iron clad case if the lead investigator is saying he's not going to talk.

I want to see and hear it. I don’t want to read 400 pages. Maybe I’m dyslexic, or maybe, my eyesight is poor. Or my reading comprehension isn’t the best. Or whatever.

... would socialize 10 times faster than anything read

getting that to congress. someone posted a transcript. I remember it though - since I was thinking, just like Slate article said, just take the report, with the evidence and draw up articles and boom - impeach. Don't even worry about dragging the people in. Just get it on the record and move on to protecting the next election.

Sorry, that's my interpretation

Plus what's floating around on the news channels:

'A question of is impeachment right or will it work.'

Rep. Gerry Connolly, VA, member oversight committee, poses why didn't Mueller subpoena dump like Clinton was subpoenaed. This guy was well spoken/versed in his position. Cool guy.

Mueller resigned. Now subpoena 'him' as a private citizen.

Obstruction was committed by vividly actively attempting to shut down the 'investigation'.

Why wasn't dotard, jr. called to testify.

Congress does not have the full unredacted report. So Mueller can't testify to the redacted parts (the parts not made public). Mueller isn't involved in legal fight to get the full unredacted report.

He doesn't want a dog and pony show or getting into things that don't really help Congress do its job.

I think he gave the public statement for the benefit of the public. So the public can hear it straight from him, his findings about Russian interference, conspiracy, and obstruction. He recognized that the public was misinformed or misunderstood the findings. So straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Oh, well. Now it's Congress's turn.

... some privileged BS there and it's not up to him to tell congress what's help for their jobs.

Congress can't make an iron-clad case against Trump when the investigator says he's not going to talk to congress.

that's some bs right there

today was repetitive. This is new. This says to Congress basically “I’m not telling you anything.” It means you will never even know why the investigation wrapped or who gave the order.

... Mueller disappointed me on this.

Mueller is pretty thorough. I think he probably would say, or hint, that there was more to do, more people to talk to, if he hadn't done all that he needed to do.

But whatever the reason, it doesn't help Congress do its job to know if Barr ordered it to be concluded, which is possible.

... that anything Barr says should be taken at face value

NOTHING

forget about Barr, forget about process - just move forward. But, you are right - we may never know what happened. It's fishy as hell, for sure. He probably wasn't even done. Sickening. But, unless he goes broke, and writes a book...? He seems WAY too anal and straight to want to go out and have a beer with.

Why read when you can watch FOX?

And I wasn't referring to you. Pretty much all of us here have read it. And we don't have to see Mueller testify, but the knuckledraggers came to their senses in '74, and it's worth a shot today.

... but I don't think Mueller is helping by not answering the 1000's of questions that his report brings up.

Do you think it would make a difference if he read the public parts aloud? The House Democrats already did that. I wonder how many people tuned in to CSPAN to watch. I didn't (but I don't have cable).

The public is going to watch this public statement, at least. It's much shorter than a hearing and is on the cable news.

Mueller’s summary and his conversations.

1. He can't talk about the redacted stuff because it's redacted.

2. If he did, the question would come up, why is that not in the report? Then it would be either, it's not relevant or it was redacted.

3. He can't talk about the "other stuff" because it doesn't involve his office (or his previous office, if you will).

4. BUT he did say it's all in there -- which to me is a hint that Congress should insist on the report being un-redacted.

As far as whether he meant he wouldn't talk to Congress, I'm not going there. I don't like to second-guess people.

... and congress has clearance for what needs to be talked about

Or deals with a reason for impeachment?

... and proxies?

That and 1000 other questions

And so many here on DU defending him not to answer.

I don't get it.

... at the end of his presser.

The presidential historian on MSNBC said he doesn't think Mueller would ignore a subpoena, of course Mueller wouldn't. Mueller would just say he's not going to answer questions about A, B or C and leave it at that then dare congress to take the next steps.

This is some bullshit right here, if Mueller thinks America's election systems are still vulnerable then he should be screaming from the mountain tops.

We are under attack and these times call for the extraordinary.