General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHas anyone read Muellers op ed in the Washington Post?
If you have a subscription can you give us the gist?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/07/11/mueller-stone-oped/
marybourg
(12,650 posts)onecaliberal
(33,012 posts)Pantagruel
(2,580 posts)"Mueller Breaks His Silence: Roger Stone Lied Repeatedly
The former special counsel responds to Trump.
DAN FRIEDMAN
Reporter
Breaking a year of public silence, special counsel Robert Mueller defended his investigation in an op-ed published Saturday in the Washington Post. Muellers piece ran a day after President Donald Trump commuted the three-year prison sentence of Roger Stone, his longtime adviser. In announcing the move, the White House asserted that Stone, who Muellers office prosecuted last year, is a victim of the Russia Hoax that the Left and its allies in the media perpetuated for years in an attempt to undermine the Trump Presidency.
The work of the special counsels officeits report, indictments, guilty pleas and convictionsshould speak for itself, Mueller wrote. But I feel compelled to respond both to broad claims that our investigation was illegitimate and our motives were improper, and to specific claims that Roger Stone was a victim of our office.
Last November, a jury convicted Stone on five counts of making false statements to the House Intelligence Committee, obstructing a congressional inquiry, and witness tampering. Mueller noted Saturday that the jurors determined [Stone] lied repeatedly to members of Congress. He lied about the identity of his intermediary to WikiLeaks. He lied about the existence of written communications with his intermediary. He lied by denying he had communicated with the Trump campaign about the timing of WikiLeaks releases. He in fact updated senior campaign officials repeatedly about WikiLeaks. And he tampered with a witness, imploring him to stonewall Congress.
Muellers op-ed, like his report last year, is bland and avoids taking direct shots at Trump. But the former FBI boss did explain why the Trump-Russia investigation and Stones lies to Congress were significant.
Russian efforts to interfere in our political system, and the essential question of whether those efforts involved the Trump campaign, required investigation, Mueller wrote. In that investigation, it was critical for us (and, before us, the FBI) to obtain full and accurate information. Likewise, it was critical for Congress to obtain accurate information from its witnesses. When a subject lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the governments efforts to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable. It may ultimately impede those efforts.
onecaliberal
(33,012 posts)W_HAMILTON
(7,878 posts)Russias actions were a threat to Americas democracy. It was critical that they be investigated and understood. By late 2016, the FBI had evidence that the Russians had signaled to a Trump campaign adviser that they could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to the Democratic candidate. And the FBI knew that the Russians had done just that: Beginning in July 2016, WikiLeaks released emails stolen by Russian military intelligence officers from the Clinton campaign. Other online personas using false names fronts for Russian military intelligence also released Clinton campaign emails.
...
Congress also investigated and sought information from Stone. A jury later determined he lied repeatedly to members of Congress. He lied about the identity of his intermediary to WikiLeaks. He lied about the existence of written communications with his intermediary. He lied by denying he had communicated with the Trump campaign about the timing of WikiLeaks releases. He in fact updated senior campaign officials repeatedly about WikiLeaks. And he tampered with a witness, imploring him to stonewall Congress.
...
We made every decision in Stones case, as in all our cases, based solely on the facts and the law and in accordance with the rule of law. The women and men who conducted these investigations and prosecutions acted with the highest integrity. Claims to the contrary are false.
Actually, it's a pretty short op-ed and somewhat disappointing in that it wasn't more forceful, given that this is the first time Mueller has spoken out publicly on these subjects, I believe.
onecaliberal
(33,012 posts)TreasonousBastard
(43,049 posts)Excepts":
onecaliberal
(33,012 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
orwell
(7,781 posts)...for his silence over Barr's "public interpretation" of his report.
And while I'm at it, screw that asshole Comey as well for his part in handing the Orange Julius Caesar the election.
Too little...too late!
Brother Mythos
(1,442 posts)Further, I'm under the impression that Comey actually believes he's some kind of a hero.
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)career suicide to see if he'd get caught. Nor did his presumptive successor in the position at the pinnacle of both their careers.
denbot
(9,901 posts)As for the gist, it was poker night and I'm kinda drunk so on top of my A.D.D., um.. no.