ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 2 of 6
< 12 3456 >
Washington DC and The Holy Land>Mueller was pursuing FBI director job
Marcellus 06:13 PM 10-08-2019
:-) speaking of lies, look who just got caught lying and who was telling the truth.

Poor Donger.


Originally Posted by :
Mueller was pursuing FBI director job when he met with Trump in 2017, administration officials say.

EXCLUSIVE – Multiple administration officials tell Fox News that when Robert Mueller met with President Trump in May of 2017, Mueller was indeed pursuing the open post as the director of the FBI – something the former Russia probe special counsel denied under oath during congressional testimony this summer.

These officials also told Fox News government documents showed Mueller was pursuing the job as a candidate himself.

It came as emails released this month through a Freedom of Information Act request by the conservative group Judicial Watch seemed to indicate Mueller knew there was a real possibility he could be named special counsel if he wasn’t chosen as the next FBI director.


“The boss and his staff do not know about our discussions,” then-Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein said in an email to Mueller on May 12, 2017. Rosenstein’s boss was then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who had recused himself from the Russia probe, meaning the president would not have known either.

A source close to Rosenstein confirmed to Fox News that he had confidential conversations with Mueller about whether he would be willing to serve in the event he needed to appoint a special counsel. These conversations began on May 12, 2017, prior to Mueller's meeting with the president on May 16, 2017, the source acknowledged.

At the time of the now-famous May 16, 2017 meeting, James Comey had been fired as FBI director just days before and -- unbeknownst to the president -- Mueller would end up being named special counsel the very next day to oversee the Trump-Russia probe.

The president has repeatedly claimed that Mueller – who served as FBI director under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama – met with him about returning to lead the Justice Department. The president has pointed to this to argue it was a conflict for Mueller to become special counsel, saying he opted against hiring Mueller as FBI director.

But Mueller, in his July congressional testimony, denied the claim, saying he believed he was giving “input” to the president about the position.

“My understanding was I was not applying for the job,” Mueller said on July 24. “I was asked to give my input on what it would take to do the job.”

John Dowd, who served as the president’s attorney during the probe, ripped Mueller for meeting with Trump, calling it the “most dishonorable conduct I have ever witnessed.” He added, “Capt. Robert Mueller, USMC, sits in front of his commander-in-chief being interviewed for FBI director knowing he is going to investigate the president and never says a word.”

The president himself has claimed there were “numerous witnesses” to the meeting.


"It has been reported that Robert Mueller is saying that he did not apply and interview for the job of FBI Director (and get turned down) the day before he was wrongfully appointed Special Counsel" Trump tweeted the day of Mueller’s Capitol Hill testimony. "Hope he doesn't say that under oath in that we have numerous witnesses to the interview, including the Vice President of the United States!"

Mueller did not immediately return a request for comment from Fox News on Tuesday.

It was announced earlier this month that Mueller rejoined the WilmerHale law firm, after concluding his work as special counsel.

In April, Mueller’s team released a report about their findings, indicating they did not find evidence of coordination between the 2016 Trump campaign and Russia while declining to reach a conclusion on whether the president's conduct during the probe amounted to obstruction.


[Reply]
petegz28 08:51 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
It isn't the "hearsay" by unnamed people...It's that those people aren't even giving any proof. It's basically just their opinion--whether it's an honest opinion is unknown, but at least in that article, they don't don't even try to support it with anything.
Hmm, you mean hearsay like when someone without firsthand knowledge claims they know something???? :-)
[Reply]
cosmo20002 08:52 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
If an anonymous Trump official says it, you can take it to the bank. Unless it’s a CNN story and then it’s probably fake.
Again, I'm not even harping on that aspect. It's that the anonymous people aren't even offering anything more, apparently, than an opinion.
[Reply]
petegz28 08:54 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
Again, I'm not even harping on that aspect. It's that the anonymous people aren't even offering anything more, apparently, than an opinion.
Huh, where were you for the entire Russia hoax??? :-)
[Reply]
cosmo20002 08:54 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Hmm, you mean hearsay like when someone without firsthand knowledge claims they know something???? :-)
You have no idea what hearsay is. You're just babbling.
[Reply]
patteeu 08:58 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
Again, I'm not even harping on that aspect. It's that the anonymous people aren't even offering anything more, apparently, than an opinion.
It’s not hard to envision that there’s documentary evidence in existence that might inform their opinions. Maybe Mueller’s office exchanged letters with the Trump personnel people to set up the meeting that explain the reason, for example. I get that no evidence is offered, or even described, but it’s not obvious that the story is based on the mere opinion of a random observer.

But obviously we’d need to investigate and develop the case before prosecuting Mueller for perjury. :-)
[Reply]
petegz28 08:59 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
You have no idea what hearsay is. You're just babbling.
Tapping out already?

Hearsay

the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.
[Reply]
cosmo20002 09:02 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by patteeu:
It’s not hard to envision that there’s documentary evidence in existence that might inform their opinions. Maybe Mueller’s office exchanged letters with the Trump personnel people to set up the meeting that explain the reason, for example. I get that no evidence is offered, or even described, but it’s not obvious that the story is based on the mere opinion of a random observer.
/thread
[Reply]
petegz28 09:05 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
/thread
Dude are you really this fucking stupid? Do you realize how you are literally shooting holes in just about every argument you have made over the last several years???

It's fucking impossible you don't realize this....
[Reply]
mlyonsd 09:06 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
/thread
And now the great white knight of CP, the one with no hypocrisy, deems the thread over.

Everyone should hang their heads in shame. Time to move on.
[Reply]
cosmo20002 09:07 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Tapping out already?

Hearsay

the report of another person's words by a witness, which is usually disallowed as evidence in a court of law.
That's a partial, incomplete, description, but do you see any relevant hearsay in the article posted? By even bringing it up, you're just babbling.
[Reply]
petegz28 09:08 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by mlyonsd:
And now the great white knight of CP, the one with no hypocrisy, deems the thread over.

Everyone should hang their heads in shame. Time to move on.
He cannot be so clueless to not realize he nuked his own position in just about every argument he has made over the years, can he?
[Reply]
petegz28 09:09 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by cosmo20002:
That's a partial, incomplete, description, but do you see any relevant hearsay in the article posted? By even bringing it up, you're just babbling.
No, it's called hypocrisy which you are guilty of several times over.
[Reply]
cosmo20002 09:09 PM 10-08-2019
Originally Posted by petegz28:
Dude are you really this ****ing stupid? Do you realize how you are literally shooting holes in just about every argument you have made over the last several years???

It's ****ing impossible you don't realize this....
Pointing out that the article doesn't offer or even describe any evidence doesn't shoot holes in anything I've said.
[Reply]
BanHam 09:17 PM 10-08-2019
Mueller interviewing for the FBI Director position was very well reported -

- NPR provided another detailed report.


> The Trump White House had been considering Robert Mueller as a top candidate to lead the FBI before the deputy U.S. attorney general changed course and tapped Mueller to serve as special counsel investigating Russian interference in last year's election, two sources familiar with the process told NPR.

Mueller had gone so far as to meet with Justice Department leaders and White House officials about the FBI job, which opened after President Trump fired Director James Comey on May 9.


https://www.npr.org/2017/06/09/53228...ntent=20170609
[Reply]
GloryDayz 09:18 PM 10-08-2019
:-)

Mueller getting that job is a laughable as Comrade Ding-Dong being accepted into the military. Two thing the nation should be thankful never happened.
[Reply]
Page 2 of 6
< 12 3456 >
Up