https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212302747richsonpoordad (83 posts)
I am alarmed! I must take a different view about the Mueller potential testimony. Hear me out.
First, Mueller has shown us who is THE FIRST TIME.
The best way to expose the American public to his final report would be to produce an historic documentary on the report itself. This could be done in a series of 3-4 parts with all the extravagant hoopla that sensational documentaries are produced. Here is how:
Two weeks worth of trailers and ads all over the major network, including FOX.
Then have every line of the report read in response to all the questions the Committees would like to ask, the way they want to ask them without the caution that they will have to use when questioning Mueller live. Here is an example:
Mr. Mueller, did AG Barr's summary accurately portray the results and conclusions of your report when he suggested that President Trump had been exonerated? (Then have a legitimate attorney from the Committee read the actual language from the report in response.) NO, "If we had been able to exonerate the President.... etc.?
This kind of presentation is more understandable to ordinary people and those who believe movies or entertainment productions rather than facts and truth.
Trump is a reality performer and his bas and most others accept him as such. The problem lie in the fact that most reality TV viewers accept everything they see on TV as reality. And, that is how the Mueller report would be accepted if produced as a reality TV show.
I am uneasy with Mueller having to respond to questions from the GOP in front of millions of people. He has already shown that he is reluctant to speak any more about his findings and Barr than he already has. It's an unknown venture with an unpredictable outcome and therefore very dangerous for the Democrats.
If the report is shown as a prime time special over the course of 3-4 nights there is the added advantage of having water-cooler talk at work sites, and time over the cours of the series to allow people to go check various sections of the report for themselves just to verify if what they are seeing is true.
I am wary of a Mueller testimony when he has already said he doesn't want to do it.
Yes!!!! A documentary! With "extravagent hoopla!" Brilliant idea. That would avoid the pesky little issue of the Republicans being allowed to ask any questions to get info that the DUmmies don't want the American people to know. We can have someone with a James Earl Jones voice read "every line" of the actual report in response to the questions. Who wouldn't demand impeachment after hearing THAT?
Hoyt (38,528 posts)
9. Hope to hell someone on Committee actually read the Report and Barr's Summary before stepping in it.
For example, Barr's Summary specifically says Mueller did not exonerate trump.
Here's the language from Barr's Summary:
"After making a “thorough factual investigation” into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards regarding prosecution and conviction but ultimately determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment. The Special Counsel therefore did not draw a conclusion — one way or the other — as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as “difficult issues” of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction. The Special Counsel’s report states that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
______________
Why give Mueller a chance to say, "Congressperson, maybe you ought to read the documents you are asking me about."
Further, Barr's summary specifically admits Russia interfered in the election through a Disinformation campaign and hacking.
I think trump's campaign did conspire/coordinate/collude with the Ruskies, but Mueller's Report concludes exactly what Barr said in his summary: As the report states and Barr quoted in his summary: “[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
I think Barr did err in his summary that if there is no underlying crime, there can't be Obstruction. But, even Mueller's Report gives trump an out with respect to that.
And, Obstruction loses some of its impact unless we get Mueller to make a point that Obstruction kept the investigation from determining pertinent facts. That's one of the questions that our Party needs ask Mueller pointedly.
If the Committee doesn't get to the heart of the matter, this aspect of Impeachment is likely dead after Wednesday. Personally, at this point, I think we have a better shot investigating other matters regarding Impeachment such as Presidential racism, dereliction of duty, campaign finance irregularities, attempting to prosecute political opponents (like Clinton), advocating violence, breaking treaties, incompetence in office, disregarding Presidential functions, abuse of power, violating free speech, and a whole lot more.
I had no idea Hoyt had this level of common sense.
