Connect with us

Politics

Mueller’s investigation has gone off the rails [Video]

There should be more folks in the media questioning the legitimacy of the Mueller investigation.

Published

on

Robert Mueller

It’s been over a year now and special counsel Robert Mueller still hasn’t found any evidence of Russian collusion, or malfeasance from the Trump campaign, or of any crime linking Trumpworld to the Russians.

At this point it’s beginning to become clear that Mueller’s investigation has gone off the rails, and as former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani pointed out in a recent CNN interview, Mueller’s original mandate has been completed so there is no reason for his team to still be operating.

Trending: What Does Bill Gates Plan to Do After He Vaccinates the World Population?

Rudy Giulianithere are two different investigations, right? The counterintelligence investigation is now over for over a year. 

take our poll - story continues below

Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?

  • Is the Biden Administration Destroying Our Constitution?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Flag And Cross updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

And they weren’t disclosing it to anybody. Immediately, that raises questions in my mind, why not? I think why not because it clears the president. 

Then you get the Comey thing, which is a leak of a confidential memo, which is illegal for an FBI official to do, and that becomes the basis for appointing Mueller. 

I’m not saying Mueller is illegitimate. I’m saying the basis on which he was appointed is illegitimate. Now let’s look at the indictments.

Dana Bash: But you think — I just want to separate — so you think that the Mueller probe is legitimate?

Rudy Giuliani: I — not anymore. I don’t.

I did when I came in. But now I see — I see spy gate. I see the judge, Judge Ellis, in Manafort saying…

Dana Bash: But — but what you call spy gate, you admit, happened before Robert Mueller was — was brought on to the scene.

Rudy Giuliani: But it has to — but it has to inform the decision to appoint Mueller. Either it is evidence or not.

And if it’s not, it goes along with what they found already, which is no collusion with the Russians.

Dana Bash: It might have informed it, but it wasn’t the beginning…

Rudy Giuliani: So, we end up with…

Dana Bash: I just want to point one other thing out, because I know that you and the president have talked about that as well, that even the Republicans in the House, when they did their report, they said that the reason that this — the main reason that this probe was launched was because of George Papadopoulos, who was on the president’s foreign policy council, an — an encounter he had with somebody in Australia, not because of this confidential informant.

This is from the Republicans in the House.

Rudy Giuliani: I think — I think, actually, the explanation for — for — for Mueller is mainly Comey.

Comey said he wanted an independent counsel. Comey said he was going to orchestrate one. Comey wrote a memo and leaked it illegally through a professor.

Hence, we have Mueller. Illegal. No basis.

Now, whatever the spy gate thing is, we are just learning about that now. I wouldn’t come to any definitive conclusions on that. And Papadopoulos was part of that whole spy gate thing as well, so it kind of gets all intertwined.

But the two indictments that you point are really pretty questionable. Manafort, before Judge Ellis, maybe no authority for that indictment. That would be extraordinary. That would ruin the whole investigation.

Second, the Russians…

That’s a pretty phony indictment. They are not showing up for anything.

You think they are coming here to be — to be tried? That is like a paper indictment on which the press can fawn all over it, and it will be nowhere.

Dana Bash: How are you so sure that there was no collusion with anybody in the campaign? We don’t know exactly what Robert Mueller and his team has right now. Do you know something we don’t?

Rudy Giuliani: Well, yes. I know 50 years of investigatory experience tells me they don’t have a darn thing, because they would have used it already, and they wouldn’t be off on collusion, they wouldn’t be off on Manafort, they wouldn’t be off on Cohen.

You got a good case, man, you go right to it, against — and against the president of the United States, you got something, and you don’t start charging it? Come on. It would be out there immediately.

Dana Bash: Well, maybe not necessarily against the president himself, but people in his orbit. You are confident that there was no collusion?

Rudy Giuliani: I — I can’t — I can’t be confident my client.

I mean, am I — am I confident because I was in that campaign at a very intimate level? Nobody talked about Russians. Nobody knew about Russians. This came as a surprise to me, to the president, and to the top four or five people around him.

Now, you go out to the outer orbit, how do I know what is going on? But I don’t think that would matter. You can’t — if there is collusion with a guy 50 rungs down on the campaign — not that I’m saying it happened, but, if it did, I don’t know — I don’t know what that means.

White House advisor Kellyanne Conway made a similar argument on Tuesday, calling the investigaiton “phony baloney” because, “collusion” isn’t actually a crime!

“So much is happening that has nothing to do with this phony baloney talking about the 2016 election. Every time people talk about this phony Russia collusion — collusion doesn’t even have legal significance — every time it’s written by responsible people, every time they talk, they are talking about the 2016 election. And so we don’t want to talk about the 2016 election.

The other thing I wanted to mention to you while we’re still on the 2016 election, Hillary Clinton — or that person who lost the election and never should have — she had said I’m going to put the coal mining out of business… [with] that usual scowl. Guess what? President Trump has presided over 84,000 new jobs for loggers and miners.”

I think that both Giuliani and Conway have good points, and that there should be more folks in the media questioning the legitimacy of the Mueller investigation.

 

News

Apple Backs Down, Will Allow Parler Back on App Store

The news is seen as a major boost for the First Amendment.

Published

on

Free speech is a fickle thing, and precious too.  If we’re not careful, it can be stripped away but those who hide behind the claim that a “private” company can limit your personal freedoms. Twitter, Facebook, and other social media platforms are almost always the culprits here, bending the algorithmic reach of those with whom they disagree. Enter Parler:  A free speech app where only the bare legal minimum of content would be moderated. The platform became incredibly popular with an astonishing swiftness, but soon faced trouble from companies who had previously aligned themselves with Facebook and Twitter’s more controlling stance. Apple, who had previously booted Parler from its App Store, has now relented to the Constitution. Apple has approved Parler’s return to the iOS app store following improvements the social media company made to better detect and moderate hate speech and incitement, according to a letter the iPhone maker sent to Congress on Monday. The decision clears the way for Parler, an app popular with conservatives including some members of the far right, to be downloaded once again on Apple devices. The letter — addressed to Sen. Mike Lee and Rep. Ken Buck and obtained by CNN — explained that since the app was removed from Apple’s platform in January for violations of its policies, Parler “has proposed updates to its app and the app’s content moderation practices.” On April 14, Apple’s app review team told Parler that its proposed changes were sufficient, the letter continued. Now, all Parler needs to do is to flip the switch. The news is seen as a major boost for the First Amendment.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Oath Keeper Leader Claims Police are Training Militias for ‘Civil War’

And the FBI seems to agree with him!

Published

on

At the very end of the first term of Donald Trump’s presidency, we were as close to a civil war as this nation has come in over a dozen decades, and we may not fully appreciate that yet.  We are, perhaps, too close to the events themselves to fully understand just how narrowly we escaped a broader calamity, but we must try to remain vigilant still. Especially if what one of the leaders of the Oath Keepers says is true. The far-right paramilitary the Oath Keepers is home to active-duty law-enforcement officers who are training up other members to prepare for civil war, according to one of the group’s top figures. CBS News’ 60 Minutesprofiled the the increasingly notorious militia on Sunday night, and one of its leaders from Arizona, Jim Arroyo, spoke openly about the close involvement of police officers. “Our guys are very experienced,” said Arroyo. “We have active-duty law enforcement in our organization that are helping to train us. We can blend in with our law enforcement and in fact, in a lot of cases, our training is much more advanced because of our military backgrounds.” And the government seems to already be away of this. Arroyo’s statement was backed up by Javed Ali, an ex-National Security Council senior director and FBI counterterrorism official, who said the Oath Keepers are a “unique and challenging” threat to the U.S. because a “large percentage have tactical training and operational experience in either the military or law enforcement. That at least gives them a capability that a lot of other people in this far-right space don’t have.” Several members of the Oath Keepers were arrested during the January 6th Capitol riot, as they attempted to prevent the certification of the results of the 2020 election by Congress.

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Best of the Week