WSJ Blasts Robert Mueller, Says Step Down for Lack of Credibility! Shut It Down!
The – so far – $7 million dollar Mueller witch hunt needs to be shut down and the Wall Street Journal agrees. In a scathing editorial Monday, the Journal called for Mueller to be fired over his lack of credibility.
The Wall Street Journal editorial page called for Robert Mueller to step down. This is surprising because the newspaper has been the lead anti-Trump newspaper but not now.
On Monday, the Journal excoriated Special Counsel Robert Mueller and the FBI for withholding information from Congress about the firing of a top agent who reportedly sent anti-Trump messages.
Briefly, Mueller reassigned a top FBI agent, Peter Strzok, over the summer after it was discovered that Strzok had sent anti-Trump, pro-Hillary text messages, The New York Times reported over the weekend. Mueller kept it secret from Congress since July.
We have discussed Strozok several times on this site but, generally, the probably corrupt agent led all the investigations against Trump and Hillary.
“Mr. Mueller and the Justice Department kept this information from House investigators, despite Intelligence Committee subpoenas that would have exposed those texts,” the Journal wrote in an editorial published Monday. “They also refused to answer questions about Mr. Strzok’s dismissal and refused to make him available for an interview.”
The Journal also takes issue with the fact that the woman – his mistress – who Strzok reportedly exchanged the text messages with, FBI lawyer Lisa Page, worked for Mueller and deputy FBI director Andrew McCabe.
“All of this reinforces our doubts about Mr. Mueller’s ability to conduct a fair and credible probe of the FBI’s considerable part in the Russia-Trump drama,” they wrote. “Mr. Mueller ran the bureau for 12 years and is fast friends with Mr. Comey, whose firing by Mr. Trump triggered his appointment as special counsel. The reluctance to cooperate with a congressional inquiry compounds doubts related to this clear conflict of interest.”
The editorial called upon Mueller to step down “in favor of someone more credible.”
In fact, all of Mueller’s team lacks credibility.
Sarah Carter, an investigative reporter for Circa news, previously emerged as one of the handful of people to review documents obtained by an undercover FBI informant embedded in the Russian uranium industry.
Appearing on Hannity’s show Monday night, Carter was asked about rumors of more anti-Trump sentiment expressed by Mueller’s team.
Sean Hannity said, “I’m hearing rumors all over the place Sara Carter that there are other anti-Trump text-emails out there. And we know about them.”
Carter responded, “I think you’re hearing correctly Sean and I think a lot more is going to come out. In fact, I know a lot more is going to come out based on the sources I’ve spoken to.”
Mueller has also stacked his entire team with Democrats and Obama-Clinton donors.
- Andrew Weissmann: Weissmann is a Barack Obama and Democratic campaign donor, according to federal records. “Weissmann, who led the Enron investigation, previously gave $2,300 to Obama’s first presidential campaign in 2008 and $2,000 to the Democratic National Committee in 2006
- Jeannie Rhee: donated $5,400 to Hillary Clinton in 2015 and 2016, according to FEC records. The records show she gave $2,500 each to Obama for America and Obama Victory Fund 2012 in 2011
- Andrew Goldstein: According to Fox News, “Goldstein contributed a combined $3,300 to Obama’s campaigns in 2008 and 2012”
- Greg Andres: FEC records show that Andres has donated at least $2,700 to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
- James Quarles: Donated thousands of dollars to the campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. He has also donated money recently to other Democrats, including Friends of Chuck Schumer and two other Democrats. He has a lengthy donation history dating back years. He did donate to two Republicans over the years, however.
- Elizabeth Prelogar: A former law clerk to Justics Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagen, gave $250 to Hillary Clinton in 2016, according to FEC records. She also gave $500 total to Obama for America and the Obama Victory Fund 2012.
- Brandon Van Grack: gave small amounts to ActBlue, an effort to raise money for Democrats, and to a Democratic candidate for Congress in 2012. In 2008, he gave about $286 to Barack Obama.
- Rush Atkinson: donated $200 to Clinton’s campaign in 2016.
- Kyle Freeny: In 2012, Freeny gave $300 to Obama. In 2008, Freeny also gave $250 to Obama, FEC records show.
There are no pro-Trump supporters on the team.
This investigation never should have happened. Former FBI Director James Comey needs to be probed for obstruction of justice. He is the one who corrupted the FBI by going to such lengths to protect Hillary Clinton.
The collusion probe started with the Obama administration and the Hillary campaign. It is corrupt and meant to overturn the duly elected President.
https://www.independentsentinel.com/wsj-blasts-robert-mueller-says-step-down-for-lack-of-credibility-shut-it-down/
Tags
Who is online
71 visitors
Robert Mueller was a bad choice to lead the investigation. His credibility is now in doubt. Between damaging leaks, biased agents, unethical procedures and Mueller's choice of legal staff, this investigation looks more & more like what Donald Trump has called it - A witch hunt.
There is going to be more coming, you can bet your bippy and your significant others also....
Like I've said, this isn't over by a loong shot......
But such is the case with political trials....
HANG HIM FROM THE . . . . . . . . (insert whatever location you deem acceptable)
Ridiculous.
Weissman is a massive partisan hack with a long record of convictions overturned on appeal on his resume. No scruples about ruining lives for headlines whatsoever.
Trump should fire Mueller before the mid-term campaigns start.
Mueller hired people with experience and good reputation in their fields. I don't expect he investigated their political donations before bringing them on the team. Why would he?
4 Trump associates or aides have now pled guilty to crimes related to the campaign or 'Russia'. No doubt there are more to come. Were these four framed by Mueller? rofl.
Trump does a good job brainwashing his followers, but we have to ask the question - how hard is that really?
Given a choice, would you plead guilty to a charge you didn't commit and bankrupt your family and see your kid put in jail, or take a slap on the wrist and save your son and what's left of,your money?
once the Feds are involved, the process is the punishment. Guilt or innocence is only of secondary concern when the Feds decide to put you through the ringer. A partisan hack with a track record of over zealous prosecutions like Weissman can make a mountain out a molehill simply by getting witnesses to look out for their own interests and avoid ruining their lives by the monstrous expenses of going to trial. Flynn, for instance, already racked up a million in legal fees before trial. The motivations to simply get out of the process is overwhelming.
Sean, Donald Trump is the most corrupt man to ever hold the office of the presidency. He is not going to be saved by conservative booshwa.
You know better than to keep up this charade every day. Some of these nuts may convince themselves that trump is innocence, but I think you know the truth.
Did you ever read the twitter feed of Flynn and his son?
Did you feel this way about all the investigations into Hillary and, Bill Clinton or, is that only reserved for the Trump Administration?
Do you actually think that Mueller would let Flynn plead to the lesser charges and would go easy on his son for NOTHING in return?
That's fallacious reasoning John. Yes, there are two pleas for lying to the FBI. About contact with Russia. BUT, it was contact AFTER the election. Not related to the campaign. And the other two, money laundering well before the campaign, and they haven't pled guilty.
The very fact that Mueller has only been able to get two for lying to investigators (again, AFTER the election) and two for alleged crimes committed years ago is very telling. It tells us that there is NO case for collusion before the election. If there were, they would be doing plea deals FOR THAT.
Kind of like Obama appointed circuit judges with experience and good reputation in their fields and the rule of law doesn't mean anything to them either.
So now y'all are believing what the NYT and HuffPo report now? Sheesh, I just can't keep up on what y'all think is FAKE NEWS and what is the god's truth.
You didn’t read the title. The article discussed in the seed is from The WALL STREET JOURNAL not any of the traditional liberal media.
False.
Yet there isn't a readable link to the WSJ article is there? The links are to reports by Huffpo and the NYT of a WSJ article. I for one, much prefer to go to the source of the information and work from there. I don't need one reporter to tell me what another reporter wrote.
But hey, y'all believe what you want, just admit that you are relying on Huffpo and the NYT's veracity for that belief.
Oh and BTFW, the WSJ cites the NYT as a source too.
You do realize that in order to read any article from the WSJ directly, you have to pay for the privilege, correct?
Well, then sign up for a subscription to the WSJ or watch it fade about the time you get interested in it. Occasionally, you can break through from a tweet and read the whole article or just pick up a WSJ in a hotel.
Your comment refutes the accuracy of mine how exactly?
You are the one saying you don't want to read what one journalist has to say about another journalist's article from a different publication. I am just pointing out that most of the time with the Wall Street Journal, you can only read it directly with a subscription so for most people they have to read what is published about those articles by another publication.
Not that I expect a truthful answer, but the question is did the members here who commented on the seed read the ORIGINAL article from the WSJ or did they rely on the FAKE NEWS media links in the seed?
Oh and BTFW tom, I read WSJ articles almost every day and don't pay a dime for 'the privilege. There is more than one way to skin a corporation.
Actually, what I said is that I don't NEED one reporter to tell me what another reporter wrote.
Your post and all the comments here prove that the members on the right actually don't have a REAL issue with 'liberal' sources as long as they parrot the WSJ. I find it hilarious that you and yours would rather jump through hell fire than just ADMIT that for all the bitching and whining about FAKE NEWS, you RELY on those very sources to tell you what your beloved WSJ has to say.
You did so, in a back door way, so I'll give you that...
BTW, you COULD pony up the bucks but like I said, there IS a way to get around their corporate greed. Google it. [BTW, that's a hint]
Did the prosecution tell Flynn’s lawyer that their main witness against him was removed for bias? Since Strzok led the interview and his testimony would be needed to establish untruthfulness, he is a critical witness not just a prosecutor. If not disclosed, would this not be a Giglio violation? This is the kind of misconduct that can get a case dismissed and a lawyer disbarred. It is a Constitutional violation.