Velo Vol
Internets Expert
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2009
- Messages
- 36,853
- Likes
- 17,289
That is a rare statement from Mueller's office and a very "lawyer-ish" denial. Hard to know what exactly to make of it.
That is a rare statement from Mueller's office and a very "lawyer-ish" denial. Hard to know what exactly to make of it.
It stunk when it came out last night. It wonโt be much of a surprise when it turns out to be a dud.
The real question is who leaked it. And why was Buzzfeed the chosen outlet?
It was fun watching the frenzy, though.
Iโd bet money it didnโt come from Muellerโs office.
Nothing Cohen has is material to Trump/Russia or Mueller would block him from speaking to Congress.
We don't know what to make of that statement because it is purposely ambiguous. Mueller's office does not dispute the core allegation made in the report - that Trump asked Cohen to lie to Congress about the Trump Tower Moscow Project. It targets "specific statements" and the "characterization of documents" from the BuzzFeed report. Fox News is getting just as "far ahead of their skis" by interpreting this as a full exoneration of Trump, as we were last night in assuming that there was corroboration.Let me make sure I understand. Last night we were pretty certain Trump was guilty of an impeachable offense based on unsubstantiated hearsay.
But we cannot be sure what to make of an official statement from the man who was supposedly responsible for digging up said allegations.
Am I understanding correctly?
We don't know what to make of that statement because it is purposely ambiguous. Mueller's office does not dispute the core allegation made in the report - that Trump asked Cohen to lie to Congress about the Trump Tower Moscow Project. It targets "specific statements" and the "characterization of documents" from the BuzzFeed report. Fox News is getting just as "far ahead of their skis" by interpreting this as a full exoneration, as we were last night in assuming that there was corroboration.
The problem is, that statement from Mueller's office does not specifically state what information it is contradicting. That statement could have "categorically" denied everything contained within the BuzzFeed report. It didn't. They split hairs in a very "lawyer-ly" fashion.Itโs just funny to me.
A statement with no substantiated evidence that amounted to nothing more than hearsay was taken as gospel.
But an official statement from the prosecutionโs office contradicting the dubious article is parsed to draw conclusions that support the very source the statment invalidates.
Makes sense, brother!
The problem is, that statement from Mueller's office does not specifically state what information it is contradicting. That statement could have "categorically" denied everything contained within the BuzzFeed report. It didn't. They split hairs.
I suggest you read the statement again because you are seeing something that isn't there. It was written in a vague prose to say the least. That is how lawyers write when they want to dispute "something" in a report but not "everything". That was not a categorical denial of the BuzzFeed report.OMFG the mental gymnastics you numbnuts are going thru trying to rationalize how this isnโt a straight up dagger into the heart of this BS story is priceless!! Please keep it up for the rest of the evening!!!![]()
OMFG the mental gymnastics you numbnuts are going thru trying to rationalize how this isnโt a straight up dagger into the heart of this BS story is priceless!! Please keep it up for the rest of the evening!!!![]()