Alan Dershowitz Discusses the Conniving Political Duplicity of Team Mueller…

Alan Dershowitz is exactly correct on the point; but he’s incorrect on the Mueller team’s motive.

Team Mueller didn’t punt the Obstruction issue to the Attorney General because Mueller’s a coward…. Team Mueller punted the Obstruction issue because they specifically wanted to create room for The House to work an impeachment angle.  It was a political decision.

This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 4th Amendment, 6th Amendment, AG Bill Barr, Big Government, Big Stupid Government, Conspiracy ?, Decepticons, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Dept Of Justice, Election 2016, Election 2020, FBI, media bias, Nancy Pelosi, Notorious Liars, President Trump, Russia, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

243 Responses to Alan Dershowitz Discusses the Conniving Political Duplicity of Team Mueller…

  1. Pyrthroes says:

    We just hope Trump dishes out to Rat dung-beetles one-tenth the measure these seditious creeps and thugs tried meting out to him.

    Liked by 13 people

  2. Mueller and Hillary’s imbeded assault lawyers knew they didn’t have a collusion or Russian conspiracy case well over a year ago, so they started charging people with any ridiculous thing they could think of and began using gestapo tactics in an attempt to goad the president into firing the SC so they could manufacture a Nixonian “Saturday Night Massacre” fantasy scenario and potential obstruction charge. . . , but Trump did not take the bait.

    As W.C Fields would say:
    “You can’t cheat an honest man”

    Congratulations President Trump.

    Liked by 18 people

    • apcharles says:

      Exactly right!

      This was all designed to lay a trap… as far back as during the election when they were trying to goad Trump into colluding with Russians.

      I have no doubt the Russians did nothing. And that every single claim of election interference was on the part of the Deep State, who then tried to frame the fingerprints of it on to Trump and Russia.

      Liked by 10 people

    • rozi814 says:

      All of them knew, including Mueller, that there was no “collusion” from the get-go. That’s why they needed all the traps along the way.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. JonS says:

    Mueller is a worm. Hope he visits with McCain soon

    Liked by 4 people

  4. mr.piddles says:

    “[…] leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as ‘difficult issues’ of law and fact […]”

    Hey, Bob. Bob-O. Isn’t that what you get paid the Big Bucks for, there, pal? To figure out those “‘difficult issues’ of law and fact”? Feel like I didn’t get my money’s worth.

    Liked by 7 people

    • Actually I think Barr did make the call–as he says, along with Rod Rosenstein, to not charge after SC Mueller left the question open.
      His logic about whether to charge for Obstruction of Justice is impeccable–no crime, most purported “actions” in public (probably tweets), and overall any action does not meet the guidelines used for such charges.

      The fact that the Left would ignore that is not surprising–remember that rules are for “the little people”—or anyone not in their sphere.

      And again, Barr was absolutely correct to retain Rosenstein so that he can be on the hook for this decision, as well as helping to find the 6(e) and other materials from Mueller’s report that cannot be made public.

      DeGenova told us that Barr was a good guy and I”m seeing the evidence to back-up DeGenova’s claim.

      Liked by 9 people

      • dallasdan says:

        SD is exactly on-point:

        “Team Mueller punted the Obstruction issue because they specifically wanted to create room for The House to work an impeachment angle. It was a political decision.”

        Barr’s pronouncement will have no affect on the House Dems’ contemplation of impeachment charges for obstruction of justice, notwithstanding Pelosi’s recent downplaying of impeachment action.


        • AZboy says:

          Pelosi realizes that pushing impeachment is a losing proposition for the Dems. But the far left is gonna push it.

          Liked by 1 person

          • John-Y128 says:

            “Pelosi and Schumer say Barr’s letter ‘raises as many questions as it answers’. According to Barr’s letter, Mueller’s report does not exonerate President Trump “on a charge as serious as obstruction of justice,” and this “demonstrates how urgent it is that the full report and underlying documentation be made public without any further delay,” the Democratic leaders said. “Given Mr. Barr’s public record of bias against the special counsel’s inquiry, he is not a neutral observer and is not in a position to make objective determinations about the report.”


            • Dwayne Diesel says:

              I see a different angle here. I think the move to have the AG say there was no “obstruction” is a smart play being used to goad the Democrats. Look at a how many of them are calling for the full report to be released.

              You can’t release the full report with out releasing all of the other information. The whole can of worms…..Now when that happens, the Dems will say it’s just a political move to muddy the waters….yet, now the White House can say “I’m just doing what you wanted….making the evidence public. Sorry but not sorry”

              Liked by 1 person

            • elmo686 says:

              So, the Democrats want documents? I think it’s time for slow walk and heavy redaction. Two can play that game.


              • Phillie_fan62 says:

                No elmo, They want the whole thing ? Give it to them! Along with all the 302’s and the FISA applications ALL unredacted! They will literally Schiff their pants when there are names and dates of just who tried to pull this lie off.It will be fun to watch them squirm!


              • mutantbeast says:

                I know what Documents the presdient should show. How about declassyfying everything? The FBI info on the Weiner, the Awan Brothers and what Admiral Rogers provided Trump back before the election.

                Liked by 1 person

      • cheryl says:

        The NY Times completely left out Rosenstein’s name when reporting who made the decision leaving the lefties who read that rag to think that Barr did it alone.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Amber says:

        I agree with your assessment of Barr Wisdom. This victory is sweeter than the 2016 Election because for the first time in his presidency Trump has a REAL Attorney General. He was handicapped from the beginning with Sessions. I am very optimistic about the future, the ball is firmly in Trump’s court


    • Anonymous says:

      Barr putting “difficult issues” in scare quotes is a slap at Mueller. Barr is (gently?) mocking him, saying, in effect: “difficult”? Really??

      He then proceeds to explain why it’s not a difficult issue.

      Liked by 4 people

      • mr.piddles says:

        Even if there are “difficult issues”… you don’t say “ohhh there are so many difficult issues, I just don’t know what to do”. Like, what are ya, soft? This freaking guy was the Director of the FBI at some point. He was conducting a full counterintelligence investigation against a sitting U.S. President. And he hits us up with… “ohhh.. it’s sssoooooooooo hard… sssoooooo many ‘difficult issues’… oohhhh… it’s just soooo hard to figure it all out…”. STFU, Bob.

        Dersh is right: this is Comey Playbook Redux. Guess we shouldn’t be surprised. Seriously, WTF is wrong with those people?

        Liked by 4 people

        • mutantbeast says:

          All LAWYERS. You want to see what happened with BOTH the FBI and CIA, they are all crooked lawyers now. Muleturd, Comey, Baker, Strzok, McCabe Page Preistep, StinkWray. ALL lawyers. Cops are needed there, not stinking lawyers. If the FBI needs a purge, bring back decent cops like Jim Kallstrom or Bill Gavin, Men who actually know how to run a proper investigation, not a political witch hunt.


  5. Michael Hennessy says:

    Mueller didn’t make a mistake on the Obstruction Waffle. He intentionally threw another turd in the bowl for Nadler and Schiff-less to feast on for the upcoming 2020 election!

    Mueller is a coup co-conspirator!

    Liked by 9 people

    • NoWayInHell says:

      Mueller is a politician ,and reportedly a corrupt one. He’s doing what they do. The mistake was to have assumed that he was some kind of an impartial judge. The only chance of finding an uncorrupted judge would be to o look among the general public, not from among people in important positions of power.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Caius Lowell says:

      Mueller is a friend of Dubya’s so is an anti-American globalist like Obama and Jeb! (please clap)…

      Liked by 1 person

    • glissmeister says:

      He deferred the decision in re obstruction to Attorney General Barr. There was no good faith basis to go into the dissembling about “does not exonerate” in doing so. It’s for Barr to decide. Mueller admits and asks for that to happen. Then he drops a big stinking turd about exoneration in the punch bowl.

      It seems malicious, petty and it perhaps rises to the level of professional malpractice. It’s difficult to explain as a good faith rhetorical convention.

      Liked by 1 person

    • B Woodward says:

      Mueller left some “waffle” regarding the obstruction issue in order to give the Democrats an opening for an impeachment charge. And neither Rosenstein nor Mueller did what federal law requires. If they both did what the law requires there never would have been an illegal special counsel conducting an illegal investigation of the President. Rosenstein’s appointment of the Mueller was illegal. Federal law 28 CFR 600.1, states that “The Attorney General … will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted…” Rosenstein did not identify a crime to be investigated. And the DOJ regulation does not authorize a special counsel to be appointed for a counter-intelligence investigation. Mueller was also disqualified from being the special counsel because of his conflicts of interest (28 CFR 600.7). Mueller is best friends with James Comey who was a key player in the FBI’s illegal spying on Trump. That alone legally disqualifies Mueller.


    • Phillie_fan62 says:

      Just remember this. Mueller IS involved in the uranium one deal! Let that sink in a bit. This whole thing was put in place in my eyes to 1 get Trump out, 2 cover for Hillary, and 3 cover for the U1 deal long enough till trump got impeached and it would go away. FAILED BIGLY on all points.


      • Ned Zeppelin II says:

        Mueller was not called, in, he is not a henchman, he was not surprised to learn there was no colluison, nor was he surprised about Strzok and Page texts fevealed by Horowitz when they were members of his SC posse: he is a leader of rhe Soft Coup. In up to his hairy eyeballs. Crooked.


  6. L-dave says:

    What was obstructed? The investigation went on and exonerated the president?

    Liked by 7 people

  7. Y’all Know What Time It Is says:

    Scrubbing Page and Strzok’s phones before dismissing them is obstruction of justice

    Liked by 16 people

  8. Derek Hagen says:

    Dersh’s whole schtick from the beginning has been to create credible cover for Hillary. Never trusted him.

    Liked by 6 people

  9. parleyvous says:

    If the finding is there was no collusion and no crime…. it is ABSURD that there is any “obstruction” for an imaginary crime.

    Liked by 4 people

    • parleyvous says:

      My comment does not mention Mueller, has nothing to do with him, just stating a fact about anyone pushing an obstruction charge now.


    • Finbar O'Shaunnessey says:

      Greg Jarrett said it best. It’s like the prosecutor saying that the verdict was not guilty, but the defendant was not found innocent. Cheap shot.


  10. TMonroe says:

    Bridge on the River Kwai is on TCM Monday at 5PM

    Liked by 2 people

  11. mr.piddles says:

    Thinking Outside The Box… Mueller’s “Obstruction-No-Obstruction” is actually not such a bad thing.

    Consider: he just unwittingly took a 90-Ton Excavator to that particular Rabbit Hole, and the Dems appear to be more than willing to jump (fall, really) right down to the bottom of it. So predictable. I call it: Fuel For The Dumpster Fire. Entirely by accident, of course.

    How many weeks of “Obstruction Delusion” are we looking at now? Months? It’ll be the hot topic. And there will be testimony. And media coverage. And interviews. And great gnashing of teeth. And more testimony. And more interviews. And more media coverage. And Impeachment Fervor will grow to a crescendo. It will be all-consuming. And the 2020 Candidates will have to talk about it. And talk about it. And talk about it. And talk about it. And at some point if they refuse to talk about it they will be asked: “Why do you refuse to talk about it?” And Pelosi will lose control over the “2020 Message”. They already don’t have a “2020 Message”, but by the end of this thing they will be in negative territory. Negative message. Which, bizarrely, is somehow better than no message whatsoever, but I digress…

    Liked by 1 person

  12. wageslave231 says:

    All roads lead to Rodham & Gomorrah.

    Liked by 7 people

  13. California Joe says:

    Remember that Rosenstein made the decision with Barr that no obstruction of justice occurred and Rosenstein was responsible for starting and continuing the Mueller investigation. In addition, how could the exercise of your Constitutional right to free speech and to defend yourself against criminal charges by publicly speaking out that no crime was committed and the investigation is a witch hunt be obstruction when in fact no crime was committed and the investigation turned out to be a complete witch hunt!

    Liked by 3 people

    • mr.piddles says:

      Maybe somebody could text Sessions, let him know he’s no longer recused.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Toenail says:

      California Joe, your comment only makes sense to those that have common sense. Many others see black as white and wrong as right. I doubt this ability to see upside down will change soon for these folks.

      Liked by 1 person

    • CNY3 says:

      @California Joe Add to that the fact that it was Rosenstein who was accused of wanting to wiretap Trump to have the 25th Amendment invoked to remove the president. From the title of the Time mag article:

      “McCabe Claims Dep. Attorney General Rosenstein First Brought Up Invoking the 25th Amendment Against President Trump”


  14. Bluto says:

    Mueller couldn’t find anything against Trump but he had to get in one last dig before he was done with his wording.

    “…while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

    Well, Mueller, like Comey before him, has no authority to convict or exonerate anyone. His job was to investigate the issues involved and present the facts to the Attorney General.

    One fact that was presented was that no American was involved with Russian collusion or Russian hacking. Consequently there was no crime to prosecute against any Americans (the ones indicted have been because of process or other unrelated crimes).

    Logically, it seems to me that if no American including Trump is guilty of collusion then Trump himself can’t be guilty of obstruction. Why? Because, if there was no collusion, what would be Trump’s motive to obstruct justice? On the contrary, he would want quick justice to prove the innocence the he knew all along.

    Liked by 2 people

  15. coolmamie says:

    No way I think Mueller is a white hat. The evidence against that idea is too long to list.

    My theory is that the offense against Mueller (past cases like Richard Jewell, etc.) combined with the revelations about Spygate, the mysterious beginnings of the entire “collusion” affair, the various testimonies being released (ohr, sztrok, page, have made it seem highly probable that the coup players are going to be revealed and charged.
    Mueller was almost certainly going to be implicated with them. This (almost) total exoneration of Trump was his only way out.

    Had Nunes and company not persevered in uncovering this deep state abomination – had the players maintained the feeling they were getting away with it – Mueller’s report, in my opinion, would have been damning.

    I see Mueller’s report as pure self-preservation. His deniability for being a part of the the Treasonous Deep State.


    • Mark McQueen says:

      I’m willing to give AG Barr credit for forcing Mueller to play it (mostly) straight in the end.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Hap Hazard says:

      Whatever he did before doesn’t really matter. Like you say, the FACT is, Mueller successfully set the stage, and probably helped arrange for, the exposure of Sztrok and company. It is pure speculation that Mueller’s report would have been any different no matter what the Congress did.


      • Ned Zeppelin II says:

        There is no way on God’s Green Earth that Mueller is a white hat. Look at his team and who is on it. That is enough to set you straight. Almost as deranged as TRUST THE PLAN and TRUST SESSIONS.


  16. Cpdesert says:

    If so, then the Dems continue down their road to nowhere, Trumps popularity soars,he declassifys the docs he’s been sitting on and gets re-elected in 2020.


  17. roccoboy1 says:

    Not sure if this has come up as haven’t had time to read through all the comments. If so, I apologize.

    This is what burns me up about Dershowitz. He constantly throws out this ostensibly even handed approach crap. That’s how he has repeatedly positioned the obvious Hilary criminal behavior and contrasted it to Trump, saying we shouldn’t go after political opponents. BUT THERE WAS NO CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR BY TRUMP- this is how he lightens the load team Hilary is carrying by putting some of Trump side – and cleans it up and appears even handed. Makes it sound like going after Hilary for real charges is the same as going after Trump for bogus charges.

    So tonight he dares to contrast the outlining of wrongdoing by Comey re Hilary with outlining of “obstruction” by Trump by Mueller???? And then says its the same thing and thereby all a wash. There was no effing obstruction!!!! It’s not the same effing thing.

    Mueller is a total weasel and this phrase “cannot exonerate” on obstruction was put there to be used exactly as it is being used by every MSM. It is so despicable and disgusting.

    Liked by 3 people

    • rayvandune says:

      Dersh is trying to create a “soft landing”, and not just for Hillary, but for the whole rotten cadre at the core of the Democrat Party. I say SLMA – “Soft Landing My Ass”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Dershowitz was on RT’s Worlds Apart with Oksana Boyko a few weeks ago and admitted that his book about “The Case Against Impeaching Donald Trump” actually began as “The Case Against Impeaching Hillary Clinton.”
        He thought in the buildup to the election with the chants of “Lock Her Up” that there would be pressure from the right to pursue some investigation as punishment for her winning the election. He just tweaked it a bit, changed his tune, and found some fans on Fox News.


  18. mike diamond says:

    Mueller,should be investagated!l!


  19. What say you DIRTY Robert Swan Mueller III…Your report sounds just like a ‘1L’ Law student Essay.
    Folks, DIRTY Mueller is just like all the rest of the Obama admin. CRIMINALS…….They are, as Jimmy Comey likes to say….[WEASELS.]
    ~Obstruction of Justice has to show (Beyond a Shadow of a Doubt) the Intent of Pres.Trump & there was NONE because this was a FAKE-CHARGE.~


  20. rayvandune says:

    Mr. President, I. WANT. SOME. BUTTS. !!


  21. spoogels says:

    Wow! This is major.

    BREAKING:Rep. Devin Nunes says House Intel has evidence Clinton operatives & hi-level FBI & DOJ officials started Trump-Russia investigation in “late 2015/early 2016” &that House GOP will be making criminal referrals to AG Barr for officials who “perpetuated this hoax” for 3+ yrs

    — Paul Sperry (@paulsperry_) March 24, 2019

    Liked by 4 people

  22. spoogels says:

    How to end our national nightmare — probe Hillary Clinton again

    Liked by 1 person

  23. dallasdan says:

    You have a very active and creative imagination. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  24. spoogels says:

    Read Paul Sperry’s twitter
    Some amazing stuff there:

    Liked by 1 person

    • Cindy says:

      Yeah, we know the bs about what the obstruction part was. The Russian/Hillary joke on the trail (Hey russia, if you got the 30,000 emails), the firing of Comey, the tweets…etc. All bs.

      Liked by 3 people

  25. Cindy says:

    The takeaway is that Mueller was conflicted. He refused to disparage the FBI or Comey and thus left it up to DOJ/Barr to discern. It was a cop out but understandable. No one wants to be a rat and so you leave the garbage up in the air. It’s life.

    Mueller was the wrong guy to lead the special council and like CTH stated… the perps chose him and counted on this conclusion.


  26. The Boss says:

    Dershowitz aside, did Mueller’s astute political calculation include in its result that the country will be treated to months of practically nonstop coverage of the utterances of two absolutely repulsive individuals – Nadler and Schiff? These two vomit-inducing pigs will be the faces of the socialist-democrat cabal, sucking all oxygen from the shitshow primary contestants. Toss in token angry black, Asian and Polynesian socialist-democrats of all ages and genders and Americans will reject the whole lot of them.

    Like a navy veteran interviewed in Virginia Beach said: “The [socialists] lost an election. Then they lost their minds. Americans have had enough.”


  27. Doo-Dah, Doo-Dah says:

    For some background on the Steele Dossier, please see this AMAZING dissection from just-over a year ago:

    There’s a lot of meat here. My first-blush takeaways:
    1) Good Lord, look what it’s possible to search for –and FIND– online if you have the tools! Faces, locations, educational backgrounds, club memberships … just – wow.
    2) Look how WIDESPREAD the *actual* collusion among the anti-Trumpers was. Many-dozens of people from all around the world.
    3) The author guesstimates it would have taken $5 million to $10 million to finance this effort to “delegitimize” Trump. WHO put up the money?
    4) If all these perception-bending, influence-peddling, media-seeding “PR” companies out there have been this successful in persuading Joe and Jane Average that “Trump is corrupt” etc, etc — what ELSE have they been able to persuade us is “just simply true by common knowledge”??

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Gary Lacey says:

    Help me out here, obstruction of justice, and pray tell what could that be, they are talking about the commander-in-chief? For firing Comey? For what???


    • Lost says:

      Tweeting mean things about Mueller. I’m not joking. According to mainstream reports, that’s one of the things that they assessed for obstruction.


  29. Nowut Ameen says:

    No conclusion on obstruction? Doesn’t there have to be justice before it can be obstructed? Trump was assaulted, insulted, attacked, disparaged every day for three years. Where is the justice? Now after Mueller crawls in to deposit his mealy-mouthed report, the Dems threaten more investigation until they reach the conclusion they announced the day Trump won the election.

    But the pendulum now swings in the other direction….

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Toenail says:

    I have read a lot of absurd and ridiculous comments but saying Mueller is a white hat tops the cake. He has been attached to several slimy activities and his Gestapo tactics clearly place him in the most contemptible of the black hat positions. Nope mot buying the white hat thing.


  31. CNY3 says:

    The issue I have with Dershowitz’s comparison to Comey is the fact that HILLARY SHOULD HAVE BEEN INDICTED. There was a “blood” and “DNA” trail 100 miles long. They never actually INVESTIGATED her like they did Trump. 2 yrs and $35Million later, nothing on Trump. Let us try even 6 MONTHS with the same amount of attorneys and staff to investigate Clinton and I am sure they will turn up all kinds of 💩 to indict her.


  32. Papoose says:

    How can one be ‘exonerated’ from something for which there is no charge? No evidence?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s