قالب وردپرس درنا توس
Home / US / When is Robert Mueller's testimony and what will the congress ask? : NPR

When is Robert Mueller's testimony and what will the congress ask? : NPR



Special Representative Robert Mueller meets in June 2017 in the US Capitol for a non-public meeting with the legislator. Mueller is back on Wednesday to testify in front of two House committees on his 201

6 election disruption findings.

Alex Wong / Getty Images


Hide caption

Caption switch

Alex Wong / Getty Images

Special Representative Robert Mueller will meet in June 2017 in the US Capitol for a closed meeting with the legislator. Mueller returned on Wednesday to report to two House committees on his 2016 electoral failure results.

Alex Wong / Getty Images

Former Special Adviser Robert Müller announces on Wednesday before Congress and the legislature has so many questions that he may not have enough time to put them all.

The House Justice and Intelligence Committees have scheduled hearings for 8:30 am and 12:00 pm.

Democrats and minority republicans are expected to do their utmost to get the most out of Müller in very different ways.

Congress members have already postponed Mueller's hearings once to get more time. The matter is complicated by Mueller himself, who has stated that he intends to limit his testimony to what he has already stated in his report.

In addition, the Ministry of Justice sent a letter to Mueller on Monday evening hoping that Mueller will not go beyond what is publicly known about his work, citing the privilege of executives.

This will not stop congress members from trying.

Here are some of the questions you might ask, broken down into the majority and minority members of these committees.

Democrats: Summarize Your Findings

A basic goal for Judiciary Committee chairperson Jerry Nadler, DN.Y., is to make Müller say what he does on TV already said in dry writing.

The Special Representative's Office uncovered an unprecedented wave of "active measures" initiated by Russia against the 2016 elections to prevent the election of Hillary Clinton and assist Donald Trump in taking office.

It documented a series of contacts between Trump's election campaign and Russians and certain a series of what Democrats call questionable measures that Trump had taken before and after the elections.

Democrats have tried to push the expectations of Müller's great new revelations beyond the scope of his findings.

Republicans: Did you find a plot with the Trump campaign?

What's good for the goose is good for the viewer. Doug Collins, R-Ga., Member of the Judiciary Committee, probably wants his own healthy bite, which he knows will be given by Müller.

He wants the former special adviser to say that he has not identified a criminal plot between the Trump campaign and the intervening Russians. That was a conclusion from Volume I of the Müller report.

What will be more difficult for both Democrats and Republicans, the results of Volume II of Müller's report, in which the Special Representative expressly Trump did not stop the judiciary from interfering. The report denounced non-cooperative witnesses – including Trump himself – and referred to the Justice Department's policy prohibiting him from bringing charges against a seated president.

Müller later stated in his own brief statement to the Department of Justice that he never considered this an impeachment option against Trump.

Attorney General William Barr has since said that he agrees that Mueller Trump could never have charged – but Barr believed that Muller could have said whether he considered a charge necessary.

This will likely emerge in the hearings.

Mueller's own view was that it would be unfair for Trump to give an opinion on charges, even if the special prosecutor can bring them in. The immunity of the president also means that he could never have a day in court to defend himself against any accusation, Müller believed.

This intricate node of legal interpretation could make it more difficult for members of the majority and minority of the committee to reach a purge rebound against Muller.

Democrats: What have you not investigated?

Müller has resigned and his work is over. However, the Democrats are eager to maintain the momentum to encourage their own ongoing investigation into Trump.

The President and his followers have referred to Müller's findings and referred to them as the last word about alleged impropriety. Trump has said, for example, that he assumes that Müller received his tax returns and concluded that nothing is wrong.

Now Democrats will have the opportunity to ask Müller if that's true or not. The answer could have some of the biggest long-term political implications for Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., And her majority.

If Müller says in so many words that his report is a clean health certificate for Trump, it means a new headwind for the Democrats 'investigations and heightens the opponents' criticisms that they are just new fishing expeditions.

When Müller clears the way for the judiciary, the intelligence service, and other committees to push ahead with the work begun, the Democrats would like to take the torch from him.

But remember: The Justice Department has made it clear that Müller should not discuss aspects of the investigation that were edited and not released for public consumption. Republicans: Who are you to "relieve" someone? Trump, White House staff and their supporters in Congress argue that Mueller has violated the most basic responsibility of a prosecutor: check that there is sufficient evidence of a violation of the law, and seek an indictment in this case.

If not, not.

It is not the job of a state prosecutor to write a report on results without charge, and it is not his job to "sort out" anyone, Mueller's critics argue. Everyone should be acquitted in the US system unless he or she is found guilty.

But Mueller wrote this: "This report does not exclude that the president has committed a crime, but he does not relieve him." [19659008] So, not only White House lawyers Müller have been accused of reporting – "Part of the Truth Commission's report" and part of the law school's examination paper ", as attorney Emmet Flood mocked – Congressmen probably wanted to ask Müller why he got so far

Democrats: Do you want to say now if you would accuse Trump?

Look for Majority Democrats to achieve the opposite.

Barr, the Attorney General said he considered the way to be free to say if he believed that Trump deserved justice in connection with the alleged disability of criminal charges – with the restriction that there could be no real charges.

All right, Nadler and his colleagues can tell Müller: They're not just v on the payroll of the Ministry of Justice, your own former boss has said he does not mind you giving an opinion. Even if the Justice Department's guidelines kept you from accusing Trump, would you do it?

In other words, would anyone who did the things you found for Trump face criminal charges?

Republicans: Why did you remove Peter Strzok? [19659008] The melodrama with Strzok, formerly one of the best FBI espionage specialists, and Lisa Page, formerly one of the best FBI solicitors, was one of the most embarrassing subplots in Imbroglio, Russia for the FBI.

Strzok and Page exchanged a series of open political text messages on their government phones in 2016 when they were involved in an extramarital affair.

When the investigators discovered all this and made the story and its messages known, it was criticized that the Russia investigation was the result of a "bias" by an insider kale looking for Trump.

Müller removed Strzok from the Special Representative's office when he was informed about the SMS. Expect republicans to invite him to tell this story early and frequently – and to make them aware of why they should accept something of an office that included Strzok and others who criticized for their political "bias" were.


Source link