mueller did not vindicate the president. he found there was not enough evidence to charge the campaign with conspiracy. he did not clear the president of obstruction of justice. he certainly didn t label his own investigation a witch hunt. in fact, he said the exact opposite. your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it? it is not a witch hunt. sarah sanders is just not it s not a witch hunt. mueller testified under oath that the president lied in his written answers to questions. director mueller, isn t it fair to say that the president s written answers were not only inadequate and incomplete because he didn t answer many of your questions, but where he did his answers showed he wasn t always being truthful? there i would say generally and there s more. more lies from this administration. and let s face it, it starts at the top.
month, but she didn t leave the lying behind. look at your screen. falsely claiming today that robert mueller vindicated the president. falsely claiming no collusion, no obstruction and falsely claiming that mueller admitted his investigation was a witch hunt all along. all of that in one tweet. and none of it is true. not one word. not one word. mind-boggling. the fact is remember, facts first here. mueller did not vindicate the president. did you watch the hearing? mueller did not vindicate the president. he found there was not enough evidence to charge the campaign with conspiracy. he did not clear the president of obstruction of justice. he certainly didn t label his own investigation a witch hunt. in fact, he said the exact opposite. your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it? it is not a witch hunt. sarah sanders is just not
was there sufficient evidence to convict president trump or anyone else with obstruction of justice? we did not make that calculation. how could you not have made the calculation because the olc opinion, office of legal counsel, indicates that we cannot indict a sitting president. could you charge the president with a crime after he left office? yes. you believe that he committed you could charge the president of the united states with obstruction of justice after he left office? yes. mueller continued his testimony before the intelligence committee, where the focus was his findings about russia s efforts to meddle in our 2016 presidential election. as that hearing got under way the chairman made a point of refuting trump s attacks on mueller and his conclusions. when donald trump called your investigation a witch hunt, that was also false, was it not? i d like to think so. yes. well, your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it? it is not a witch hunt.
obstruction of justice. is that correct? that is correct. was there sufficient evidence to convict president trump or anyone else with obstruction of justice? we did not make that calculation. how could you not have made the calculation because the olc opinion, office of legal counsel, indicates that we cannot indict a sitting president. could you charge the president with a crime after he left office? yes. you believe that he committed you could charge the president of the united states with obstruction of justice after he left office? yes. mueller continued his testimony before the intelligence committee, where the focus was his findings about russia s efforts to meddle in our 2016 presidential election. as that hearing got under way the chairman made a point of refuting trump s attacks on mueller and his conclusions. when donald trump called your investigation a witch hunt, that was also false, was it not? i d like to think so. yes. well, your investiga
done wrong. he says no wrongdoing and all it takes is a look at the court docket to see that that s pulse and mr. mueller said the opposite just hours before. he and others pointing to the convictions or guilty pleas from paul manafort deputy rick gates, president s first national security advisor michael flynn, dozens of indictments. for the hoax and witch hunt allegations, he addressed that, as well. when donald trump called your investigation a witch hunt, that was also false, was it not? i d like to think so, yes. well your investigation is not a witch hunt it is not a witch hunt. when the president said the russian interference was a hoax, that was false, wasn t it? true. when he said it publicly, it was false? he did say publicly that it was false, yes. so not a witch hunt, not a hoax, either. as for the president s claim repeated twice this afternoon that nothing was done wrong, definitely not what mueller found.