Did Mueller Commit Perjury During House Testimony?

Have you ever watched a kid on Christmas morning, standing in front of a Christmas tree and all of the presents around that tree? As a rule, they have a look of want and anticipation, longing to find out what gift they will receive.

That was the same look on the faces of many Democrats last week, the day that Special Counsel Robert Mueller was to testify before two House committees. They were eagerly anticipating the receipt of a great gift from Mueller – the gift of information that would allow them to move forward with impeachment charges against President Donald Trump. Democrats were certain that this day was going to change the course of history in America as well as knowing that they were going to be able to eliminate their greatest political foe – Trump.

By the end of the first House committee hearing, Democrats believed they had part of what they wanted when Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) asked Mueller:

“The reason that you did not indict the president is because of the OLC opinion that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?”

Mueller responded:

“Correct.”

Democrats were dancing with glee, until the beginning of the second committee hearing when Mueller opened up with:

“I want to add one correction to my testimony this morning. I want to go back to one thing that was said this morning by Mr. Lieu, who said and I quote, ‘You didn’t charge the President because of the OLC opinion. That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the President committed a crime.”

Now that Mueller had just dashed the hope and anticipation of Democrats, it was reported by Fox News:

Mueller denied that Trump’s assertions that the investigation was a “witch hunt” and insinuated that the Trump campaign welcomed Russian aid to help them win the 2016 election. He also warned that election interference by foreign agents was not a thing of the past saying, “They’re doing it as we sit here and they expect to do it during the next campaign.” [emphasis mine]

In this statement, Mueller not only revealed his Democratic partiality, but he may have in fact committed perjury before Congress.

Why do I say this?

In June 2019, it was reported:

“After nearly three years and millions of tax dollars, the Trump-Russia collusion probe is about to be resolved. Emerging in its place is newly unearthed evidence suggesting another foreign effort to influence the 2016 election — this time, in favor of the Democrats.”

“Ukraine’s top prosecutor divulged in an interview aired Wednesday on Hill.TV that he has opened an investigation into whether his country’s law enforcement apparatus intentionally leaked financial records during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign about then-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in an effort to sway the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.”

“The leak of the so-called black ledger files to U.S. media prompted Manafort’s resignation from the Trump campaign and gave rise to one of the key allegations in the Russia collusion probe that has dogged Trump for the last two and a half years.”

“Ukraine Prosecutor General Yurii Lutsenko’s probe was prompted by a Ukrainian parliamentarian’s release of a tape recording purporting to quote a top law enforcement official as saying his agency leaked the Manafort financial records to help Clinton’s campaign.”

Liberals like Bette Midler continue to make statements like Trump selling his country out for a building in Moscow. However, they are intentionally ignoring the facts of what Democrats have been doing, namely Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

As shown above, Clinton or her campaign, is guilty of seeking information from a foreign country which they intended and did use to influence the 2016 election, which means that Mueller lied in his statement above, made before a House committee.

The links between prominent Democrats and the Ukraine don’t stop with Hillary seeking damning information. Consider this report of when Clinton was Secretary of State:

In May 2015, the International Business Times reported:

“Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States’ oil-rich ally in the Middle East.”

“Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region’s fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.”

“But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At a press conference in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been ‘a top priority’ for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the ‘U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.’”

“These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing — the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 — contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.”

“The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that placed weapons in the hands of governments that had also donated money to the Clinton family philanthropic empire, an International Business Times investigation has found.”

What about Joe Biden? Remember the infamous bail out of the auto industry and banks, carried out by the Obama administration? Using US taxpayer money, then Vice President Joe Biden used $20 million to help a friend of his open a luxury car dealership in the Ukraine, when the $750 billion bailout was intended to bailout American companies, not help friends open businesses in the Ukraine.

Yes, it appears that Mueller committed perjury, yet no one seems to be aware of it. All the liberal media and Democrats care about is what Mueller said that could be used against Trump and the only thing conservatives care about is that Mueller didn’t give Democrats the demining information they sought.

One thing is certain, Mueller proved where his loyalty lies and it’s not with truth and justice.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright Listabilities, LLC 2018, all rights reserved