If you were wondering how the propagandists over on State-Run TV, a.k.a. Fox "News" were going to spin the fact that Mueller came out and directly disputed Trump lackey Attorney General William Barr's mischaracterization of his report, and the fact that Barr lied to Congress with his blatant contradictions between what was actually in the Mueller report and his spin, here's the garbage Fox was feeding to your right wing relatives over the weekend, courtesy of Trump cheerleader "judge" Jeanine Pirro.
In right-wing world, it wasn't Barr who was lying about Mueller's report, but Mueller himself is the one having "sellers remorse." Pirro also accused Mueller of "colluding with Democrats" in order to "rally the troops around impeachment."
Transcript of Pirro's damage control for Trump below for those who don't want to subject themselves to her latest rant:
Mueller was charged with serving the United States of America and not his ego, yet that is exactly how he will now be remembered. Mueller had a case of seller's remorse, when the seller regrets what he's already sold. It seems Bob is afflicted with a serious case of this remorse.
The original report didn't hurt Trump enough. Ask yourselves one question. Why after 10 weeks, after the special counsel report is submitted does Mueller unilaterally decide to hold a press conference to say he's closing shop? And why does Mueller do a Jim Comey and say I didn't charge but only because, dot, dot, dot.
Why? He does it to rally the left because the Mueller report didn't hurt enough. Mind you, the report is the best evidence of the investigation. It is the investigation. There is no need to unilaterally emphasize or add to the document.
Not Robert Mueller. He decides to jump into the political fray just like his pal Jim Comey did. And now the calls for impeachment are echoing throughout Congress. This was not the case when the report was submitted. So Mueller I imagine, at the behest of the left gives them what they need to jump start the calls for impeachment.
But nothing has changed in the report. The only thing that changed is Mueller deciding to create chaos and havoc, as if two years of an investigation the president showing absolutely no Trump-Russia collusion and no obstruction are not enough.
But that's exactly what Mueller did. Muddy up the waters and charge up the left.
MUELLER: If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so.
PIRRO: Now they never said that in the report! So now Mueller is adding, “Look, I am not confidence you didn't commit a crime.” Folks, that is sheer lunacy. I don't know a prosecutor in this country who has ever said after a grand jury investigation “I'm not sure he didn't commit a crime.”
You will either indict or you don't. You don't come out and say, “You know, that Vinnie Boombat, I'm not indicting him, but man I'm telling you he ain't a good guy.” Every prosecutor knows if you don't indict someone, you stop there.
So what was the point of the 400-plus report? The report doesn't say I'm not confident you didn't commit a crime. So then, what's the end game now?
Let's take a second to talk about collusion. Not the Trump-Russia collusion. But what about collusion between Mueller and the Democrats? The Democrats don't have an independent thought other than their hatred of Donald Trump. The Mueller report didn't accomplish their goal. The Democrats are desperate. They need Mueller to shake things up so they can rally the troops around impeachment.
Think about it. What do the Democrats offer other than all things anti-Trump?
MUELLER: We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.
PIRRO: And why the heck not!? What did you and your gang of Trump-hating, Hillary-loving lawyers do for two years? He uses as an excuse that he couldn't indict because the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines said you cannot indict a sitting president. Yet even unflappable Attorney General Bill Barr took offense to that one.
BARR: Special counsel Mueller stated three times to us in that meeting in response to our questioning that he emphatically was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found obstruction. […]
We did not understand exactly why the special counsel was reaching that decision, and when we pressed him on it, he said that his team was still formulating the explanation.
PIRRO: Still formulating an explanation as to why you didn't reach a decision on obstruction? Are you stupid? You had two years to think about that one. And he did not. Instead he punted and now Mueller wants to come out and say look, we never said he didn't, we simply couldn't make a decision because he's a sitting president.
Folks, that's baloney. What was the point of this investigation in the first place? What did you do for two years Bob? You could have reached a conclusion without charging by simply stating your conclusion or your opinion.
And by the way, when did you know there was no collusion? Did you know that before the midterms? You could have shut the whole thing down, but then again, it was a major help to the Democrats, now wasn't it? And you are helping them yet again.
So let's recap. Neither the president nor anyone on the Trump campaign colluded with Russia. You couldn't make a decision on obstruction and by law the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General had to do so.
So who the hell asked you to come out this week and muddy the waters like Jim Comey did in 2016? I guess we now have a competition between holier than thou Jim Comey and mixed up Monsignor Mueller, both members of the choir of never-Trumpers in the church of the demon rats, because that's what this is all about. Nothing more, and nothing less.
