This article makes Muellar out to be a failure and a screw up every where he went. Why would a pro Clinton very liberal rag like this do that? Will he be exonerating Trump or Going after the DNC? soon? This seems like a very corrupt deep state warming to Mueller. This seems like the time.... Obama and the Senator made those out of place speeches right before Roberts changed (presumably) the obamacare mandate into the tax. http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-mueller-record-20171122-story.html So in this article we learned... that Mueller is a failed trial attorney who could not cut it in court in D.C. We learned he is gruff and frequently ineffective. He went to the private sector and failed or went back to a shit prosecutor job within 2 years. He struggled for years with his FBI's failed investigation in anthrax and a target sued and won a privacy case for 5.8 million. He had issues with admitting he screwed up that investigation. Here is one quote... "At FBI headquarters, protecting the director from embarrassment was ingrained." They had to protect him because what an investigation found. The FBI had to change the word inspection to review so they did not have to turn the inspection report over. The covered up for his incompetence.
I don't know why they would go down this road, other than the obvious: They are worried that he cannot deliver and Trump will be left examined and unimpeded this early in his tenure. Interesting dynamics in that article there and here on the forum though. You have the demotard bootlickers posting pictures of Mueller as a Marine and reminding us how scary he looks, to them anyway. And we have the tards reminding us that Trump needs to be worrying about prison time and all of that. At the same time you have some- I am among them who say- "Bring it on as fast and hard as you can. Go for it. The FBI and Mueller have a long history of talking scary and then blowing major cases." Ironically, the LA Times article provides more supporting evidence for one of those strategies rather than the other. Let the viewers decide for themselves which one it is. The puzzies here think that they are just going to flash a picture of Mueller in Marine uniform and the defense and the jury are going to go tits up. It doesn't work that way. In this country, with top level cases, the level of defense that can be put on is stratospheric. As we just saw in the defense of Menendez or a pantload of other cases you could select. You think those government prosecutors are tough? Well, guess what. Most of the defense teams have former government prosecutors as defense lawyers. Interesting piece of trivia in that article. It said that in one of the brief periods that Mueller the Clown went into private practice, he was with the firm of Hale and Dorr in Boston. That is the same law firm that Nixon hired to keep himself out of prison. His attorney, James St. Clair was with that firm. As I said, the defendant gets to put on a defense, and Mueller doesn't have a conviction until he has one. Don't anyone bother to talk to me about Flynn or mannafort or their sons. No one cares. You can argue that they have all flipped but you don't know if they have anything that leads to trump, and as you can see from the LA Times article, Mueller has had lots of cases where he cut massive giveaway deals with bad hombres and they still could not produce in court. Oh, that's right. They will show pictures of Mueller with a rifle..whooooooooooo. Bring it on.