Quote:
I still doubt Mueller will testify. This court ruling should be devastating.
From reading the latest pleadings in the Flynn case (Spoiler alert: Flynn's former counsel really f***ed up) and that article from
The Federalist about the Concord case, I think Mueller has some real exposure for potential perjury, if he testifies and tries to tow the company line that Russia did it.
Concord (or Internet Research Agency case as it is formally styled) should be off-limits for questioning as it is still a pending matter. However, the general question of how Mueller arrived at the conclusion that the actual Russian government was ordering, directing, financially supporting or otherwise behind the social media campaign is not off limits. Was there as mole inside the Kremlin that corroborated Putin's involvement outside of Steele's so-called "sources"?
The same question as to what evidence did Team Mueller obtain that proved that the DNC and the DCCC was even hacked and if hacked by whom? Question him (and behind closed doors members of his team) about the Binney report and the efforts they made to ensure that such a download was impossible. Did they ever even consider that the computer theft was in-house? How many CrowdStrike employees were extensively interviewed about their draft reports? Was a final report ever prepared? Why not?
Did they ever interview Assange? Why not? Wouldn't he be the best source of information for the origins of the wikileaks materials?
There are a lot of land mines for Mueller and company.