Posted on 06/23/2018 1:27:00 AM PDT by blueplum
Robert Mueller's office has called out allegedly inaccurate reporting on the Russia investigation in a new court filing. A footnote in a new court filing said stories published by The New York Times and Washington Post are inaccurate and irresponsible. Manafort has previously warned that a lot of the reporting about his investigation is wrong.
Robert Mueller has attacked the media, including The New York Times and the Washington Post, for reporting "inaccurately" on the Russia investigation. The rebuke came in a court filing on Thursday, which asked a judge to issue a 19-page questionnaire to potential jurors in the special counsel's upcoming trial in Virginia against Paul Manafort. {snip}
In a footnote, the special counsel singled out two stories in The New York Times and Washington Post last year, which claimed that Mueller's office had...
(Excerpt) Read more at aol.com ...
**Title was abbreviated for space. The complete title is: "Mueller's office attacked The New York Times and Washington Post for 'inaccurately' reporting on his investigation"
But Mueller's team said in Monday's filings that its application for a search warrant "had not sought permission to enter without knocking."
"In issuing the warrant, the magistrate judge authorized the government to execute the warrant any day through August 8, 2017, and to conduct the search 'in the daytime [from] 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.,'" the document says. "The government complied fully with those date and time conditions, and Manafort does not contend otherwise."
That verbiage does not convince me that the reporting of the raid as a "no-knock raid" is "inaccurate". The first part says they didn't ask the judge to allow a no-knock raid, and the second part says nothing to refute an accusation (whether via "unnamed sources" or not) that they did indeed "execute" a no-knock raid via lock-picking while Manafort was out.
It also called out reports that “question the legitimacy of the Special Counsel’s investigation, tending to advance the opinion that the investigation is ‘tainted’ and therefore its results are suspect,” and stories that “include disparaging descriptions of the defendant.”
—
Translation. Mueller’s case is tainted, and now he’s trying to cover up his own crimes.
Both pots and kettles turn out to be blackened from being suspended over an open fire.
Just so people know the historical significance of “the pot calling the kettle black”.
So, lets see if we understand this.
Mueller has a fake investigation that leaks to publications that print fake news.
Now he claims that those publications have inaccurately portrayed his fake investigation as fake, and he is reminding the judge that they print fake news.
You can’t make up this stuff.
Just love watching them dig their hole deeper and deeper.
“””Robert Mueller has attacked the media, including The New York Times and the Washington Post, for reporting “inaccurately” on the Russia investigation.”””
Or in other words, “Mueller is very angry that the falsehoods in his memo leaked to NYT and WAPO was not printed verbatim.”
I’m totally sick of seeing old moose face on TV.
It IS quite interesting, to see rats 🐀 calling out other rats 🐀
It’s just competing alternate facts.
Compost/Slimes vs. Robert “Heinrich” Müller - a popcorn moment.
Maybe he should make the media part of his investigation. Throw in some subpoenas, raid some offices and take everything, not so much accuse but suggest they just have that smell about them.
He needs better leaks then.
Silly me. I read the headline expecting to see that Mueller was actually worried that the jury pool would be biased AGAINST Manafort.
Of course not. Mueller is worried that exposing the facts will bias the jury pool against the investigators.
It’s also interesting to see the bias in the article. I rarely intentionally read anything from AOL or Business Insider. They are clearly spinning the information in this story.
Did someone say "leaks?"
Try new Flex Tape! It patches, bonds and seals instantly!
Interesting. Today’s Wall Street Journal has an op-ed titled “Mueller’s Fruit of the Poisoned Tree.” The subheadline says “It makes no difference how honorable he is. His investigation is tainted by the bias that attended its origin in 2016.”
Would love to be a juror on either of those trials...NOT GUILTY. I don’t care what he did years ago. Has nothing to do with Trump’s campaign for president.
Mulehead wants a pool of Dindonuffins with
Obamafones as his jury pool.
He’ll next file motions to prohibit the defense from mentioning either the scam that created this SC or Trump et al.
Wiessman and Rhee will then doctor a few bits of evidence to seal the case.
Now he’s ticked off the most friendly and powerful purveyors of fake news. Another dumbass move.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.