WENSTRUP: Thank you for being here today. Is it correct to say that there was no evidence they were involved in the theft or publication of Clinton campaign-related emails?
MUELLER: Can you repeat the question?
WENSTRUP: Is it accurate to say you are investigation found no evidence that members of the Trump campaign were involved in the theft or publication of the Clinton campaign-related emails emails?
MUELLER: I don’t know. Well…
WENSTRUP: Volume 1, page 5, the investigation did not establish that members of the term campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.
So, it would therefore be inaccurate based on this to describe that finding as open to doubt. That finding being that the Trump campaign was involved with theft or publication of the Clinton campaign emails. Are you following that?
MUELLER: I do believe I am following it, but that portion or that matter does not fall within our jurisdiction.
WENSTRUP: Basically, report says volume 1, page 5, I just want to be clear that “Open to doubt” is how the committee Democrats find this in their minority views of the report.
It flies in the face of what you have in your report. Is it accurate also to say that the investigation found no documentary evidence, that George Papadopoulos told anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign about claims that the Russians had dirt on candidate Clinton?
MUELLER: Let me turn that over to Mr. Zebley.
WENSTRUP: I would like to ask you, sir. This is your report. That’s what I’m basing this on.
MUELLER: Then could you repeat the question for me again?
WENSTRUP: Is it accurate to say the investigation found no documentary evidence that George Papadopoulos told anyone affiliated with the Trump campaign about Joseph Mifsud’s claims that the Russians had dirt on candidate Clinton?
MUELLER: I believe, it appearing in the report, that it’s accurate.
WENSTRUP: In the reported says, “No documentary evidence that Papadopoulos shared this information with the campaign.”
It is therefore inaccurate to conclude that by the time of the June 9th, 2016 Trump Tower meeting, “The campaign was likely already on notice via George Papadopoulos’ contact with Russian agents that Russia, in fact, had damaging information on Trump’s opponent.” Would you say that is inaccurate, to say it’s likely already —
MUELLER: I direct you to the report.
WENSTRUP: I appreciate that, because the Democrats jumped to this incorrect conclusion in their minority views.
Again, which contradicts what you have in your report. I’m concerned about a number of statements I would like you to clarify. A number of Democrats have made some statements that I have concerns with, and maybe you can clear them up.
This committee said President Trump was a Russian agent. After your report was publicly released. That seem it is not supported by your report, correct?
MUELLER: That is accurate. It’s not supported.
WENSTRUP: Multiple Democrat members have asserted that Paul Manafort melt Dominic met with Julian Sanchez in 2016 before WikiLeaks released emails implying that he concluded with Assange.
Before I was done I would assume that means you found no evidence of this meeting. Is that assumption correct?
MUELLER: I’m not sure I agree with that assumption.
WENSTRUP: But you make no mention of it in your report. Would you agree with that?
MUELLER: Yes, I would agree with that.
WENSTRUP: Mr. Mueller, does your report contain any evidence that Mr. Trump was enrolled in the Russian system of Kompromat as a member of this committee (Rep. Schiff) once claimed?
MUELLER: What I can speak to is information, evidence that we pickup as the special counsel. I think that’s accurate as far as that goes.
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.