Updated statement from Buzzfeed

[octoberlib]

Link to tweet

Updated statement from @BuzzFeedNews:
“As we’ve re-confirmed our reporting, we’ve seen no indication that any specific aspect of our story is inaccurate. We remain confident in what we’ve reported, and will share more as we are able.” --Matt Mittenthal, spokesperson.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

1. I LOVE IT!!! If true, the Liar-in-Chief is fucked beyond belief...

not enough popcorn in the world to meet demand!

[Power 2 the People]

13. +1

[SCVDem]

36. I am really eating popcorn

As I read this!

[former9thward]

52. So Mueller is lying?

What do you have in your popcorn?

[triron]

53. What do you have in yours?

[uponit7771]

59. No both can be correct

[former9thward]

64. Buzzfeed says they are accurate.

Mueller says they are not. No they both can't be correct.

[uponit7771]

65. BF & Mueller can be talking about different categories of accuracy.

One is talking about the story while the other is focusing on specifics

[former9thward]

66. The specifics are the story.

People are invested in believing what they want to believe. It will not lead to good results.

[WeekiWater]

61. Who said that? NT

[manor321]

2. Mueller needs to clear up the lousy vague statement they put out

If he can't do that then he should have kept his mouth shut.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

3. Seriously!! Not all that impressed with what I've seen so far...

WTF is Mueller waiting for?! Get the damn report out there already... shouldn't even have to wait for it to start impeachment proceedings against tRumph & his henchman VP... time to start the President Pelosi 2019 campaign!!

[Windy City Charlie]

5. I'm not expecting anything from Mueller

You have to keep in mind Mueller's report will get submitted to the Attorney General & the Justice Department, and they'll determine if it gets released or not. I have feeling it won't, and they'll come up with some lame excuse as to why they can't release it. It's going to be up to either congress or a state government to take any sort of substantial action.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

7. Certainly possible... after all, Mueller IS a Republican.

[paleotn]

18. You're joking. Right?

[erlewyne]

21. Let Mueller do his job!

He wants to stay out of sight, it is a "he said she said" thing.
Mueller wants everybody to know he did not say that and he
is being implemented.

He will be our hero in the end. So, what if he is/was a Republican?
He is sending quite a few Republicans to jail. We are such amateurs
compared to him.

[erronis]

23. There's some serious injecting going on here. Purpose?

[Loki Liesmith]

34. Mueller doesn't have a say in the matter

The AG determines the status of the report.

[paleotn]

17. Not much?

Umm, excuse me? How many now have felony convictions on their records? How many have turned states evidence? Hmmm?

[SayItLoud]

41. Or up to a Daniel Ellsberg type. nt

[uponit7771]

48. +1

[onenote]

46. Based on your experience as a prosecutor, what would you do different?

Armchair warrior.

[paleotn]

16. There are tactical and strategic maneuvers going on...

beneath the surface that none of us are privy to. They may look strange and even disturbing to those on the outside, but not to those who know what's going on. What I'm really concerned with is maintaining the integrity of the Mueller investigation and any evidence they may be seeking that could be put in jeopardy by someone going off half cocked. That's why this investigation has been so incredibly air tight from a leak standpoint. Find all the evidence possible before it's destroyed and bag every goddamn one of the perps. Every fucking one off them. That's how solid, effective investigations are run.

[srobertss]

22. Marcy Wheeler

at emptywheel.net would agree with you. She’s speculating that Mueller doesn’t want Cohen’s sworn testimony muddied for strategic purposes. Cohens sworn testimony is that he coordinated his story with Trump’s messaging out of loyalty. Marcy Wheeler speculates that this lower bar on what occurred may be easier to deal with in a trial, perhaps Don Jr’s trial. She’s a little hard for me to follow, but she’s really brilliant.

[erronis]

25. Marcy's analysis is brilliant. And the intelligent commenters mainly concur.

BF may have put that story out there based on SDNY leaks or information, but it seems that the SCO is still going quietly and deliberately about its business. So far the investigation has netted a lot of fish, both big and small. More will be getting their gills caught soon.

https://www.emptywheel.net/2019/01/19/peter-carr-speaks/

[Politicub]

33. Feels like a bad omen to me

I don't know why Mueller would issue a statement. I would think they would let the news run its course.

Anyway, Cohen will be deposed before the House soon. I'm sure one of the Democratic reps will ask him.

[cstanleytech]

40. Actually its probably vague for a good reason.

[pintobean]

4. Gee, who's more credible

Robert Mueller or BuzzFeed?

It's a shame we don't have DU polls asking that from last weekend and this weekend, for comparison.

[bigtree]

12. What the hell is "not accurate" anyway?

...if the Buzzfeed report is false, why not say it's false? Why the cryptic bullshit?

I don't buy into the notion that this is a total rebuke of the report - some coming to that conclusion because of the rarity of statements from the Mueller team.

Where do you get your interpretation of what "not accurate means?" It could mean anything. Why should anyone accept one explanation? It needs to be cleared up. For all we know, a date was misstated or something trivial.

[LiberalFighter]

14. Agreed. Mueller didn't say it was entirely inaccurate.

[creeksneakers2]

37. Its very rare for Mueller to respond at all.

This is the first time I can remember. I don't think they would have gotten involved over something trivial.

[onenote]

49. What do you think "the characterization of the documents and testimony... are not accurate" means?

Let's see -- what was the Buzz Feed story's "characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony"?

It was that it supported the assertion that Cohen lied at Trump's direction.

So I think we know what not accurate means.

[Hoyt]

51. Sorry, I don't believe Mueller's team would say "Inaccurate" over a date or anything minor.

Nor do I believe Mueller's group was responding to his team possibly being source of leak. If that set him off, he'd have responded every time someone made up a story that cited "sources close to the investigation."

I think the response they made -- Not Accurate -- likely means they have no evidence trump directly told Cohen to lie. Anything less than that, and I don't believe Mueller's team would have said anything unless they are in trump/putin's pocket too.

Now, there is plenty of other crud to take trump down, but maybe this isn't it.

[orangecrush]

20. I'm not sure

Either the Buzzfeed story was a poison pill, or Mueller's office was pressured to issue the statement to avoid being shut down.

Or Mueller wants Trump to think he may get out of this to prevent him from doing scorched earth before the shit really hits the fan.

Who knows?

[Flaleftist]

60. Why would Buzzfeed dig in to a story they do not believe is true?

Would that not do serious/catastrophic damage to their reputation if future revelations prove this story is BS?

[LanternWaste]

68. I'll choose C...

the little fella on the internet with an opinion irrelevant to the subject

That's the credible one. Naturally.

[marylandblue]

6. Buzzfeed needs to provide a document backing up the claim

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

9. Fingers crossed!! Why say what they said if they didn't have the goods?!

[FakeNoose]

39. Mueller's statement last night does back it up

Robert Mueller wanted us to know that the leak didn't come from him, that is all. What's so hard about that?

Since this whole thing began he has never leaked anything and he isn't starting now. The Buzzfeed reporter got the leak from somebody else, perhaps the SDNY? Who knows, and maybe it doesn't matter. The proof is that Mueller never denied or contradicted the Buzzfeed story. He just said that certain aspects of the conversation were incorrect. The story that we care about is this: Last year Michael Cohen gave all his evidence and testimony to Mueller including the fact that Cheeto committed obstruction of justice while he was *pResident. Mueller has spent more than a year interviewing several people, former White House employees, who have corroborated Cohen's story with texts, emails, phone convos and 3rd party testimony. The story is solid.

Cohen got the OK from Mueller to talk about certain things when he testifies for the Senate Intelligence Committee, but maybe not this (I don't know.) Now that this story has broken in the media, Mueller has to change his strategy a little (maybe.) Mueller and Cohen are concerned about Cheeto's direct threat to Cohen's father-in-law. There's some back-peddling going on, but nobody is denying the Buzzfeed story about Cohen. We're good. Mmmmm-kay?

Relax and have a nice glass of wine. Enjoy your weekend.

[marylandblue]

42. I believe the story, but I don't know if I believe Buzzfeed.

It's a weird position to be in, but we live in a topsy-turvy world. The story about what Mueller has is consistent with my own speculations. But did Mueller's office really leak and now he is covering it up, or did Buzzfeed get played?

[FakeNoose]

43. The reporter cannot reveal his source - they never do

If Buzzfeed hadn't checked everything out they never would have allowed the story to run. They're the ones who get sued for libel, not the reporter. If you saw "All the President's Men" you know what I mean.

Robert Mueller says he's not the source, so OK I believe him. It wouldn't make sense for him to start leaking now, so close to the end, when he's never done it before. Other people know about this story besides Mueller and his office. The leak came from somewhere, but Mueller wants the pResident (and us) to know it wasn't him.

Buzzfeed didn't get played but they did protect their source. It's OK for American media to do that. Everybody wins.

[marylandblue]

44. I'm okay with Buzzfeed protecting their sources or whatever

But I am not sure this isn't some sort of stupid plot to discredit Mueller. Which is maybe why Mueller felt he had to say something. But I'd still like to know what the story was based on, and if we can see the hard evidence, I think it would bring on Trump's demise faster. But as they say, you can't always get what you want.

[triron]

55. Why? Mueller hasn't.

[marylandblue]

57. Mueller can't. Buzzfeed makes me want to see what they have.

They don't really have to show it if they don't want to. But true to their name, they have fed the buzz.

[Grasswire2]

8. I think as many others do...

..that Mueller had to tamp down the runaway media train and that both Mueller and Buzz Feed are correct in essence.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

10. My thought as well.

[2naSalit]

11. THat's kind of

what I was thinking. Timing is essential.

[reACTIONary]

15. That's my thought also nt

[BigmanPigman]

26. Of course that is what he is doing.

[honest.abe]

29. Yeah, that is exactly what I wrote earlier this morning.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11693784

[uponit7771]

54. +1

[triron]

56. That's what Chuck Rosenberg said last night.

[NotASurfer]

19. Mueller's response sounds like an indirect bit of encouragement

You could read that as "you're on the right track, but there's a thing or two you need to follow up on to make it airtight"

[watoos]

24. Untucking believable

An anti Mueller thread

[erronis]

27. I don't think it's anti-Mueller. Just trying to stop people from getting ahead of the facts.

Those elusive facts that are still being developed so they can be presented with no chance of arguing "facts are not facts."

[RandySF]

28. I don't think anyone is angry with Mueller

He’s doing his job by scuttling leaks.

[LiberalLovinLug]

30. Bottom line is...Does anyone here NOT think that Donald directed his sleazy personal lawyer to act?

Anyone?.................you over there?..............anyone?

I didn't think so.

The rest is all legal mumbo jumbo. Mueller has his reasons, and I won't begin to unpack that.

I for one am glad the story got out. If for nothing else to make the righties heads explode.

[sarisataka]

31. Since June 2015

I have made my default expectation to be disappointment when it comes to pie in the sky reports about the end of Trump's campaign/ term. Given that I expect disappointment, ironically I have not been disappointed yet.

I have some optimism for a change in 2020 but that is dwindling.

[Codifer]

58. Does anyone here believe that Shrub

completed his military duty and wasn't awol?

The fascists planted a military record that supported the notion that shrub had been off on a toot with coke but the record, though correct in content, was in an anachronistic font. Therefore, said the fascists, everything in the record was false..... no matter how true it was. Just as the orange asshole has proclaimed about this current truth.

I have been expecting such a ploy from these traitors. They are "all in" and know that their failure will be their hanging for treason. They will stop at nothing.

I don't think that we are being "Dan Rathered" in this case... but I expect that we will be at some point. I have expected that the fascists will target Rachel.... but I figure that she is too clever for that to work.

I do NOT want the orange shit-gibbon impeached. No more slapping the peepee of traitors (refer to nixon, reagan, both bushes, ollie north ad naseum). I want the asshole and his family and pence and mcconnel and all the rest of this evil cabal to be arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned for aiding a foreign power in the destruction of (after seizing all assets).

If they just get their pee pee's slapped..... time to grab a pitchfork. I could not bear that again.


Saris, I apologize for responding to the wrong post, I meant the response for Liberallovinlug.... yeah, I'm old.

[red dog 1]

32. Mueller: "Buzzfeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's

Office, and the characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate."

The statement did not say which parts of the BuzzFeed report were inaccurate.
(From BBC 8 hours ago)


I would tend to believe Mueller over BuzzFeed.

[George II]

35. "Not accurate" could have meant anything. It was a shrewdly written statement....

...from Mueller's office.

My guess is that the "not accurate" part is only minor with respect to the entire story.

[DinahMoeHum]

38. Right. Methinks he's not saying they're outright lying. . .

. . .they're just incorrect on a point or two.

[onenote]

45. Who here expected BuzzFeed to admit they fucked up?

When all is said and done, I believe we will learn that Buzz Feed's "characterization" of the documents and testimony -- that is, their characterization of those materials as establishing that Trump directed Cohen to lie -- will in fact turn out to have been inaccurate.

[triron]

62. Why shold they? They didn't.

[uponit7771]

47. Hmmmm, we'll see

[kentuck]

50. It may look good enough for a reporter..

..but not as good for a prosecutor? Maybe they don't have as much evidence as they think they have? Perhaps they don't have direct evidence of Trump telling Cohen to lie to Congress? Perhaps it is from an indirect third party? It may look very good to the reporters and not so good to the prosecutors?

[uponit7771]

67. +1, publicly if half of what BuzzFeed reported is true then its 100% aweful for Benedict Donald

... but possibly not able to get a conviction off of it.

[triron]

63. knr

[gldstwmn]

69. 24 business hours... I can't with these people. n/t