Here Are The Key Moments From Mueller’s Testimony | NBC Nightly News

Here Are The Key Moments From Mueller’s Testimony | NBC Nightly News


WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE PRESIDENT CALLED IT AGAIN LATE TODAY. THE PRESIDENT CALLED IT AGAIN LATE TODAY. PETE WILLIAMS STARTS IT AGAIN LATE TODAY. PETE WILLIAMS STARTS OUR COVERAGE. PETE WILLIAMS STARTS OUR COVERAGE.>>MR. MUELLER, WHAT’S OUR COVERAGE.>>MR. MUELLER, WHAT’S YOUR MESSAGE TO THE>>MR. MUELLER, WHAT’S YOUR MESSAGE TO THE PRESIDENT? YOUR MESSAGE TO THE PRESIDENT?>>Reporter: ROBERT PRESIDENT?>>Reporter: ROBERT MUELLER ARRIVED IN>>Reporter: ROBERT MUELLER ARRIVED IN HOPES TO THE DEMOCRATS MUELLER ARRIVED IN HOPES TO THE DEMOCRATS THAT THE MESSAGE WOULD HOPES TO THE DEMOCRATS THAT THE MESSAGE WOULD SPREAD TO MILLIONS THAT THE MESSAGE WOULD SPREAD TO MILLIONS THAT NEVER HEARD IT. SPREAD TO MILLIONS THAT NEVER HEARD IT. THE OPENING MINUTES THAT NEVER HEARD IT. THE OPENING MINUTES APPEARED TO SHOW THAT THE OPENING MINUTES APPEARED TO SHOW THAT PROMISE WITH JERRY APPEARED TO SHOW THAT PROMISE WITH JERRY NADLER ZEROING IN ON PROMISE WITH JERRY NADLER ZEROING IN ON WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP NADLER ZEROING IN ON WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID ABOUT IT. WHAT PRESIDENT TRUMP SAID ABOUT IT.>>THE PRESIDENT SAID ABOUT IT.>>THE PRESIDENT REPEATEDLY CLAIMED>>THE PRESIDENT REPEATEDLY CLAIMED THAT YOUR REPORT FOUND REPEATEDLY CLAIMED THAT YOUR REPORT FOUND THERE WAS NO THAT YOUR REPORT FOUND THERE WAS NO OBSTRUCTION AND IT THERE WAS NO OBSTRUCTION AND IT COMPLETELY EXONERATED OBSTRUCTION AND IT COMPLETELY EXONERATED HIM. COMPLETELY EXONERATED HIM. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HIM. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT YOUR REPORT SAID. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT YOUR REPORT SAID.>>CORRECT. YOUR REPORT SAID.>>CORRECT. IT IS NOT WHAT THE>>CORRECT. IT IS NOT WHAT THE REPORT SAID. IT IS NOT WHAT THE REPORT SAID.>>THE REPORT DID NOT REPORT SAID.>>THE REPORT DID NOT CONCLUDE THAT HE DID>>THE REPORT DID NOT CONCLUDE THAT HE DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION CONCLUDE THAT HE DID NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE? NOT COMMIT OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE? IS THAT CORRECT? OF JUSTICE? IS THAT CORRECT?>>THAT IS CORRECT. IS THAT CORRECT?>>THAT IS CORRECT.>>AND WHAT ABOUT>>THAT IS CORRECT.>>AND WHAT ABOUT TOTAL EXONERATION?>>AND WHAT ABOUT TOTAL EXONERATION? DID YOU ACTUALLY TOTAL EXONERATION? DID YOU ACTUALLY TOTALLY EXONERATE THE DID YOU ACTUALLY TOTALLY EXONERATE THE PRESIDENT? TOTALLY EXONERATE THE PRESIDENT?>>NO. PRESIDENT?>>NO.>>REPUBLICANS PRESSED>>NO.>>REPUBLICANS PRESSED MUELLER ON JUST THAT>>REPUBLICANS PRESSED MUELLER ON JUST THAT ISSUE AND THE REPORT MUELLER ON JUST THAT ISSUE AND THE REPORT STATEMENT THAT WHILE ISSUE AND THE REPORT STATEMENT THAT WHILE IT, QUOTE, DOES NOT STATEMENT THAT WHILE IT, QUOTE, DOES NOT CONCLUDE THAT THE IT, QUOTE, DOES NOT CONCLUDE THAT THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED A CONCLUDE THAT THE PRESIDENT COMMITTED A CRIME, IT ALSO DOES PRESIDENT COMMITTED A CRIME, IT ALSO DOES NOT EXONERATE HIM. CRIME, IT ALSO DOES NOT EXONERATE HIM. REPUBLICANS SAID THAT NOT EXONERATE HIM. REPUBLICANS SAID THAT SENTENCE TOOK AWAY HIS REPUBLICANS SAID THAT SENTENCE TOOK AWAY HIS PRESUMPTION OF SENTENCE TOOK AWAY HIS PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE. PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE.>>CAN YOU GIVE ME AN INNOCENCE.>>CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OTHER THAN>>CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE OTHER THAN DONALD TRUMP WHERE THE EXAMPLE OTHER THAN DONALD TRUMP WHERE THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DONALD TRUMP WHERE THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DETERMINED A PERSON JUSTICE DEPARTMENT DETERMINED A PERSON WAS NOT EXONERATED DETERMINED A PERSON WAS NOT EXONERATED BECAUSE THEIR WAS NOT EXONERATED BECAUSE THEIR INNOCENCE WAS NOT BECAUSE THEIR INNOCENCE WAS NOT DETERMINED. INNOCENCE WAS NOT DETERMINED.>>I CANNOT — THIS IS DETERMINED.>>I CANNOT — THIS IS UNIQUE.>>I CANNOT — THIS IS UNIQUE.>>DONALD TRUMP IS NOT UNIQUE.>>DONALD TRUMP IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW.>>DONALD TRUMP IS NOT ABOVE THE LAW. HE’S NOT. ABOVE THE LAW. HE’S NOT. BUT HE DAMN SURE HE’S NOT. BUT HE DAMN SURE SHOULDN’T BE BELOW THE BUT HE DAMN SURE SHOULDN’T BE BELOW THE LAW WHICH IS WHERE SHOULDN’T BE BELOW THE LAW WHICH IS WHERE THIS REPORT PUTS HIM. LAW WHICH IS WHERE THIS REPORT PUTS HIM.>>IN TWO HEARINGS THIS REPORT PUTS HIM.>>IN TWO HEARINGS MUELLER REVEALED>>IN TWO HEARINGS MUELLER REVEALED NOTHING NEW, STICKING MUELLER REVEALED NOTHING NEW, STICKING TO HIS PLEDGE TO TALK NOTHING NEW, STICKING TO HIS PLEDGE TO TALK ONLY ABOUT WHAT WAS IN TO HIS PLEDGE TO TALK ONLY ABOUT WHAT WAS IN HIS 480-PAGE REPORT. ONLY ABOUT WHAT WAS IN HIS 480-PAGE REPORT. DEMOCRATS THREATENED HIS 480-PAGE REPORT. DEMOCRATS THREATENED TO GET HIM TO READ DEMOCRATS THREATENED TO GET HIM TO READ FROM EXAMPLES BUT TO GET HIM TO READ FROM EXAMPLES BUT MUELLER MORE THAN 200 FROM EXAMPLES BUT MUELLER MORE THAN 200 TIMES DECLINED OR GAVE MUELLER MORE THAN 200 TIMES DECLINED OR GAVE SUCH SHORT ANSWERS TIMES DECLINED OR GAVE SUCH SHORT ANSWERS THEY DID NOT AMOUNT TO SUCH SHORT ANSWERS THEY DID NOT AMOUNT TO A COHESIVE NARRATIVE. THEY DID NOT AMOUNT TO A COHESIVE NARRATIVE.>>NO, YES, NO, A COHESIVE NARRATIVE.>>NO, YES, NO, CORRECT, TRUE,>>NO, YES, NO, CORRECT, TRUE, GENERALLY CORRECT, CORRECT, TRUE, GENERALLY CORRECT, YES, GENERALLY, YES, GENERALLY CORRECT, YES, GENERALLY, YES, THAT’S ACCURATE. YES, GENERALLY, YES, THAT’S ACCURATE.>>BUT REPUBLICANS THAT’S ACCURATE.>>BUT REPUBLICANS SAID MUELLER WAS NEVER>>BUT REPUBLICANS SAID MUELLER WAS NEVER PRESENTED FROM DOING SAID MUELLER WAS NEVER PRESENTED FROM DOING HIS JOB. PRESENTED FROM DOING HIS JOB.>>WERE YOU EVER FIRED HIS JOB.>>WERE YOU EVER FIRED AS SPECIAL COUNSEL>>WERE YOU EVER FIRED AS SPECIAL COUNSEL MR. MUELLER? AS SPECIAL COUNSEL MR. MUELLER?>>NO. MR. MUELLER?>>NO.>>NO.>>NO.>>NO. WERE YOU ALLOWED TO>>NO. WERE YOU ALLOWED TO COMPLETE YOUR WERE YOU ALLOWED TO COMPLETE YOUR INVESTIGATION COMPLETE YOUR INVESTIGATION UNENCUMBERED? INVESTIGATION UNENCUMBERED?>>YES. UNENCUMBERED?>>YES.>>MUELLER PUSHED BACK>>YES.>>MUELLER PUSHED BACK AGAINST LEGAL TEAM>>MUELLER PUSHED BACK AGAINST LEGAL TEAM INCLUDED HILLARY AGAINST LEGAL TEAM INCLUDED HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS. INCLUDED HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS.>>I’VE BEEN IN THIS CLINTON SUPPORTERS.>>I’VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS 25 YEARS AND>>I’VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS 25 YEARS AND I NEVER HAD AN BUSINESS 25 YEARS AND I NEVER HAD AN OCCASION TO ASK I NEVER HAD AN OCCASION TO ASK SOMEONE ABOUT THEIR OCCASION TO ASK SOMEONE ABOUT THEIR POLITICAL AFFILIATION. SOMEONE ABOUT THEIR POLITICAL AFFILIATION. IT IS NOT DONE. POLITICAL AFFILIATION. IT IS NOT DONE. WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS IT IS NOT DONE. WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS THE CAPABILITY OF THE WHAT I CARE ABOUT IS THE CAPABILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO DO THE THE CAPABILITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO DO THE JOB AND QUICKLY AND INDIVIDUAL TO DO THE JOB AND QUICKLY AND SERIOUSLY AND WITH JOB AND QUICKLY AND SERIOUSLY AND WITH INTEGRITY. SERIOUSLY AND WITH INTEGRITY.>>AND HE SHOWED A INTEGRITY.>>AND HE SHOWED A SPARK WHEN ASKED TO>>AND HE SHOWED A SPARK WHEN ASKED TO HIS REACTION REPEATED SPARK WHEN ASKED TO HIS REACTION REPEATED STATEMENTS ABOUT HIS REACTION REPEATED STATEMENTS ABOUT DONALD TRUMP POSTING STATEMENTS ABOUT DONALD TRUMP POSTING THE WIKILEAKS TWEETS. DONALD TRUMP POSTING THE WIKILEAKS TWEETS.>>WIKILEAKS, I LOVE THE WIKILEAKS TWEETS.>>WIKILEAKS, I LOVE WIKILEAKS.>>WIKILEAKS, I LOVE WIKILEAKS.>>PROBLEMATIC IS AN WIKILEAKS.>>PROBLEMATIC IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT IN>>PROBLEMATIC IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT IN TERMS OF GIVING SOME, UNDERSTATEMENT IN TERMS OF GIVING SOME, I DON’T KNOW, HOPE OR TERMS OF GIVING SOME, I DON’T KNOW, HOPE OR SOME BOOST TO WHAT IS I DON’T KNOW, HOPE OR SOME BOOST TO WHAT IS AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL SOME BOOST TO WHAT IS AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. AND SHOULD BE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY.>>MUELLER SAID HIS ACTIVITY.>>MUELLER SAID HIS INVESTIGATION WAS NO>>MUELLER SAID HIS INVESTIGATION WAS NO WITCH HUNT AND THAT INVESTIGATION WAS NO WITCH HUNT AND THAT RUSSIAN ACTS OF WITCH HUNT AND THAT RUSSIAN ACTS OF MEDDLING THROUGH PHONY RUSSIAN ACTS OF MEDDLING THROUGH PHONY SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE MEDDLING THROUGH PHONY SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE HACKED EMAILS WERE SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE HACKED EMAILS WERE REAL AND DANGEROUS. HACKED EMAILS WERE REAL AND DANGEROUS.>>WOULD YOU AGREE REAL AND DANGEROUS.>>WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IT WAS NOT A HOAX>>WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IT WAS NOT A HOAX THAT THE RUSSIANS WERE THAT IT WAS NOT A HOAX THAT THE RUSSIANS WERE ENGAGED IN TRYING TO THAT THE RUSSIANS WERE ENGAGED IN TRYING TO IMPACT OUR ELECTION? ENGAGED IN TRYING TO IMPACT OUR ELECTION?>>ABSOLUTELY. IMPACT OUR ELECTION?>>ABSOLUTELY. IT’S NOT A HOAX.>>ABSOLUTELY. IT’S NOT A HOAX. THE INDICTMENTS WE IT’S NOT A HOAX. THE INDICTMENTS WE RETURNED AGAINST THE THE INDICTMENTS WE RETURNED AGAINST THE RUSSIANS, TWO RETURNED AGAINST THE RUSSIANS, TWO DIFFERENT ONES, WERE RUSSIANS, TWO DIFFERENT ONES, WERE SUBSTANTIAL IN THEIR DIFFERENT ONES, WERE SUBSTANTIAL IN THEIR SCOPE USING THAT SCOPE SUBSTANTIAL IN THEIR SCOPE USING THAT SCOPE WORD AGAIN. SCOPE USING THAT SCOPE WORD AGAIN. AND I THINK ONE OF WORD AGAIN. AND I THINK ONE OF THE — WE HAVE AND I THINK ONE OF THE — WE HAVE UNDERPLAYED TO A THE — WE HAVE UNDERPLAYED TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. UNDERPLAYED TO A CERTAIN EXTENT.>>Reporter: MUELLER CERTAIN EXTENT.>>Reporter: MUELLER SAID AS THE REPORT>>Reporter: MUELLER SAID AS THE REPORT DOES THAT THOUGH HE SAID AS THE REPORT DOES THAT THOUGH HE WANTED TO INTERVIEW DOES THAT THOUGH HE WANTED TO INTERVIEW PRESIDENT TRUMP, THE WANTED TO INTERVIEW PRESIDENT TRUMP, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM PRESIDENT TRUMP, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM DECIDED NOT TO PUT UP SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM DECIDED NOT TO PUT UP A FIGHT. DECIDED NOT TO PUT UP A FIGHT.>>THE EXPECTATION WAS A FIGHT.>>THE EXPECTATION WAS IF WE DID SUBPOENA THE>>THE EXPECTATION WAS IF WE DID SUBPOENA THE PRESIDENT, HE WOULD IF WE DID SUBPOENA THE PRESIDENT, HE WOULD FIGHT THE SUBPOENA AND PRESIDENT, HE WOULD FIGHT THE SUBPOENA AND WE WOULD BE IN THE FIGHT THE SUBPOENA AND WE WOULD BE IN THE MIDST OF THE WE WOULD BE IN THE MIDST OF THE INVESTIGATION FOR A MIDST OF THE INVESTIGATION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF INVESTIGATION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME. SUBSTANTIAL PERIOD OF TIME.>>Reporter: THE TIME.>>Reporter: THE PRESIDENT DID SUBMIT>>Reporter: THE PRESIDENT DID SUBMIT ANSWERS IN WRITING PRESIDENT DID SUBMIT ANSWERS IN WRITING THOUGH NOT TO EVERY ANSWERS IN WRITING THOUGH NOT TO EVERY QUESTION THE SPECIAL THOUGH NOT TO EVERY QUESTION THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM ASKED. QUESTION THE SPECIAL COUNSEL TEAM ASKED.>>WHERE HE DID, HIS COUNSEL TEAM ASKED.>>WHERE HE DID, HIS ANSWERED SHOWED HE>>WHERE HE DID, HIS ANSWERED SHOWED HE WASN’T ALWAYS BEING ANSWERED SHOWED HE WASN’T ALWAYS BEING TRUTHFUL? WASN’T ALWAYS BEING TRUTHFUL?>>I WOULD SAY TRUTHFUL?>>I WOULD SAY GENERALLY.>>I WOULD SAY GENERALLY.>>PETE JOINS US NOW. GENERALLY.>>PETE JOINS US NOW. PETE, IT’S NOT LOST ON>>PETE JOINS US NOW. PETE, IT’S NOT LOST ON ANYONE WHO WATCHED THE PETE, IT’S NOT LOST ON ANYONE WHO WATCHED THE HEARINGS TODAY THAT ANYONE WHO WATCHED THE HEARINGS TODAY THAT DIRECTOR MUELLER HEARINGS TODAY THAT DIRECTOR MUELLER SEEMED TO BE DIRECTOR MUELLER SEEMED TO BE STRUGGLING AT TIMES SEEMED TO BE STRUGGLING AT TIMES YOUCHLT COVERED HIM STRUGGLING AT TIMES YOUCHLT COVERED HIM YEARS. YOUCHLT COVERED HIM YEARS. WHAT DID IT SEEM TO YEARS. WHAT DID IT SEEM TO YOU. WHAT DID IT SEEM TO YOU.>>WE LAST SAW HIM YOU.>>WE LAST SAW HIM TESTIFY SIX YEARS AGO>>WE LAST SAW HIM TESTIFY SIX YEARS AGO AND THIS WAS NOT THE TESTIFY SIX YEARS AGO AND THIS WAS NOT THE HARD CHARGING FBI AND THIS WAS NOT THE HARD CHARGING FBI DIRECTOR WE SAW THEN. HARD CHARGING FBI DIRECTOR WE SAW THEN. TODAY HE WAS HALTING DIRECTOR WE SAW THEN. TODAY HE WAS HALTING AND SOMETIMES UNSURE TODAY HE WAS HALTING AND SOMETIMES UNSURE OF HIMSELF. AND SOMETIMES UNSURE OF HIMSELF. HE’S OLDER NOW. OF HIMSELF. HE’S OLDER NOW. HE TURNED 75 IN TWO HE’S OLDER NOW. HE TURNED 75 IN TWO WEEKS. HE TURNED 75 IN TWO WEEKS. AND HE CLEARLY DID NOT WEEKS. AND HE CLEARLY DID NOT WANT TO BE THERE

42 thoughts on “Here Are The Key Moments From Mueller’s Testimony | NBC Nightly News

  1. You guys should take it out to the streets and have a demonstration to save your country!
    Your law makers are too weak to do it! They're taking forever.

  2. Totally a sham, a hoax, a witch hunt used for 2 years as a negative talking point by MSM. FAKE NEWS .. innuendo of Russian collusion but the Hillary people colluded with Russians to create a FAKE dossier that smeared Trump with unverified material to obtain FISA warrants to spy to feed the witch hunt.. We get it.. today was an eye opener.

  3. Urainium Bob didn't bring life to the Russian Hoax. Gonna be a night filled with tears for the Propoganda arm of the Demonicrat Socialists.

  4. Mueller couldn't answer even basic questions… Fusion GPS is the whole reason for the "investigation" and he said he had never heard of Fusion GPS.

  5. @NBC, do your job and report real facts. This is starting to sound like Fox.. "mueller is old and unsure of himself." I never thought I would see the day when NBC would cover for Trump. Shame on you guys..

  6. When Mueller used the word “business” he was caught by his own words. Prosecution is NOT supposed to be a “business.” He told on himself and his “business.” FBI agent’s in league with Soros doing 🚌 ness

  7. What will the Dems do next? Double down. To paraphrase Dinesh D'Sousa (Hillary's America) they will never give up the con.

  8. https://youtu.be/hDXb6wZdpHo

    Here is what Mueller ACTUALLY said..
    I'm sure NBC will remove my post because it's bad for their business/donors..
    Shame on NBC..

  9. NBC you guys are hypocrites so all of a sudden Muller is too old to work yet you guys want joe Biden to run the 🇺🇸 and joe is a lot older MAGA

  10. If Russia was indeed trying to hack the election, then guess who was sleeping on the job?…yes, thats right, its Obama and Biden.

  11. See the whole thing because this short clip is SO angled that it makes the Democratic trolls look like babies. It's a SHAME 3 years of investigation to ruin I President instead of accepting you lost. Idiots! Shame on you, children of the Lie!

  12. They told the Democrats this was going to be a disaster for them but by God they went ahead and did it anyway.🤣

  13. 10:47 P.S.T and still no news…you are aware of how many of us cut the chord? Maybe you don't need an audience that bad. Sighh I mean really ??

  14. 🤔Legal defense to a Trump Indictment will be that Courts lack Jurisdiction, because Obstruction took place during Presidency & the VENUE to Prosecute such Acts belonged under IMPEACHMENT that was Forfeited by the House. Constitutional Impeachment Provision is a REMEDY & it PreEmpts alternate prosecution Out of Office.😂

  15. Trump guilty 100% you idiots need to go look at Trumps pep rally he loves wiki leaks recently gump said doesn't know wiki leaks. Tells McGhan to say he never asked him to fire muller..

  16. The HOAX is not the crime committed by Russia. The HOAX is Trumps involvement…how hard is this to understand.

  17. Nothing new but it sure well shows Donald is not inocent and had many people doing his dirty work & himself included.

  18. Former special counsel Robert Mueller testified on Wednesday that his investigation was not hindered or curtailed, reassuring anyone worried that he wasn’t able to fully carry out the inquiry.

    Mueller made this assertion in response to questioning from Rep. Doug Collins (R-GA), the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee. Collins, in a series of rapid-fire questions, asked the special counsel whether “your investigation [was] curtailed or stopped or hindered?”

    “No,” Mueller responded.

  19. Foreign electoral interventions are attempts by governments, covertly or overtly, to influence elections in another country. There are many ways that nations have accomplished regime change abroad, and electoral intervention is only one of those methods.

    Theoretical and empirical research on the effect of foreign electoral intervention had been characterized as weak overall as late as 2011; however, since then a number of such studies have been conducted.[1] One study indicated that the country intervening in most foreign elections is the United States with 81 interventions, followed by Russia (including the former Soviet Union) with 36 interventions from 1946 to 2000—an average of once in every nine competitive elections.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *