WASHINGTON — Robert Mueller Day on Capitol Hill finally came and went. The former FBI director and special counsel testified for roughly six hours before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees about his nearly two-year investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 elections, and allegations the president and his camp obstructed law enforcement in their efforts.

Republicans sought to cast the Mueller probe as hopelessly biased or seeded by bad information from Hillary Clinton’s campaign, or paint Mueller himself as a bad lawyer. Democrats used the day to underscore what they say was obviously corrupt behavior by the president and his family, who were openly willing to use emails stolen by a hostile foreign nation to damage his opponent.


Here are 7 key takeaways from the day:

1. The report is not a full exoneration

President Donald Trump has repeatedly claimed the Mueller report fully exonerates him of charges made by critics that he interfered with the Justice Department's probe of Russian malfeasance. It does not, according to Mueller.


"Did you actually totally exonerate the president?" asked the Democratic head of the Judiciary Committee at the start of the day.

"No," Mueller replied.

What the report found was that no one in the campaign conspired in a criminal fashion with the Russian government or Russian state interests to manipulate the election. Mueller has said that if he could find no evidence Trump obstructed justice, he would make that fact clear. He has not made that clear — indicating there is evidence of obstruction. Because a president cannot be charged with a crime by DOJ rules, all Mueller can do is present a report and allow Congress to choose a course of impeachment or not.

Attorney General Bill Barr, a Trump appointee, has said he does not believe enough evidence exists to charge Trump, regardless of whether a president can or cannot be charged with a crime. That is his assessment, not Mueller's.

2. Mueller says criminal charges against Trump are still possible

Mueller stated plainly that because of a Justice Department legal ruling, known as the Office of Legal Counsel memo, sitting presidents may not be indicted. But that doesn’t mean they can’t be charged after they leave office, Mueller said. They do not receive lifetime immunity for crimes committed in the White House.

"You believe you could charge the president with obstruction of justice after he leaves office?" one Republican Judiciary Committee member asked.

"Yes," Mueller responded.

No president has ever been criminally charged while in the Oval Office, though two have been impeached by the House for improper conduct: Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Neither was removed from office by the Senate. Richard Nixon resigned before he could be impeached, a near certainty by that point. President Gerald Ford, Nixon’s vice president, quickly pardoned him.

2b. If Trump wins reelection, obstruction charges are probably not possible

While Mueller established that Trump could still be charged by future prosecutors after he leaves office, Chicago Democrat Mike Quigley pointed out the statute of limitations on federal obstruction charges is five years. Were Trump to win reelection in 2020, he would not leave the office until Jan. 20, 2025, long after charges for such a crime are no longer possible.

Quigley characterized the president, in this instance, as essentially above the law.

3. Mueller forcefully stands by his team

One of the few moments of heightened emotion by Mueller came when Republicans questioned the integrity of the lawyers he hired to assist him.

Many prosecutors who joined Mueller’s team are registered Democrats or have donated to Democratic candidates in the past, including some to Hillary Clinton. One was at Clinton’s 2016 election night party at the Javits Center in New York. Trump has slammed the investigation on Twitter as hopelessly biased, as have many of the president’s allies


While he was mostly to the point, even monosyllabic, in most of his answers, Mueller interrupted to address criticisms of the lawyers and investigators who worked under him.

“Can I speak for a second to the hiring practices?” Mueller said. “We strove to hire those individuals that could do the job. I’ve been in this business for almost 25 years. And in those 25 years, I have not had occasion once to ask somebody about their political affiliation. It is not done. What I care about is the capability of the individual to do the job and do the job quickly and seriously and with integrity.”

It was one of a few times he defended his subordinates against accusations of impropriety.

4. Mueller says his probe was not a ‘witch hunt’

Trump has time and time again referred to the Russia probe as a “witch hunt” intended to entrap people around him and create a pretense to kneecap his presidency.

Mueller tersely dismissed those claims in his testimony.

"When Donald Trump called your investigation a 'witch hunt,' that was also false, was it not?" a Democrat asked.

“I’d like to think so, yes,” Mueller replied.

“Well, your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it ...?”

"It is not a witch hunt," Mueller replied, seemingly irritated and cutting the questioner off. It was one of the few flashes of emotion from Mueller, an otherwise straight-laced former Marine.

He also reiterated that Russian interference in the form of email hacks and social media trolling in the 2016 contest was not a hoax and intended to specifically benefit Trump: “The indictments we returned against the Russians were substantial.”

5. Mueller offers a rare opinion on Trump’s praise for WikiLeaks: ‘Problematic is an understatement’

When asked by Quigley what he thought about then-candidate Trump imploring voters to read WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign, Mueller offered one of the few statements that extended beyond the four corners of his written report.

“Problematic is an understatement,” Mueller said of Trump’s quotes about WikiLeaks. It gives a “boost to an illegal activity. ... Disturbing and subject to investigation,” Mueller said. “Certainly calls for investigation.”

The Mueller probe concluded that emails were "phished" from John Podesta and the Clinton campaign by Russian state actors, then leaked to the controversial publisher of state secrets. Meaning, in Mueller's mind, a candidate for president of the United States was asking voters to access stolen property boosted by a hostile foreign power for his own personal benefit.

WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange now faces a host of U.S. charges but none in relation to the hack of Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign emails. He is being held in the U.K., pending extradition.

6. Did the Dems do themselves any favors? Probably not.

David Axelrod called it “very, very painful.” Chuck Todd said the Democrats were substantively correct, but “optics” were a “disaster.” Donald Trump Jr. called it “a great win for my father.” The president himself thanked Mueller for his testimony, which theoretically should be damaging to him.

Opinions were mixed on social media, but it seemed clear that Mueller’s nearly rote confirmation of his written report — he refused to read passages aloud, requiring lawmakers to read it instead — was hardly a political home run. At times, Mueller, who is 74, asked for members to repeat their questions and at least once garbled his speech. Some members seemed to have a finer grasp of the footnotes than he did, though the report exceeds 400 pages and was compiled by a sizable team.


In the end, Democrats saw what they wanted to see, Republicans the same. Will voters be any different?


7. Russia will probably try it all again

What will likely be lost in the political infighting is a warning from special counsel Mueller: This isn't over.

Mueller said he hoped this report and his testimony would be "a signal, a flag ... don't let this problem continue to linger."

“They’re doing it as we sit here, and they expect to do it in the next campaign,” Mueller warned about Russia. He added that “many more countries” were likely developing the same capabilities to meddle in U.S. elections, having seen the results of Russia’s campaign.

— Charles J. Johnson, on Twitter @Charliemagne

Here’s a recap of how Mueller’s testimony before Congress unfolded:

7:05 a.m. CT/8:05 a.m. ET: Mueller arrives on Capitol Hill for testimony

Robert Mueller has arrived on Capitol Hill to testify before the House Judiciary and House intel committees about his now-concluded Russia investigation.

Flanked by police officers in the Rayburn House Office Building, senior Mueller aide Aaron Zebley arrived with the former FBI director.

Mueller has publicly expressed his reluctance to testify and said he won’t go beyond what’s already in his much-scrutinized report at today’s hearings. The nation has heard the former special counsel speak only once — for nine minutes in May — and he did not go beyond what he had already outlined in writing.

Mueller was appointed in 2017 by Rod Rosenstein, the deputy attorney general in charge of the probe when then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself because of previously undisclosed contacts with Russians.

The investigation shadowed Donald Trump’s presidency for nearly two years and officially concluded in March, when Mueller submitted his 448-page report. The report found no criminal conspiracy on the part of Trump or his campaign to work with the Russian state to influence the 2016 presidential election. Mueller indicated there was some evidence of obstruction of justice on the part of Trump and his campaign, but said he was incapable of charging a sitting president. Attorney General Bill Barr said there was insufficient evidence to charge a crime, even if a sitting president was capable of being indicted.

-- Charles J. Johnson and Associated Press

7:41 a.m. CT/8:41 a.m. ET: Trump tweets as Washington readies for Mueller testimony

President Donald Trump is among the many across the country tuning in for Robert Mueller's testimony.

The president began tweeting on Tuesday night about Mueller and hasn’t much let up. On Wednesday morning Trump tweeted numerous attacks against some of the people initially involved in the Russia investigation.

“Why didn’t Robert Mueller & his band of 18 Angry Democrats spend any time investigating Crooked Hillary Clinton, Lyin’ & Leakin’ James Comey, Lisa Page and her Psycho lover, Peter S, Andy McCabe, the beautiful Ohr family, Fusion GPS, and many more, including HIMSELF & Andrew W?” Trump wrote.

He has continued to attack Mueller as highly conflicted, a charge so far without evidence. Mueller is longtime registered Republican and has served both Republican and Democratic presidents.

“So why didn’t the highly conflicted Robert Mueller investigate how and why Crooked Hillary Clinton deleted and acid washed 33,000 Emails immediately AFTER getting a SUBPOENA from the United States Congress? She must have GREAT lawyers!”

The president also sought to paint Mueller as a disgruntled job seeker, writing that he turned down Mueller for the job of FBI director before he was appointed to be special counsel by Rod Rosenstein.

“It has been reported that Robert Mueller is saying that he did not apply and interview for the job of FBI Director (and get turned down) the day before he was wrongfully appointed Special Counsel. Hope he doesn’t say that under oath in that we have numerous witnesses to the ... interview, including the Vice President of the United States!”

-- Charles J. Johnson

7:45 a.m. CT/8:45 a.m. ET: Top Republicans, Democrats open the Mueller hearings

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, New York, says his committee has “a responsibility to address” the evidence that Robert Mueller has uncovered in his Trump-Russia investigation.

Opening a three-hour hearing with Mueller, Nadler said there are themes to the hearing: “responsibility, integrity, and accountability.”

Nadler laid out the examples from Mueller’s report that committee members intend to focus on while questioning the reluctant former special counsel.

Nadler said “not even the president is above the law.”

The top Republican on the House Judiciary Committee then defended President Donald Trump.

Georgia Rep. Doug Collins says “the president knew he was innocent” and did not shut down Mueller’s probe, even though he had the authority to do so.

Collins said Russia meddled in the 2016 election but “the president did not conspire with Russians.” He said “nothing we hear today will change those facts.”

Collins said Republicans will also question the origins of Mueller’s investigation in the coming questioning.

-- Associated Press

Former special counsel Robert Mueller, is sworn in before he testifies before the House Judiciary Committee hearing on his report on Russian election interference, on Capitol Hill, in Washington, Wednesday, July 24, 2019. (Andrew Harnik / AP)

7:50 a.m. CT/8:50 a.m. ET: Mueller says Russia’s efforts to interfere in U.S. elections is ‘among the most serious’ challenges

Robert Mueller says Russia’s efforts to interfere in American elections is “among the most serious” challenges to U.S. democracy he has ever seen.

"There are certain points that bear emphasis. First, our investigation found that the Russian government interfered in our election in a sweeping and systematic fashion," Mueller said.

A number of Russians, including Russian military intelligence, were charged by Mueller with meddling with the 2016 election — hacking into email accounts of Democratic staff and running a sophisticated "troll operation" to post divisive or misleading political content on social media. As these indicted individuals are all outside the United States, it is unlikely they will ever be arrested or face trial.

Mueller made the statement as part of his opening remarks before the House Judiciary Committee. He’ll appear before the intelligence committee later in the day.

-- Charles J. Johnson

7:59 a.m. CT/8:59 a.m. ET: ‘We did not address collusion, which is not a legal term.’

In his opening remarks, Robert Mueller made clear that his investigation did not address whether or not President Trump or his campaign “colluded” with Russians.


“We did not address collusion, which is not a legal term,” Mueller said in his prepared opening statement. Instead, the former special counsel said they investigated whether members of the campaign engaged in a criminal level conspiracy to influence the 2016 election, saying they did not find evidence to support such charges.

The distinction is to some an important one: “Collusion” has become a term batted around in the media and online. The president himself tweeted “NO COLLUSION, NO OBSTRUCTION!” on Wednesday morning, one of many times he’s expressed the sentiment “no collusion.”

Trump’s son, Donald Trump Jr., met with Russians at Trump Tower to receive political “oppo” on their opponent Hillary Clinton, collusion by some standards. But, Mueller’s report makes clear this instance did not represent a chargeable offense.

In summation: Collusion and illegal conspiracy are not the same thing.

Mueller has been sworn in and is now testifying under oath.

-- Charles J. Johnson

8 a.m. CT/9 a.m. ET: Mueller dismisses Trump’s claim of ‘total exoneration’

Robert Mueller dismissed President Donald Trump’s claims of “total exoneration,” saying it’s not what his Russia report said.

Mueller told lawmakers on the House Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that investigators did not exonerate Trump of obstruction of justice.

He made the statement in response to questions from the committee’s chairman, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, an NYC Democrat.

Trump has repeatedly made the false claim the report fully exonerates him. For example, he tweeted on March 24, shortly after the report was delivered to the Department of Justice, “No Collusion, No Obstruction, Complete and Total EXONERATION. KEEP AMERICA GREAT!”

-- Charles J. Johnson and Associated Press

8:20 a.m. CT/9:20 a.m. ET: Investigation found Russia favored Trump, Mueller confirms

Robert Mueller said that he found that Russia believed they would benefit from Donald Trump winning the 2016 presidential election, rather than former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

The former special counsel was asked Wednesday if his investigation found the Russian government perceived a benefit if one of the 2016 presidential candidates won.

“Yes,” he said.

And which candidate would that be? asked Rep. Zoe Lofgren, a California Democrat.

"It would be Trump," Mueller said, after slightly garbling his speech.

The Russians executed a plan to boost Trump by hacking and releasing sensitive emails from Democratic staff — some through WikiLeaks — and posting content on social media and other internet forums that showed extreme political viewpoints in an attempt to keep voters from the polls, or drive people to vote out of anger or disgust.

-- Charles J. Johnson and the Associated Press

9:03 a.m. CT/ 10:03 a.m. ET: Did the Russia probe pay for itself?

One of the standing criticisms of the Russia investigation by Republicans is the cost of the probe. It’s reported to have cost up to $35 million in taxpayer funds.

Mueller hired about two dozen lawyers, detailed FBI agents, utilized intelligence analysts, accountants and comms staff over the course of the nearly two years he and his team were investigating.

Judiciary Chairman Jerry Nadler, a Democrat, addressed this in his opening remarks, saying, “In the Paul Manafort case alone, you recovered as much as $42 million—so that the cost of your investigation to the taxpayers approaches zero.”

So, is that true?

Yes and no. The investigation is funded by a permanent, indefinite appropriation for independent counsels by Congress, according to Politifact. In his criminal prosecution of former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort, Manafort was forced to surrender tens of millions in cash, real estate and other assets. Its total value is not yet clear, but it includes real estate valued at $22 million.

But, money and assets recovered during criminal proceedings does not directly reimburse the cost of the investigation. Instead, it’s funneled into the Department of Justice’s general assets forfeiture fund — this is generally seen as important best practice so that prosecutors are not driven by financial motive, but by the law. They don’t individually “get a percentage,” so to speak.

Did Mueller hand Congress a check for the exact cost the of the investigation? No. Did his team recover a large percentage if not the full cost of his staff and expenses? Yes.

In either case, Mueller’s probe cost much less than the $47.4 million spent investigating the Iran-Contra Affair, or the $69 million spent on investigating Bill Clinton from ’94 to 2002, according to The Washington Post.

-- Charles J. Johnson

9:07 a.m. CT/ 10:07 a.m. ET: Mueller says he didn’t interview for FBI gig, contradicting Trump’s tweets

Robert Mueller disputed Donald Trump's claim that Mueller was rebuffed in a bid to fill the post of FBI director.

Facing questions from lawmakers, Mueller said he spoke with Trump about the FBI job before he was named as special counsel, but "not as a candidate."

Then-White House chief strategist Steve Bannon has said that while the White House invited Mueller to speak to the president about the FBI and thought about asking him to become director again, Mueller did not come in looking for a job.

Trump tweeted Wednesday that there are "numerous witnesses," including Vice President Mike Pence, who could say that Mueller applied and interviewed for the job and was "turned down" for it.

Pence spokesperson Alyssa Farah told the Associated Press that the vice president “was present in the Oval Office when Robert Mueller interviewed for the job of FBI Director in May of 2017.”

-- The Associated Press

9:30 a.m. CT/10:30 a.m. ET: Trump breaks his Twitter silence

President Donald Trump broke his Twitter silence over the ongoing testimony of Robert Mueller in front of the House Judiciary Committee shortly after 9 a.m. CDT.

Trump tweeted an apparent quote from Fox News anchor Chris Wallace, tagging Fox in the tweet.

Trump spent the morning and some of last night slamming Mueller and his investigative staff — more on those tweets below.

-- Charles J. Johnson

9:56 a.m. CT/10:56 a.m. ET: Presidents can be charged with crimes after they leave White House, Mueller said

Robert Mueller said it would be possible to criminally charge a president after he left office in response to questioning by Colorado Republican Rep. Ken Buck.

Mueller flatly stated that because of a ruling by the Office of Legal Counsel, the Department of Justice's a legal administrative and advisory office, sitting presidents may not be indicted. As a result, he said, he did not make a determination as to whether or not to charge Trump with obstruction, but simply laid out his findings in the report, making clear he could not fundamentally clear the president of criminal obstruction — it's a frustrating gray area for the president's ardent critics and supporters alike

Pushing the line of questioning further, Buck asked, "You could charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office."


“Yes,” Mueller responded.

Democrat Ted Lieu of California continued investigating this point, asking, “The reason again that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of an [Office of Legal Counsel] opinion stating you cannot indict a sitting president, is that correct?”

Mueller replied, "That is correct."

Presidents can be held accountable for actions in office by Congress, Mueller has previously noted, through the impeachment process. However, because the DOJ’s position is presidents cannot be charged, it is unfair for prosecutors to publicly allege they have committed crimes without having to prove such allegations beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

No president has been criminally charged, though two have been impeached and Richard Nixon quit before facing almost certain removal from office. Nixon was pardoned for any crimes by his Vice President Gerald Ford when Ford took the Oval.

Whether or not charges can be brought after a president finishes his term has been a subject of legal debate, with most agreeing presidents lose criminal immunity after leaving the White House. Preserving evidence of criminal wrongdoing when documents are accessible and witness memories relatively fresh was a purpose of the report that Mueller noted in his only other public remarks about the probe.

-- Charles J. Johnson

10:12 a.m. CT/11:12 a.m. ET: Trump sons, adviser fight the Twitter battle

President Donald Trump's sons and advisers are weighing in on former special counsel Robert Mueller's congressional testimony with quips on Twitter targeting Democrats.

Donald Trump Jr. is calling the hearing a "disaster" for Democrats.

"Funny, Mueller can't understand the Republicans but he can totally understand the Democrats questions. This is a disaster for dems," Trump Jr. wrote.

Eric Trump says Ohio Republican Rep. Jim Jordan's comments at the hearing were "spot on." Jordan said Democrats should be investigating what he says are the false accusations that started the Russia probe.

Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway tweeted three words "drop the mic," but it's not clear to whose questioning or comments she was referring.

And the president's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, blasted Mueller's stumbles and calls for questions to be repeated, tweeting the former FBI director was "being destroyed on credibility, knowledge, competence and numerous 'ahs,' pauses and excuses like "beyond my purview."

-- Associated Press

10:41a.m. CT/11:41 a.m. ET: Mueller won’t quote himself

Robert Mueller told the House judiciary and intelligence committees that he would decline to quote from his report on the Trump-Russia investigation during his testimony before both panels on Wednesday.

That's according to an Associated Press source involved with the negotiations who spoke about the confidential talks only on condition of anonymity.

Mueller's refusal to read his own words has proved somewhat challenging for Democrats, who called him in with the idea that he could more clearly and broadly explain his findings to the American people.

Mueller has replied to questions with short phrases, often saying he defers to his report, and has often asked for a citation when he has his own team's words quoted to him.

Democrats are filling in the gaps by reading from the report themselves, methodically going through episodes that Mueller reviewed for obstruction of justice.

-- Associated Press

10:55 a.m. CT/11:55 a.m. ET: Meet the Illinois congressmen questioning Robert Mueller

Two Illinois Democratic congressmen will be among those asking former special counsel Robert Mueller questions at today’s House hearings: U.S. Reps. Raja Krishnamoorthi, of Schaumburg; and Mike Quigley, of Chicago.

Krishnamoorthi represents Illinois’ 8th District and Quigley represents the 5th District of Illinois. Both sit on the House Intelligence Committee. Read more about the congressmen here.

-- Chicago Tribune staff

10:59 a.m. CT/11:59 a.m. ET: Republicans press Mueller on hiring practices

Republicans pressed Robert Mueller to explain why a number of lawyers he hired to investigate Russian interference into the 2016 election are registered Democrats, or have donated to Democratic candidates, including some to Trump’s ex-opponent, Hillary Clinton. Republicans allege it’s evidence of political bias baked into the probe.

Andrew Weissman, one of Mueller's top deputies in the probe, was at the Clinton election night party in New York, a GOP member pointed out. In another case, he wrote an email praising then-Acting Attorney General Sally Yates after she refused to defend Trump's original "Muslim ban" travel orders.

Uncharacteristic of his testimony, full of curt answers and deferrals to the report, Mueller interrupted his Republican questioner to expand on his hiring practices.

"I have been in this business for almost 25 years," Mueller said. "And in those 25 years, I have not had occasion once to ask somebody about their political affiliation. It is not done. What I care about is the capability of the individual."

Mueller has been most animated when defending members of his staff, whom he has praised. Trump has repeatedly referred to Mueller's team on Twitter as "13 Angry Democrats."

The chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, a group of far-right, Tea Party-styled lawmakers, tweeted, “Mueller still struggling to answer even basic questions. He can’t accurately remember facts, evidence, or even his own conclusions. Folks—this guy didn’t run the investigation. His team of Resistance Democrats did.”

-- Charles J. Johnson

12:12 p.m. CT/1:12 p.m. ET: Democrats and Republicans bicker over meaning of Mueller testimony

It might surprise you, but Democrats and Republicans seem to disagree on the impact of Team Mueller's Russia investigation and the former FBI director's testimony.

The White House is calling former special counsel Robert Mueller's congressional testimony "an epic embarrassment for the Democrats." The House intelligence committee chairman says the report by the office of former special counsel Robert Mueller is "methodical and devastating."

Press secretary Stephanie Grisham issued a statement as Mueller prepared for the second round of testimony on Capitol Hill about his investigation into Russian election interference to favor the Trump campaign.

Grisham's statement reads, "The last three hours have been an epic embarrassment for the Democrats. Expect more of the same in the second half."


Adam Schiff, the intel chairman, opened the start of a second congressional hearing Wednesday afternoon after Mueller spent three hours testifying before the House Judiciary Committee earlier in the day.

Schiff, a Democrat from California, says the report also tells the story of "disloyalty to country, about greed and about lies."

Schiff says what is at stake is "our next election, and the one after that, for generations to come."

-- Associated Press

12:20 p.m. CT/1:20 p.m. ET: Trump tees off again on Twitter

First, he said he wouldn't be watching. Then, he said "maybe I'll see a little bit of it." But it seems the president, who often live-tweets cable news broadcasts throughout the day, is indeed watching Robert Mueller testify before the U.S. House.

Trump tweeted on Wednesday afternoon, just as Mueller’s testimony was resuming, “I would like to thank the Democrats for holding this morning’s hearing. Now, after 3 hours, Robert Mueller has to subject himself to #ShiftySchiff - an Embarrassment to our Country!”

Earlier in the day, New York Times White House reporter Maggie Haberman reported that West Wings sources told her Trump was spending the morning in the residence, not the Oval Office, indicating he was watching television.

-- Charles J. Johnson

12:32 p.m. CT/ 1:32 p.m. ET: Mueller says his investigation is not a ‘witch hunt’

President Donald Trump has repeatedly referred to the Russia election interference probe as a “witch hunt” (or even a “WITCH HUNT!”). That is, an investigation in which creating a premise for punishment is the true purpose — not discovering the truth.

Special counsel Robert Mueller, who led the probe for two years, dismissed those claims in his testimony.

“When Donald Trump called your investigation a ‘witch hunt,’ that was also false, was it not?” House intel Chairman Adam Schiff, a Democrat, asked.

“I’d like to think so, yes,” Mueller replied.

“Well, your investigation is not a witch hunt, is it...?” Schiff followed.

“It is not a witch hunt,” Mueller replied, slightly tersely.

Schiff prefaced his questions with a list of the crimes for which Mueller’s team has secured convictions or guilty pleas.

-- Charles J. Johnson

1:01 p.m. CT/2:02 p.m. ET: Axelrod calls Mueller testimony ‘very painful’

Obama's chief campaign strategist (and long ago Tribune scribe) David Axelrod seems to think Robert Mueller's House testimony is not going as Democrats had hoped.

Axelrod tweeted on Wednesday morning: “This is very, very painful.” He followed that tweet up, writing, “Not a commentary on the content. The report is damning. That was reenforced today. He has been an exemplary public servant, as people are both sides attested, but he clearly was struggling today and that was painful.”

That assessment dovetails with others by media figures that Mueller’s testimony is too restricted to the written report to be effective, and that Mueller has at times seemed confused by the questioning, asking for questions to be repeated and misremembering the first president to appoint him to federal office — Ronald Reagan, not George H.W. Bush.

Mueller, 74, served with distinction in the Marines during Vietnam, then served in various senior Justice Department roles in the Clinton, Obama and both Bush administrations.

-- Charles J. Johnson

1:23 p.m. CT/2:23 p.m. ET: Mueller on Trump’s tweets praising WikiLeaks: ‘Problematic is an understatement’

Rep. Mike Quigley, a Chicago Democrat, questioned Robert Mueller about whether the president is functionally above the law, as it relates to certain crimes

Quigley confirmed with Mueller that presidents can be charged with crimes after they leave office, then asked him what would happen if the statute of limitations on a crime expired before a president finished his term.

“I don’t know the answer to that one,” Mueller said.

Quigley pointed out that because the statute of limitations for federal obstruction of justice charges is five years, a president who serves eight years is, essentially, above the law in the early part of a two-term administration.

Mueller responded that he didn't necessarily agree with Quigley's characterization.

Quigley then pointed out several of Trump's tweets praising WikiLeaks, which published emails stolen from Clinton campaign staff at the time.

"Problematic is an understatement," Mueller said, of an American presidential candidate hyping stolen electronic records. It gives a "boost to what is and should be illegal activity," he said.

“Disturbing, and subject to investigation,” Mueller added. “Certainly, calls for investigation.”

The Mueller probe found that those emails were hacked at the behest of the Russian state, which favored Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton.

WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange has been indicted for alleged computer crimes and violations of the Espionage Act, but not in relation to the hack of Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign emails. He faces extradition to U.S. jurisdiction from the U.K. next year.

-- Charles J. Johnson

2 p.m. CT/3 p.m. ET: Mueller won’t say if he subpoenaed Trump Jr., wanted to interview the president

Robert Mueller has refused to say whether his team subpoenaed Donald Trump Jr., the president's son.

Rep. Eric Swalwell, a California Democrat, asked Mueller if he subpoenaed the president's eldest son or if he wanted to interview him. Mueller responded: "I'm not going to discuss that."

Mueller's report on the Russia investigation, which was released in April, said Trump Jr. had "declined to be voluntarily interviewed" by the special counsel's office.

There are two lines in the report, following that statement, that are redacted because they contain grand jury information.

Trump Jr. was a key figure in a 2016 campaign meeting with a Russian lawyer in Trump Tower in which damaging information from Russian interests was promised to the campaign.

Asked if he wanted to interview President Donald Trump, Mueller stated he did. Trump declined to sit for an interview with Mueller, who did not choose to subpoena him. Instead, Trump's legal team submitted written answers to a list of questions from Mueller's team.

When he was asked what he hoped to accomplish with his Russia probe, Mueller said he wants to send a message “to those who come after us.”

Mueller said he wanted the report to be "a signal, a flag ... don't let this problem continue to linger."

He also said that Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election was not a hoax: “The indictments we returned against the Russians were substantial.”


Trump had said the allegations of collusion and Russian interference are a hoax perpetrated by Democrats. Mueller’s report found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy — informally referred to as “collusion” – but pointedly did not exonerate Trump on obstruction charges.

-- Charles J. Johnson and Associated Press

2:20 p.m. CT/3:20 p.m. ET: Mueller raises alarm on Russian interference in 2020 election

Robert Mueller says election interference by Russia in 2016 was not an isolated attempt.

“They’re doing it as we sit here, and they expect to do it in the next campaign,” he told lawmakers. He added that “many more countries” were developing such capabilities.

During his opening statement earlier on Wednesday, Mueller said that Russia’s efforts to interfere in American elections is “among the most serious” challenges to U.S. democracy he has ever seen.

"There are certain points that bear emphasis. First, our investigation found that the Russian government interfered in our election in a sweeping and systematic fashion," Mueller said.

A number of Russians, including Russian military intelligence, were charged by Mueller with meddling with the 2016 election — hacking into email accounts of Democratic staff and running a sophisticated “troll operation” to post divisive or misleading political content on social media. As these indicted individuals are all outside the United States, it is unlikely they will ever be arrested or face trial.