first_img  LINKEDINPINTERESTREDDITTUMBLRSTUMBLEUPON   Sen. Lindsey Graham speaks to media about the Mueller report at the Capitol in Washington on March 25, 2019. (Charlotte Cuthbertson/The Epoch Times) MSNBC Interrupts Coverage to Disagree With Senate Judiciary Chairman on Mueller Report Conclusions By Kristian Kafozoff May 3, 2019 Updated: May 3, 2019 Share this article Politics center_img The Senate Judiciary Committee official hearing on the investigation of Russian interference with 2016 election had invited Attorney General Bill Barr to testify concerning the Mueller report’s release.The Attorney General had issued a summary on March 24, concluding that the special counsel’s investigation “did not find that Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election.”However, according to the Washington Post, a letter sent by Mueller countered that conclusion, insisting that it “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this office’s work and conclusions. There is now public confusion about critical aspects of the results of our investigation. This threatens to undermine a central purpose for which the Department appointed the Special Counsel: to assure full public confidence in the outcome of the investigations.”So, when the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Chairman Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.) made the statement, “No collusion. No coordination. No conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian government regarding the 2016 election,” MSNBC broke off their coverage of the testimony to assert their disagreement with the Republican senator, the Washington Examiner reported.MSNBC anchor Brian Williams cut off the live stream, saying: “We’re reluctant to do this, we rarely do, but the chairman of the Judiciary Committee just said that Mueller found there was no collusion. That is not correct.” Brian Williams then invited his colleague Nicole Wallace into the conversation, continuing: “The report says collusion is not a thing they considered. It doesn’t exist in federal code.”The Washington Examiner’s Julio Rosas documented this part of the conversation in the following video clip: Show Discussion Sharelast_img

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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