Bob Muller, Robert Muller, Special Counsel discussed on Stay Tuned with Preet
Would you talk for a minute about the difference between evidence and proof? All I'm hearing is that there's no evidence of collusion. When when I see is evidence out, the was at all over the walls of collusion could use speak to that. Ferment. Thanks. Hey, Larry, thanks for your question as I think of it. Informally evidence and proof are kind of synonyms for each other. And I think the confusion lies in the way, some people have tried to spin things to say, there's no proof of X or there's no evidence of acts just because a prosecutor like the special counsel or someone else makes the ultimate decision not to bring a charge, the ultimate decision not to bring a charge simply means that the prosecutor does not believe there is proof or evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to convince a unanimous jury of the guilt of the person that you're thinking about charging. So when you talk about conspiracy slash collusion or obstruction. There's lots and lots of evidence at the end of the day, the special counsel for different reasons with respect to volume one and volume two of the Muller report chose not to bring a charge but you are right to be concerned the people trying to spin the situation as being devoid of evidence when someone testifies about something, and when there is a conversation between the president and Don Mcgann about getting rid of Bob Muller that is all evidence. Some people might not find it overwhelming. Evidence persuasive evidence, some of it may be circumstantial evidence, but it's evidence. This next question is in the form of a tweet from Charlie zero forty-seven. Hashtag ask pre now it's reported Muller doesn't want to testify publicly, what should we make of this? So Charlie, I'm a little surprised and confused by that reporting myself to be clear, the report that I read, I assume you're referring to is that special counsel Robert Muller's team has expressed reluctance and him testifying that reportedly because they're worried that he might look to political. So I don't know if that's the view of Robert Muller himself. I don't know even necessarily, if it's the view of his team, this might be secondhand third hand here say, so I wouldn't put a lot of stock in it, I sort of get the point what I've been saying all along based on my familiarity with Robert Muller, both as a colleague, and also as a staffer in the Senate when I saw him come and testify number of times by Miller doesn't shy away from testifying by mother doesn't shy away from hard questions by mother doesn't shy away from answering questions forthrightly when a lot of other people in his kind of position and station would hedge or Phillips. Busters we've seen some people do I've said before, and I'll say, again, I have never seen a person testify to a Senate committee more bluntly and more forthrightly and more credibly, so the whether or not they're concerned about him looking political. I don't think the based on my experience, watching him that his demeanor or his approach or the way he formulates his answers suggest being political, and maybe it's the case of things have changed with respect to his perception of the world because of all the ways in which his report has been politicized and his work has been politicized and the attacks on him and the rest of the team. So maybe he views the world through a slightly different lens, certainly the people around him may, but they're not Bob Muller and I still think whether or not he has concerns about how the testimony will be perceived. I think he owes it to the American people in the congress to come testify he's been silent. And there've been critics of his silence are also people who have supported his silence. And I think generally overall, it's probably a better strategy given how much noise there is out. There and how poor decision it might be to get into a back and forth with the president, the person who has the largest megaphone allowed us megaphone in the world. But now it's over. And now there are questions about what he found in questions about why he did what he did. And I think he owes it to everybody to come and testify, not behind closed doors, but publicly as I've seen him, do very, very well on many occasions, this next question comes in a tweet from at poker..