House Republican: Mueller Report ‘Extremely Biased’ Because It Doesn’t Mention Benghazi or Crooked Killary

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) is one of President Donald Trump’s strongest congressional allies. Despite watching his party’s majority in the House of Representatives completely evaporate during last year’s midterms, Meadows as remained steadfastly in Trump’s corner, defending him in the press and casting aspersions at House Democrats who are leading oversight investigations into Trump’s financial dealings both before and after he took office. Meadows has been particularly critical of the Mueller Report recently, calling into question the validity of the investigation that led to it, and even implying it was biased against Trump, which seems at odds with Meadows’ and Trump’s assertions that the report fully exonerates the president.

“It’s very easy to understand, really,” Meadows told reporters today. “The report was completely biased against Trump and also completely exonerated Trump. The president is so innocent that they couldn’t even get the report to say he wasn’t, despite how biased they are! Does that make any sense? Not if you live in a world where words have meanings, but I’ve found if I say stuff with enough conviction in my voice, my constituents, which are Trump’s base, will lap it up like Pavlov’s dogs, no matter what it is I’m saying, so I’m going to keep doing that right now.”

Rep. Meadows would go on to tell reporters he’s “beyond angry” and “outraged and incensed” about the Mueller Report, and it has to do with something very specific.

“I was beyond angry, sad, and disappointed that once I finally got around to reading it, and by reading I mean skimming it for the parts that confirmed my pro-Trump bias,” Meadows explained, “there wasn’t a single, solitary mention of Benghazi! And further, it didn’t even use the words Crooked or Killary when describing former Secretary Clinton!:

Meadows said what he did find in the report was “disturbing” and “unsettling” to him, because Mueller “missed a key opportunity to bash the Clintons and Obamas.”

“All it’s got is like a dozen instances of well-documented attempts by a sitting president to break the law and hamper an investigation,” Meadows said with deep exasperation in his voice. “What good is that gonna be with my angry, white, barely educated constituents?!”

Meadows questions why Mueller “didn’t even bother to investigate Vince Foster or Seth Rich or the Uranium One” and “decided instead to investigate the very real possibility that the sitting president colluded with a hostile foreign government to gain office and has since abused the living shit out of the powers he was granted ever since.”

“Ummm, excuse me? We still have not put the Fast and Furious thing to bed from the previous black urban administration and we’re supposed to focus on whether we have a lawless tyrant king inept fucking moron in office instead,” Meadows asked rhetorically. “I’m sorry, but screw all that! There wasn’t even a syllable on Benghazi in Mueller’s so-called report. I’m sorry, but that’s hogwash.”

President Trump, still finishing up his European state visit, was made aware of Meadows’ comments while on Air Force Individual-1. 

“That’s great! Absolutely great! Mark’s right. All the Angry Democrat focus on holding me accountable is illegal. I don’t care what the Constitution says,” Trump said. “It’s just an old piece of paper. It’s not like I have to take it seriously. I didn’t take some stupid little bullshit oath to defend some scrap of cuck-y paper, did I? Of course I didn’t. What kind of loser takes an oath to defend a piece of stupid paper? Not me!”

Constitutional Conservative Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) said he saw “absolutely no problem” with Trump’s comments, and he also said he thinks cancer is “prolly fun to get” and that water is “totally and completely dry.”

“Is that house over there on fire? Yes. Is it going to burn everything around it down if we don’t call the fire department? Yes,” Sen. Paul said, watching a nearby home go up in flames. “But will I call the fire department? I don’t know. It depends on whether I feel like it’s politically expedient to do it.”

Just then, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, happened to be walking by. She noticed the fire. Pelosi also heard Paul’s comments.

“You know, this is a rare moment of bipartisanship we’re witnessing here and now,” Pelosi said. “I too am worried that doing anything to put the fire out before we weigh the political costs is foolish and unwise. What’s a little fire damage if it means we gain some kind of temporary political advantage? Exactly. That’s why I agree with Senator Paul, and we should instead just watch everything burn. Don’t you agree? Of course you do, and if you don’t, what are you going to do about it? Vote? LOL.”

Another story: Economists Predict Medicare For All Could Be Funded For 400 Years By Charging $1 To Punch Mitch McConnell In The Face


Writer/comedian James Schlarmann is the founder of The Political Garbage Chute and his work has been featured on The Huffington Post. You can follow James on Facebook, Spotify, and Instagram, but not Twitter because he has a potty mouth.

James' newest satirical compilation is out now and available from Amazon, Barnes & Noble, and soon at WalMart.com.

More from James Schlarmann

NRA Exec Just Straight Up Doesn’t Give A Fuck About Your Dead Kids, America

FAIRFAX, VIRGINIA — As he came out of the corporate headquarters of...
Read More