Congressman Andy Biggs: Calling Robert Mueller to Testify Likely a Distraction

By Masooma Haq
Masooma Haq
Masooma Haq
Masooma Haq began reporting for The Epoch Times from Pakistan in 2008. She currently covers a variety of topics including U.S. government, culture, and entertainment.
July 13, 2020Updated: July 13, 2020

Congressman Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) said Monday that he’s uncertain Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R-S.C.) supporting calls to have former special counsel Robert Mueller testify before Congress will yield any new information, but thinks it will more likely distract people from the real issues a few months before the elections.

“It might be very instructive and illuminating to get after Mr. Mueller again, but he’s not going to be very good if he’s anything like he was a year ago,” Congressman Biggs told America’s Newsroom.

Biggs said calling Mueller to testify would just create theatrics because it has been proven that there was no collusion.

“Well I mean the biggest risk that I would see is that he comes in and gives an incredible performance, but that is just not going to happen because Mr. Mueller himself said yesterday in that op-ed, he said there was no collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign he said that under oath, a year ago,” continued Biggs.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said he will call Mueller to testify about his investigation into whether President Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia, granting a request to Democrats on the panel.

“Apparently Mr. Mueller is willing—and also capable—of defending the Mueller investigation through an op-ed in the Washington Post,” Graham wrote on Twitter on July 12.

Graham added that “Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have previously requested Mr. Mueller appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify about his investigation. That request will be granted.”

Biggs was also of the opinion that Mueller wrote the op-ed to defend his investigation.

“I’m speculating, but I think his motivation is this, his investigation has been thoroughly discredited and debunked, and I think at some point, he feels like he’s got to defend it and this was a place to hang his hat,” said Biggs.

In the opinion piece penned by Mueller in The Washington Post, he defended the conviction of political operative Roger Stone. Stone’s sentence was commuted on July 10 by Trump, prompting top Democrats to raise allegations that his action was a threat to national security.

In the article, Mueller asserted again that Stone committed crimes related to messages he had about WikiLeaks and hacked emails that were published during the 2016 election.

“Stone was prosecuted and convicted because he committed federal crimes. He remains a convicted felon, and rightly so,” Mueller wrote. Stone, who has denied any wrongdoing, wasn’t charged with a crime related to collusion with Russia.

It’s the first time Mueller has made a public comment about the investigation in about a year. Mueller’s investigation didn’t find any evidence of collusion between Trump’s campaign and the Kremlin.

“We made every decision in Stone’s case, as in all our cases, based solely on the facts and the law and in accordance with the rule of law. The women and men who conducted these investigations and prosecutions acted with the highest integrity. Claims to the contrary are false,” Mueller wrote in the article.

Representative Biggs said that public opinion about the investigation is locked in, but that calling Mueller before Congress would be used by Democrats to attack the President.

“So, the only risk is that you dredge this whole thing back up just a couple months before the election. That’s the biggest risk, but the reality is, Mr. Mueller is going to have a really tough time convincing the American public that his prosecution, his investigations were not politically driven when we have the transcripts saying they knew, and he admits they knew that there was no collusion early on,” added Biggs.

Jack Phillips contributed to this report.