In a sidebar to Robert Mueller’s Wednesday statement, in which he stated he had no statement to make about his 400-page statement that he stated stands on its own, one truth that went unstated is Trump’s apparent innocence of the 1932 kidnapping death of Charles and Anne Lindbergh’s infant son.
In off the record comments, Mueller confirmed his initial conclusion: He found no evidence of collusion between Trump and Bruno Hauptman, who was convicted and executed for the baby’s death.
Initially, Mueller also stressed that he has no proof that Trump was NOT guilty of the heinous crime. He softened that position slightly when informed by White House officials that Trump was born in 1946, 14 years after the Lindbergh case was closed.
Charles Lindbergh … Who knows what secrets he took to his grave … if he is really dead?
“That sounds pretty solid … but I have no way of proving the Conspirator in Chief was really born after 1932,” Mueller said.
Trump spokesperson Sarah Sanders demanded that the case be closed, and then dropped a tantalizing proposition.
“If Barack Obama was born in Hawaii as he claims — a claim we find questionable — it would have placed him close to the Lindbergh’s home in Hawaii.
“Lindbergh allegedly died when Obama was allegedly 13 years old. . .so who knows what kind of collusion they could have been guilty of?” Sanders added. “Just sayin…”
We tried to confirm these worrisome revelations, but suspiciously enough, Charles Lindbergh, Bruno Hauptman and Robert Mueller were all unavailable for comment.
Bruno Richard Hauptmann: Did he kill the Lindbergh Baby AND vote Republican?
Obama and Trump, meanwhile, were both playing golf, presumably not together.
Postscript: The Lindbergh baby would have been 87 years old this year. House Democrats are on record opposing a Republican suggestion that exhumation, in the interest of transparency, might be necessary.
This is an artist’s depiction of how the Lindbergh Baby might look at age 87: