Any answer would have to be weighed against
--rules of how to handle evidence
--grand jury rules
--national security disclosure requirements
--other on-going investigations
--whether he got the information first hand or in the form of document
--ensuring that the context is clear, both physical, verbal, and that phrasing and intonation are obvious, because nobody in the House will be interested in what actually was said, they have a goal and want to reach it and somebody should be looking out for the truth instead of his or her truth
--what he actually remembers, since very often details like "turned over" or "attempted to turn over" or "suggested turning over" are often crucial to those who care about logic and facts
I also suspect that the conversation would become heated and at this point Mueller isn't likely to suffer fools willingly, and nothing breeds foolishness like frustration. Whether in not getting the desired answer, or not being allowed to answer so that a part answer is taken to be the entire answer. The first time he's told, "It's a simple yes or no question" concerning something that is very much not a yes/no topic might be the last question he tries to answer.
Oh. By "some" in the subject line I mean "almost any."
= new reply since forum marked as read
