All the while I was listening to Mueller, I was thinking about the coarsening of our culture, about how Mueller sounded like a guy trying to hearken the nation back to a bygone era.
Read the report, he said, but alas, we live in a time when we want everything reduced to soundbites or 140 character-tweets.
Consider the constitutional process for bringing evidence against a sitting president, he said, but alas, we live in a time when such guidance is too nuanced for many of us to make sense of it.
I wonder if we—all of us—have been so conditioned by Trump that not only is irony dead, but our ability to read between the lines is also dead. We seem to be looking for someone to scream the answer to us, but is that really what we want? Haven’t we all had more than enough of the screaming? I know I have.
5
The problem for a lot of Trump's critics seems to be that they are frustrated that everyone doesn't see what they see. They see only a very guilty man, and want everyone else to see this. They are particularly annoyed that the word "exoneration" has been used. People mustn't believe that. In their minds, nothing will exonerate this president -- even a failure to find evidence.
Barr's refusal to play along has just angered them even more. They are treating Mueller's as the final and only word. Barr has a different view. So they denigrate him because he, alone, stands in their way. Worse, many Americans believe him.
They are fighting for public opinion, which is not cooperating.
1
Facing an unhinged bully's misspelled rants on Twitter, how does Mueller's parsed legalese following a two-year investigation on said bully solve anything?
Mueller appears intimidated by the potential blowback from partisan flamethrowers, especially the President.
Not what the country needs at this critical juncture.
2
"“Under long-standing department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional.”
I'm looking for an explanation of this oft-quoted statement.
Does it mean that it's unconstitutional to charge a president with a federal crime while 'he' is in office?
OR
Does it mean that the policy itself is unconstitutional?
If anyone can shed some light on this I'd appreciate it. It seems to be ambiguous. Maybe that was the intention?
3
@Blue Pacific
To confuse things even more, Barr has said that Mueller contradicted himself, in front of witnesses, stating that this wasn't the only reason for his not recommending charges. Barr also said Mueller could have identified specific crimes without actually charging.
Mueller wants to indict without actually indicting. No wonder people aren't buying it.
1
Bob Barr is the pig that Robert Mueller refuses to wrestle.
2
If Bob Barr had the truth on his side he would have no need to spin the results of the Mueller Investigation. Bob Barr knows what the truth is. So does Donald Trump. They are both doing everything the can to distract the public and ride out what, for most, is an unfortunately short attention span.
There is no doubt in my mind that Barr made it clear to Robert Mueller that prosecution of any charges was simply out of the question. Go ahead, charge him, we're not going to prosecute. Barr can now claim that charging Trump was totally up to Mueller. It is quite easy to theorize that just as Mueller was known to play by the rules, that Barr's reputation for deceitfulness and ignoring inconvenient rules was well known throughout the FBI prior to his appointment. What this boils down to is that Barr is the pig that Mueller refuses to wrestle.
1
a gentleman of honor cut from the cloth of George C Marshall, Robert Mueller serves as an example to all of us. He has reminded us that civility, diligence and fairness are virtues that are part of lives well lived. While he is criticized for not doing enough to push for action against trump I believe he will be remembered as a beacon of virtue that helped to draw America back to decency.
4
The only defense we have left against Trump is to impeach him.
6
@proffexpert
This is true. Unfortunately, when you've been calling for impeachment from the day he took office, it's now just the "same old, same old," and Americans have tuned out.
Think "Crying, 'Wolf!'"
1
This is just another example of how fascists use democracy to destroy democracy. Same strategy as In Turkey, Hungary, and Brazil. Corrupt the courts and make the legislature irrelevant. Republicans believe that if a person is not caught, no crimes were committed and they know it's treason only until you get away with it. They have clearly gotten away with it and there's nothing anyone can do about it. We live in the Fascist States of America and that's just the way it is.
7
We are witnessing dictatorship style impunity - fascism. Here - I named it.
7
Flat out wrong. The constitution has nothing to say about indicting a sitting president. Get your facts straight.
9
So Mueller hands the report to "his good friend" Barr, and it does not bother him that Barr completely and willfully changes, hides and misinterprets its findings ?! Doesn't Barr's lying and shameless covering for Trump give Mueller pause?
3
Mueller had his decency weaponized.
The only way you can deal with disordered people who live by the You're Not the Boss of Me ethos is with consequences. Hard, boot-on-the-neck consequences.
I keep waiting for the consequences.
5
Dems in Congress: stop coddling Mueller, subpoena him, and set a date for a public hearing.
6
Mueller is described here as a caring Saint Fairness. He was told to find out if there was collusion. He took twenty-two months. It should have taken two weeks or two months at the most. Obama knew why. She lost to Trump for the same reason she lost to him. She ran a soulless campaign. He didn't need a bunch of buddy lawyers to figure it out. Muller did get Papadopoulos. The hardened criminal was sent away for 14 days, out in 12. Mueller indicted some Russians, not even in the country and some Russian companies. Flynn admitted he lied. What was Flynn doing that was so horrible. He was trying to get Russia to not vote for a U.N. resolution again Israel and to not over react to some sanctions. Nothing about the election. Mueller sent his agents to Manafort’s house early in the morning with machine guns. They went away with photos of his clothes closet. His prosecution was on business dealing years before that Obama's justice department passed on. Another early morning Mueller raid was on Roger Stone. A bunch of agents in tactical gear and automatic weapons went in and dragged him out in handcuffs. They let the press know to be there. Mueller wasn’t fired. He had free access to the White House staff and documents Rosenstein's offer to resign was rejected. One of Mueller’s guys got caught writing his girlfriend about how they were going to stop Trump. Saint Mueller does not like to be criticized by calling his investigation biased and a witch hunt. Democrats to the rescue.
3
@Ron
Considering the responsibility of the Obama Administration, it was a stroke of genius to try to pin "Russian collusion" on Trump. After all, it was under Obama that the interference actually occurred. They made it about Trump when it was really their own malfeasance.
Now that all the facts are about to come out, it looks like they were too busily hunting Trump to address the Russians.
"...By hewing to Justice Department policy that prosecutors should not interpret their findings in public, Mr. Mueller opened the door for one of the Trump administration’s savvier operators to interpret his findings for him."
That's crazy reasoning...since Mr. Mueller DID "interpret" at least one out of his two possible findings about Trump's involvement in Russiagate:
'...In his letter to Congress, Barr summarizes the Mueller investigation as looking at two areas: Interference by Russia in the 2016 presidential election and obstruction of justice.
The special counsel found that Russia did interfere with the election, but “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple efforts from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign.”'
https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2019/03/mueller-concludes-investigation/
The quoted part is the summary last sentence of a long paragraph in the Mueller report.
Interpret: transitive verb
1 : to explain or tell the meaning of : present in understandable terms.
Mueller explained (or interpreted from the evidence) that there was no evidence of conspiracy or coordination between the Russian Government and "the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it."
Mueller did not reach a conclusion about obstruction of justice, although as Special Counsel he had the mandate to do so.
He half-waffled.
2
Propaganda works. Democrats are outgunned in the media and the messaging. When will they learn-not in my lifetime.
1
I have a highly educated physician friends in Chicago who are Trump supporters. They watch Fox News and believe that Trump was exonerated after Barr said so. This is very disappointing. It is clearly time to start impeachment hearings. This is the responsibility of the house as directed by the constitution. Let’s not waste any more time.
3
@LAM Speaking of the Constitution, President Trump hasn't been found guilty of anything, so why would the Mueller report need to exonerate him? In America we investigate to see if a crime was committed and go from there, we don't assume a crime was committed and investigate to prove innocence. Or are we willing to topple the pillars of our legal system to prove Trump is destroying America. Sort of we have to destroy America to prove Trump is destroying America.
3
We need more than a 'functionary' in the person of Robert Mueller ...
We need patriots in the substance of our founding fathers, i.e., Nathan Hale, Patrick Henry, Bernie Sanders & Elizabeth Warren...
2
What ever happened to the Executive Summaries prepared by the Special Counsel? Barr decided not to distribute them so that he could continue misrepresenting what was in the Report until he released the redacted version a month later, I would bet that they are a digestible length without the need for redaction and capture the essence of the Special Counsel's work--a document for a public without the attention span to read the entire 448-page Report. Congress should subpoena and release those summaries to give the general public a better idea of what the report did and didn't say.
6
Since Barr thinks that presidents can obstruct justice without being charged with obstructing justice, I expect him to call for repeal with all obstruction of justice laws so that we can all play by the same rules. I think many of the Founders would disagree with Barr's view that presidents are above the law.
1
Mueller failed us. He didn’t fail in the investigation, he failed in the reporting. Which is half the job. He failed because he didn’t communicate his results to the American public clearly and directly. It may be the case that he can’t indict a sitting President. But Mueller could have said “The president committed crimes. We can’t indict a sitting president, but that doesn’t mean he’s innocent.” Mueller didn’t make that clear, instead he used the double negative “we’re not saying that Trump didn’t commit crimes”. That’s weak, and seems designed to confuse Americans.
Such vagueness certainly made it easy for Trump and Barr to twist Mueller’s results, which Mueller had to know they would do. Mueller’s job was not just to investigate by the book, but to communicate his results in a way that average Americans would understand, and Trump wouldn’t be able to distort. It would have been easy for Mueller to do that, but he presented his results in mushy legalese that obscured his findings, and he left it to Barr to do The right thing. Barr did not become Trump’s consiglieri to do the right thing. History will not treat Mueller well...
6
Mr. Mueller seems to be burdened with the same flaw as Jim Comey—excessive concern with upholding his reputation for probity and non-partisanship. He apparently believes that if you say something indirectly you are showing yourself to be above the fray.
If this report is meant to be an impeachment referral, as many commentators have suggested, he needs to state that simply and directly. Dancing around the topic and using euphemisms and hoping that people will infer his real meaning does not make Mueller appear noble and non-partisan. Instead, it only ensures that his words will be misunderstood and distorted. And it makes him seem timid and afraid of criticism (whether or not that is actually the case).
Appearing virtuous and actually being virtuous are two very different things. They can even come into conflict with each other. I am not certain that Mueller fully realizes this.
6
"One of the ironies today is that people are saying it is President Trump who is shredding our institutions. I really see no evidence of that. From my perspective, the idea of 'resisting' a Democratically elected president and basically throwing everything at him, and really changing the norms on the grounds that we have to stop this president--- that's where the shredding of our norms and institutions is occurring,"
Attorney General William Barr
4
@Dougal E
Millions of Americans agree. They have not forgotten how for 2 years, Trump was accused of colluding with the Russians. His critics have moved on to obstruction, which is their new and greatest big case against him. Conveniently, they ignore that their prior case was a dud.
Who are the real spinners?
They are the people who cried "collusion" till they were blue in the face -- until overnight they changed the subject and started crying obstruction.
They are the people who are spinning the story that Mueller "really" found obstruction even if he didn't say so.
They are the people who claim that long standing precedent prevented Mueller from expressing a view on whether Trump committed obstruction (it doesn't; it merely says a sitting President can't be prosecuted for a crime -- just ask Leon Jaworski, Lawrence Walsh and Kenneth Starr).
They are the people who are not satisfied with the Mueller report, so they are engaged in a no holds barred campaign to bully Mueller into saying something he didn't say in his report.
They are the people who can't change their minds and won't change the subject.
3
Mueller should have recommended to the attorney general that the Justice Department revise it’s memo and allow indictment of a sitting president. The constitution has nothing to say about this.
4
Trump gave Mueller 1.5 million documents, without keeping anything back like previous presidents.
If Nadler, or whoever, wants now, say, a copy of a parking ticket from Trump, the procedure is simple. They should prepare a plea before each of the courts all the way up to the US Supreme Court detailing what is the exact reason of that request, with full trial like documentation. It may take a few years, but that is what it takes.
It is all as simple as that.
4
@otroad
It's called a subpoena, and not a plea.
And as far as keeping anything back -- what "previous presidents" are you talking about??
Especially when we've yet to see Trump's income tax returns.
2
@N. Smith There is no law that states the President has to show anyone his tax return. As for a subpoena, if you don't feel there is ample reason behind it you don't have to comply. The previous administration ignored plenty of subpoenas, but I'm sure it will only be viewed as a problem when this administration does it. Can't tarnish that without any scandal legacy the media keeps propped up.
2
In almost any setting a complete and thorough documentation of work, a product of time and investment and research is accompanied by a presentation, and is enhanced and disseminated by one. It's age-old. From academic presentation and defense, business and commerce explanation and Q&A, even personal stories and fiction. It's how we all interact in a complex world. Is it ideal that we demand an even more classic thorough reading by all for complete message transfer, yes. Is this susceptible to some form of abuse and misuse, possibly. But a human communication and voicing, a personal interaction conveys focus and substance, and is a difficult thing to replace.
1
In regard to court trials: In the event that trump supporters are ever called for jury duty, I hope they do NOT report for service. They are evidently unable to tell when someone is straight up lying over and over, but are mesmerized by the defendant's twists of logic, they admire his dramatic outbursts. Under pressure, the defendant turns to the jury and demands that they lock up the judge for daring to question him! The detectives spied on him! They scared his dog when they arrested him! His lengthy rap sheet is none of your business; he is above error; just a victim. When he sits back to sneer and insult the court process on his twitter account, republican jurors can't take it anymore......they jump up and start arguing FOR the defendant! This guy has so many enemies, the entire law enforcement system is against him! Lock up the prosecutors, the detectives, the police officers, the judge and any members of the jury who disagree! Now as the defendant is telling everyone that he alone can pick 'the best judges', these same jurors would clap and volunteer to drag the judge to prison The defendant installs his daughter and son-in-law for life as impartial judges of America, so it's all good.
Then the jurors will go home and lecture their kids about bullies,the need for independent thought, family values and American traditions.
3
@deb
By that rationale, Mueller's chorus should be disqualified from jury duty as well.
The prosecutor is never going to declare someone innocent, yet that's the new standard now, and nobody bats an eye.
@deb well sure the prosecution didn't prove guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but the defendant didn't prove his innocence. That's not how our justice system works. If that is the new standard going forward, it isn't President Trump who is destroying America.
This is great: "Mr. Mueller’s decision to avoid explicitly saying that he expected Congress to weigh in on the obstruction-of-justice evidence left some top lawmakers confused about how to proceed."
What exactly is confusing?
We've apparently elected a bunch of dunces who can't figure out whether their job is to govern the country according to the Constitution, or to engage in political guesswork about what will do the least damage to their next campaign.
At some point, principle has to prevail over politics.
3
Mueller absolutely didn't play by "the rules." There is no doubt Mueller wanted Trump's head like all the other contributors to the Mueller fiasco. He claims that he could not institutionally charge Trump with obstruction which is wrong. Mueller saw Russians under everybody's beds but could not find any way to issue indictments. This anti Russia hysteria was not caused by following "the rules." It was a deliberate effort to create a crime where none existed. Clinton flops in the 2016 election. The Russians did it. The Pelosi prank follows the same pattern. The Russians did it.
5
Mueller documented many Russian crimes as evidenced by the multiple indictments against Russian military operatives. He also documented multiple contacts between Trump‘s team and the Russians. You just don’t like with the Mueller report says. By the way you should read it. I seriously doubt that you have.
4
After the press conference, DOJ and OSC jointly released a statement confirming that Barr was correct when he said Mueller thrice denied before witnesses that, but for the OLC ruling, he would have charged the President with obstruction of justice. This was consistent with the report's conclusion there was insufficient evidence to charge.
I believe NYT has already reported the real explanation when OSC denied the Wolff book report of indictment. OSC wanted to charge under Section 1512, not Section 1505, which is bound by the OLC. The FBI takes an expansive view of obstruction of justice and liberally employs threats of such charges against witnesses. For example, Papadopoulos refused to wear a wire but agreed to cooperate with special counsel Goldstein and plead to a lesser charge after he deleted his Facebook account. Mueller's FBI and DOJ so charged Arthur Andersen in the Enron case in 2005 when they destroyed records; special counsel Michael Dreeden argued as solicitor.
I suspect Dreeden and Goldstein wrote volume 2 to justify their expansive view. But they state they could not prove criminal intent, as the Supreme Court in Arthur Andersen overruled their legal theory 9-0 and required they prove beyond a reasonable doubt the offender "knowingly and corruptly" actually obstructed. This is why Barr on CBS said DOJ rejected their legal theory and declined to indict. If OSC interviewed Trump and he confessed, they would have and could have.
4
@joeshuren sorry, it's Michael Dreeben.
Barr told CBS that even if Mueller couldn't indict, he could report evidence of criminal offense. In fact, his assignment letter from Rosenstein and multiple later instructions from DOJ specifically clarified the OLC ruling did not prevent his investigation. I'm no lawyer, but law professor Jonathan Turley and former federal prosecutor Andrew C McCarthy have maintained with Barr that OSC could investigate and reach conclusions about criminal conduct, no matter OLC. If Mueller didn't want to do it himself, he could have provided a confidential report to the AG with evidence and put him on the spot. He didn't, but instead referred to conclusions in his report, which said he couldn't find evidence of criminal intent to obstruct.
Of course, the House can establish rules for impeachment and not necessarily accept the 9-0 Supreme Court definition requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal intent. But now it will have to do that without the evidentiary materials from OSC, just the report.
@joeshuren sorry, it's Michael Deeben.
Barr told CBS that even if Mueller couldn't indict, he could report evidence of criminal offense. In fact, his assignment letter from Rosenstein and multiple later instructions from DOJ specifically clarified the OLC ruling did not prevent his investigation. I'm no lawyer, but law professor Jonathan Turley and former federal prosecutor Andrew C McCarthy have maintained with Barr that OSC could investigate and reach conclusions about criminal conduct, no matter OLC. If Mueller didn't want to do it himself, he could have provided a confidential report to the AG with evidence and put him on the spot. He didn't, but instead referred to conclusions in his report, which said he couldn't find evidence of criminal intent to obstruct.
Of course, the House can establish rules for impeachment and not necessarily accept the 9-0 Supreme Court definition requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal intent. But now it will have to do that without the evidentiary materials from OSC, just the report.
1
@joeshuren I agree with that to a point. But when the OSC denied that a document with obstruction charges on it didn't exist, or something to that effect, it doesn't mean that it never existed. The statement was carefully worded.
Also, even if Trump had confessed to obstructing justice, it would have well been in his rights because once he understood the investigation had corrupt antecedents, he had a duty as the chief executive to end it. Of course he couldn't for political reasons which turned out to be prescient. Mueller's investigation was essentially a continuation of Comey's investigation, which relied on the scurrilous Steele dossier paid for by Clinton et al plus other dubious and possibly fabricated intelligence.
The idea that Trump would be charged with obstruction after he was falsely accused would not have sat well with the jury in the court of public opinion. That is why impeachment is not going to happen at this point, based on the current evidence. It would be perfectly natural for him to attempt to obstruct justice when he knew he was falsely accused. In fact, you could argue that he wasn't obstructing justice, he was obstructing INjustice.
2
Dowd’s op-Ed aphorism “Fair play is no match for foul” rings loud and clear in current day politics. By sticking to the books, Mueller got played and out-played by Barr’s misrepresenting the report. First impressions last as far as the non-reading sound-bite oriented public majority is concerned and Trump simplified the message by his no collusion, no obstruction mantra.
The Report’s legalese double negatives nuanced wording which was easily manipulated by Barr and Trump allies was no help for public understanding . Barr’s most recent CBS interview post Mueller public statement has brought additional “lawyerly” muddling of The OLC and DOJ guidelines. Don’t expect the American public to clearly grasp the meaning of the law when it seems that there are two different interpretations. Are Mueller and Barr even speaking the same English?
This is why Mueller should testify before Congress. If he's truly a patriot and loves this country, his work is not done! He shouldn’t leave the country in a muddle.
7
Mueller was too cute by half.
2
@Imperato
He certainly had a knack for going in and out the back door surreptitiously.
2
We need another Daniel Ellsberg to simply find and release an unredacted copy of the Mueller report and publish it in The NY Times.
What are Trump and his enablers such as Senators Graham and McConnell afraid of ? That truth ? Appears so....
2
Don't make Mueller out to be some patriotic hero because he's not.
America watched Trump as he admitted to Lester Holt that he fired Comey to stop the Russian investigation.
America and the world watched Trump as he stood next to Putin, boast, "We...I beat Hillary Clinton."
America witnessed Putin answer a reporter's question if he instructed the Russian government to help Trump win the election . Putin answered yes.
Mueller's report took 4OO pages and millions of dollars and could NOT spell out what we already knew.
Yesterday Trump tweeted he had nothing to do with the Russians helping him win the election. Thats right, our government has allowed this illegitimate president bring nothing but chaos and hated to our country.
6
I think the report itself needs a publicist who can create a campaign that sustains high interest around the report and breaks the material down to make it more accessible. I’d love to see the summaries both read aloud and serialized in print in all kinds of high visibility media. National immersion would help help everyone understand and debate the actual details and we need to. Hearing Mr. Mueller did convince me I’d been negligent in not directly reading the report. I got the audio version, which is free on audible. Public libraries have free ebooks and audiobooks too and, if they haven’t yet, should make this one available with no waiting lists.
As for Mr. Mueller, I thank him. His service and that of his staff has been extraordinary. We may never know the full story. And in speaking, he reminded the country of what strong and ethical leadership looks like. Regardless of the shallow edge Trump and Barr might hold in the short term I feel the message is beginning to take hold and I pray it will prevail.
I do agree that his lawyerly locution is challengingly nuanced for public consumption. I don’t grasp what prevents him from directly saying that if it were any other individual than the president there would have been sufficient reason to pursue charges. Televised testimony could create additional clarity. We need that. And we need a congress that understands that they must stop reading tea leaves for the future and do the right thing in the present.
2
@Pauli
Put it out with the next release of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Edition.
1
I think Mueller did what was right and true by operating within his mandate. If, in the end, the congress fails in their constitutional duty and voters aren't moved by the facts in the report and the righteous stoicism of Mueller's adherence to the rule of law, then that's on the rest of us. I think Mueller has done the honorable thing every step of the way. Leave the sausage making to the sausage makers.
5
Was it Trump who made the new rules, or the Republican party, who for years have been pretending that the facts don't matter, that reality is whatever public perception believes it is? Did Trump change the Republican party, or was he simply the first one to fully exploit the tools the Republican party has honed - to gain political dominance?
Like Comey before him, Mueller has failed to grapple with the moral decay of the congressional Republican leadership, which started well before Trump was even elected. Conservatives by definition are reluctant to embrace change, so perhaps that accounts for the reluctance to acknowledge the seismic shift that has taken place within the Republican party.
It is long past time for people of conscience to publicly abandon the Republican party.
5
@DebbieR
Good points all. I don't think Trump changed the party. He just exposed their supposed "values" for the shams they were. The few decent ones left jumped ship and retired.
2
Except there are many, including Barr, who have challenged Mueller's interpretation of those memos (a/k/a "the rules"). He is even on record contradicting himself with Barr.
Mueller wants to indict without indicting and to find guilt without identifying a crime. That's not how most Americans want their Justice system to operate.
6
If Congressmen Nadler and Schiff actually use the powers given to them by the Constitution. If Congress labels Mr. Barr and McGahn with Contempt of Congress.
If Congress will energetically subpoena witnesses to testify under oath before Congress, and take any slackers to court to force them if necessary, only then will Congress get with the program.
The alternative will be America will no longer have any semblance of a Department of Justice or three branches of government.
Congress, grow a spine!
4
@Steven of the Rockies
Has it occurred to those demanding impeachment that the case may not be as solid as they believe?
Mueller's "sophistication" made him blind to the new rules and ineffective.
2
Mueller is Ned Stark while Trump is a combination of Cersei and Joffrey.
1
The depths to which my country has sunk is truly sad. The people running our government have no intellect, morals, principles or shame. Somehow we must get rid of them. Please VOTE DEMOCRATIC.
3
@libdemtex The depths to which my country has sunk is truly sad. The people running our government have no intellect, morals, principles or shame. Somehow we must get rid of them. Please VOTE DEMOCRATIC.
You cannot want people of morals, principles or honor in office and vote Democrat. The two are antithetical.
If Mueller had simply given his press conference right before submitting the report, all of this would have been completely different. All he really had to do was read a paragraph in front of the cameras stating that a sitting President cannot be indicted and therefore Congress must determine what to do with the evidence.
Instead he inexplicably allowed a 24/7 propaganda machine to outright lie and mislead the American people for 2 months. How, after investigating liars and cheaters for 2 years, could he give his report to those same liars and cheaters with no comment? How could he invest 2 years of his life into this and then sit back and allow it to be misrepresented and redacted? How disappointing.
So now the American people have a choice - read and digest a 500 page report, or simply believe partisan spin and move on. Hmm I wonder what the average person will do?
Please vote D in 2020.
5
I can only imagine what a dedicated member of the Mueller team must think of being described—by the president of the United States, no less!—as one of Earth’s worst human beings.
Let’s keep this to a short, national nightmare. Vote.
3
It amazes me (but doesn't surprise me) the amount of coverage Mueller's statement received and the absolute dearth of coverage in this newspaper that Barr's substantive interview on CBS this morning, part of which were released last night, has received so far in this newspaper. Here's sampling of it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8qf7u-q1Aw
3
Mueller was naive, and was played by Trump and his minions. Trump's only true talent is manipulating the media to affect public opinion.
3
Cant Mueller be subpoenaed?
1
Yes and she should be.
Long story short:
Republicans do what they want.
Because the democrats let them.
It's the same old song...
P.S. I'm officially sick and tired of hearing about Mueller and his oh so important report. Never has so much time been spent on such a waste of time. Nobody's gonna read your magnum opus, Bob. Thanks for nothing.
It is very hard when you play by the rules and do an extensive investigation to get all the facts, only to find that you are dealing with someone who does not i.e. Trump. Worst of all, that person (DT) has the backing of people (GOP) who don't play by the rules either. Both are only interested in themselves and/or promoting their party.
38
"Mr. Mueller seemed to expect that the system would work as it had in the past, with Congress or perhaps voters making the decision about whether Mr. Trump had committed a crime, only to see the president’s handpicked attorney general..." Is this supposed to make sense? Mueller worked for the DOJ, reported to them, and the DOJ made the decision. That is how the system is _supposed_ to work. Mueller does not report to Congress.
2
So, this is what we have. The report from a man of integrity, honesty, and principles, reporting on the of the workings of a man who is the polar opposite. Ergo, Mueller playing by the rules and Trump making up new ones is hardly "news", is it?
We have but one choice, that is, to try to have as many people as possible to read and understand the Mueller report. It is essential to our democracy as is the purity of our vote. Carl Reiner and Robert De Niro's efforts to make the report public and digestible in two-part videos for the public to digest is commendable if only for all of we laypersons to understand so that we know what Trump actually did, and to know why he is doing what he is doing now.
In interviews I have seen of Trump supporters who innocently do not know why Trump is being hounded by the Press, Democrats and so many others, I think we owe them as well as ourselves this service of complete disclosure.
If anything at all, all of us need to be reminded that Mueller opened and closed his remarks with reminding us that our electoral process was compromised, that it could and would probably happen again, and it is this that should concern all Americans...I don't think all Americans know this.
2
@norinal
Barr is also a man of integrity and principles. He is considered a lawyer's lawyer. He has been attacked ruthlessly.
4
@AACNY
Barr is compromised by this president -- which is the only reason how he got this job.
2
Mr.Mueller is precise and reticent-he has been a soldier and a respected lawyer.Mr.Trump is the opposite of these traits, careless and without conscience.Mr.Mueller is right that his report speaks for itself, the problem is that most of us do not want to read through the 400 plus page report.Everyone has access to TV and would listen carefully to what he had to say.The medium is the message and in this case it would be TV and not Trump’s incessant, incorrect tweets.
4
I take this article as a tacit admission that the President has outplayed everybody in this deal, giving the lie to months of commentary by the mainstream press that his opponents had the upper hand in the battle over the Mueller report. It's an excellent blueprint for future targets of the Feds on how to fight the system.
1
Of course Trump stole the show. Want more American’s to pay attention to the Mueller report? Use the report as the basis for an actual show - i.e. a binge-worthy Netflix series, a mainstream movie or a Broadway musical. Imagine what Lin Manuel Miranda or Aaron Sorkin could do with such rich material.
2
Agree. It has to really reach the public. I think it should be serialized in audio and print and appear in the most popular media sites. Now! There’s no time to waste.
The DOJ rules are based on the Constitution. The president can be indicted after but not before he’s removed from office. The Federalist Papers are also unequivocally clear about this. American citizens too busy to read the entire report can make an informed decision by reading the Constitution, two Federalist Papers, and the two introductory sections of the Mueller Report which Robert Mueller summarized in his press conference.
The Federalist Papers are not law. They were propaganda.
1
For the sake of the future of America's democracy and all that he has conscientiously worked for throughout his career Mr. Mueller must now bite the bullet and stand up in the public arena and explain in clear language, understandable to the vast majority of American voters who are not lawyers, just what his investigation found regarding Russian meddling in the 2016 election and Mr Trump's attempts to obstruct that investigation. Most Americans, presumably that includes Donald Trump, have not read the redacted report made public several weeks ago and what they know of the Mueller report has been biased by the interpretation of others. Now it is time for Mr Mueller to put his spin on the Mueller report.
2
Ask Mitch McConnell if he has read the Mueller Report, and how does he square the reports findings and his constitutional responsibility by the oath he took to uphold it?
3
Bob Mueller is out of time, and by this I mean that he is behaving as if he were living in a different time and America than Donald Trump, Bob Barr, and Mitch McConnell are presently inhabiting. His insistence that the report says it all reminds me of a mildly exasperated professor, who is annoyed that the lecture hall isn't getting his point. The truth is, Mr. Mueller isn't getting the point.
Bobby! Read my lips: You have to speak more plainly to capture the attention of the the Fox News audience and the Republicans. The Dems get it. They may be dithering over the pros and cons of impeachment. But they get the point. It's the Republicans who have their heads stuck in the sand.
3
No, seriously? Mueller's "testimony" has been transcribed in advance and covers 450 pages? And he expects his fellow citizens to not only read the two volumes, but also read between the lines of the legal jargon to uncover his true opinions.
Perhaps readers could limber up for this wrestle with an unfamiliar technical vocabulary by skimming the first half of Moby Dick and see how they do with whaling terminology. And that's a literary masterpiece--no offense Mr. Mueller, you can twist a mean phrase or two yourself, assuming you wrote this "testimony" yourself.
Could a pal--say Barr or Comey--persuade Mueller to watch the classic scene where Groucho Marx interprets legalese: "The party of the first part."
\\Mr. Mueller handled the part of his investigation involving the president’s conduct in office with extreme care, allowing only a part of his team to develop evidence on the obstruction-of-justice matter. The other investigators were walled off from that part of the inquiry, according to several people with knowledge of the structure of the special counsel’s office.//
Oh the irony. Why would Mueller feel it necessary to wall off parts of his investigation from "other investigators?" Did the reporters think to ask themselves that question?
\\Yet Mr. Trump portrayed the Mueller investigation as out of control — an ever-expanding blob that consumed anything in its path — and his attacks on the special counsel and his team began immediately. //
Given that Mueller had to wall off certain investigators, maybe Trump has a point, no?
3
It seems President Trump is spending most of his time self promoting, campaigning, tweeting, doing personal business, and staging or dramatization. Not to mention, you can’t get straight answers! I just want him doing some real work!
If he were an average employee of government or corporate America, . . . He would Be Fired!
1
This is precisely on point. Too many Democrats have not caught on to the fact that the rule book is in shreds. And, decent Republicans (what's left of them) are missing the point, as well. While Comey decided to depart from custom and sink Hillary Clinton's campaign in its final week, Robert Mueller did the opposite. Instead of saving this country from the virulently anti-democratic Trump, he decided to go the extra mile to protect the presidency? Trump has already ruined the presidency, as we know it. Thanks for nothing, Bob.
2
Congress works hard to pass good laws. However, none are perfectly written. There have always been cadres of lawyers and accountants looking for ways to get around them for profit, i.e. loopholes. While it's terrible that imperfect laws, made for the good of the country, are exploited by these loophole-hunters in search of higher profits, it's ludicrous that the same tactics are being used by those elected as public servants.
The president of the US has brought his corporate, self-serving, loophole-hunting mindset to the head of the public sector. He swore to uphold the laws, but does the complete opposite. He has broken his prime oath. This alone is worthy of impeachment, as it promotes the rapid decay of the entire system. Disgusting.
I watched Barr's summary press conference and thought something's hinkey. So when the report became available to download I read the two summaries right away (and the rest as well).
Barr didn't mischaracterize the report - he lied. And when Barr lied (and keeps on) Barr proved Mueller's charge that Trump obstructed justice and, if not for being president, would have been indicted. People lie is to hide something, and the reason criminals lie to to hide crimes. If Barr did not think there was no crime, why the lies.
Next, Barr keeps saying that Muller could have made a charging decision. Muller should take that as a release from that DOJ memo and speak out.
3
The problem as I see it is not Trump, who we knew would be a terrible president and would act as he's been acting.
The trouble is with a certain senator from Kentucky who was voted into his office by - how many people? - and now seems to have an iron grip on the rest of the Republican senators as well as the judiciary.
Maybe we should just let Trump be Trump, and should re-focus our attention and energies on that one man determined to destroy our Constitutional norms. Mr. McConnell is actually more mentally unstable and more dangerous than Trump to allow this spectacle to continue while he "runs" - and ruins - the country.
2
It's like after waiting for the results of a pregnancy test for criminal intent, Dr. Mueller told us trump's a little pregnant.
But that's not possible - either he is or he isn't.
Dr. Mueller's actual analysis of trump's criminal condition, indicates he's very pregnant and very over due.
We've been expecting for over 18 months. Deliver him already!
1
If Mueller had simply given his press conference right before submitting the report, all of this would have been completely different. All he really had to do was read a paragraph in front of the cameras stating that a sitting President cannot be indicted and therefore Congress must determine what to do with the evidence.
Instead he inexplicably allowed a 24/7 propaganda machine to outright lie and mislead the American people for 2 months. How, after investigating liars and cheaters for 2 years, could he give his report to those same liars and cheaters with no comment? How could he invest 2 years of his life into this and then sit back and allow it to be misrepresented and redacted? How disappointing.
So now the American people have a choice - read and digest a 500 page report, or simply believe partisan spin and move on. Hmm I wonder what the average person will do?
Please vote D in 2020.
96
@Frank Roseavelt - Mueller handed his report to his supervisor, AG Barr who then intentionally gummed up everything. It was not Mueller's job to provide an oral summary of his summary of the report. It was and is the job of every member of Congress (House of Representatives and Senate) to read the report. Americans who want to hold their elected officials accountable should also read the report.
It's available on Amazon for Kindle for FREE. The Kindle app is free, too.
It's also read by Vice on YouTube.
3
@Frank Roseavelt
Mueller’s report was for the Attorney General, not the public. It was Bob Barr’s decision to release it. You may consider him a “liar and a cheater” but he has been open and transparent. Read the report or not, the choice is yours, and you have Bob Barr to thank.
Vote Your conscience in 2020
I really believe he believed that Barr would’ve done the right thing. That was the first mistake Mueller made. The second mistake was submitting his own summary to Barr, which is most likely the ONLY document Barr read, which Barr proceeded to reword to Trumps liking. Mueller isn’t stupid, and I truly believe he’s “resigning as special investigator” so he could help pursue charging him when he becomes a citizen. He could handle things a lot different from OUR side of the government.
3
The slightest criticism of Trump, invites abusive responses. name callings and vindictive actions from this malignant narcissist, with his 7th grade emotional immaturity.
What is tragic is that only a handful of Republican Senators or Congressman dare to utter a word of condemnation of such behavior, not to mention 80 percent of his evangelical followers and the remaining his 60 million worshippers...
34
Reality shows get higher ratings these days than "Law and Order."
Mueller needs to get with the times.
6
Donald Trump's response and continued spinning of what the report actually says, and insulting and calling Robert Mueller integrity into question; is exactly why Robert Mueller needs to be willing to appear before the Congressional Judicial Committee, along with his other investigators who are also being smeared as political hacks by Donald Trump.
I think Robert Mueller means well, but it's time to stop with the nuisance regarding your findings in the report, and come and state in clear language whether Donald Trump would be prosecuted if he were not the President, and explain some of your findings regarding the Trump Tower, and what you thought of Donald Trump's responses in the questionnaire, etc, etc.
I don't care if you repeat what you stated in the report publicly in questioning by the committee, it has a much broader and larger impact on the public who tends to pay more attention to what they see and hear for themselves rather than read a report of over 400 pages in government legalese.
20
@Chico - There is NO reason for Mueller to appear before Congress if they haven't done their work and read the report. He'll answer questions with, "As state on page 25 of Section One..." Just a chat, skip it. To support a fact finding mission, they have his number.
Trump keeps saying that Mueller is/was "conflicted" in his role as special counsel. Does anyone know what Trump was trying to imply when he called Mueller conflicted? Why doesn't some White House news reporter who has access to the POTUS ask for an explanation of Trump's description of Mueller as "conflicted"?
15
@RLW - POTUS Trump has repeatedly made the false claim that Mueller had a conflict of interest ("was conflicted), but nobody has agreed that there was any conflict of interest. POTUS Trump claims there was disagreement about a $1,000 golf fee and that Mueller was angry about not being selected for a position in his administration after meeting with president-elect Trump.
POTUS Trump can't imagine that everyone isn't as petty and vindictive as he is. Project much, POTUS Trump?
4
@RLW
Didn't this "conflict of interest" have something to do with Mueller's membership fees at a Trump golf resort?
1
@RLW
If you don't have your partisan goggles on, it's very easy to see that Mueller was conflicted in several ways.
When several of the prosecutors on his team are either demoted or fired from the DOJ, that's a problem.
When the lead prosecutor mimics Comey's gross and appalling mistake of implicitly calling the accused a criminal without actually pressing chargers, that's a conflict.
No matter what you think of Trump's boorish and aberrant behavior, if you respond in kind that's on you. That's not on Trump. This is especially the case if you are the Special Counsel and contradict yourself with double negatives.
1
The wheels of justice turn slowly, yet grind exceedingly fine. There is so much additional evidence of criminal behavior by the Trumps that Mueller has uncovered, e.g.; the 14 criminal referrals to other prosecutors, that Congress must have. The full disclosure of the information will disgust many more people than that which has already been disclosed. The House is doing the thing properly! Full disclosure is what Trump fears because it will even bother Republicans Senators.
12
There are so many thing wrong with this picture, one hardly knows where to begin.
But at this point, all you need to know is that under a decades-old policy of the U.S. Department of Justice, a sitting president cannot be charged with a federal crime.
And the Mueller report has left it all in the hands of Congress.
It also didn't exonerate him.
This case is far from closed.
19
How clueless is this guy that he thought he could hand his work over to Barr and that Barr would do the right thing?
19
All of Donald Trump‘s soundbites are lies. And it is the job of the New York Times another respectable members of the press to say so each and every time he contaminates our air with his falsehoods. All he is doing is protecting his base which he has managed to brainwash .
The other 65% of the country are smart enough to know that Donald Trump is a fraud and that Donald Trump is a liar and that Donald Trump is very likely a criminal who will be prosecuted once he is out of office.
25
I remember the Bill Clinton impeachment. Larry Flynt, the owner of Hustler magazine and the hero of a documentary on the first amendment, offered $1 million to anyone who came with proofs that any of the impeachers was worse than Bill. A number of long term affairs and out of wedlock kids popped up to moralizing representatives, who had to resign. It was a debacle, fun to watch.
If anyone thinks that Trump would take an impeachment, based on his self defense against a coup attempt,
if anyone thinks that Trump would take it sitting down, that is pure delusion.
The amount of raw, unrestrained humiliation which he would inflict upon each of the impeachers individually, impeachers whose power is just symbolic, is hard to imagine. And most Americans will view it as justified.
History will be made. They first tried to take him down with a coup, lasting for years. They made up charges, they spied on him. When that didn't work, they tried to impeach him for defending himself. They ended up totally humiliated. And he won. Bigly.
A true American hero.
5
@otroad: So someone you see as a "true American hero" will inflict "raw unrestrained humiliation" on his political opponents while they are trying to do their constitutional duty, simply to exact political revenge? I assume your other heroes include Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon?
4
@otroad
For all the calls about transparency of Trump's finances, he is doing everyone a favor.
The list of Mar-a-Lago members, golf club members and who owns Trump tower condos would be far more embarrassing to the Dem elite than whatever stupid business decision lie in his financial statements.
Since insider trading for Congresspeople was only declared quasi-illegal in 2013, it would most embarrassing to see a true financial picture not just their sanitized tax return. https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2013/04/16/177496734/how-congress-quietly-overhauled-its-insider-trading-law.
@otroad
The elephant in the room is that (a) Trump was incessantly accused of colluding with Russia for 2 years, and (b) Trump was exonerated on collusion.
Americans will take a dimmer view of anything democrats now do after listening to them charge collusion and watching them come up empty on that charge.
2
And now Barr is saying he disagrees with Mueller’s reading of DOJ policy with regard to charging a sitting president, which is the final bitter irony. Next time we are so lucky as to have a non-Republican president the GOP will follow Mueller’s precedent about as closely as they intend to honor the “Biden rule.” Sorry Mueller, you work for us and your reputation really doesn’t matter a whit to me. Time for some straight talk, under subpoena if necessary — and by the way your GOP friends won’t say boo-hoo when Trump’s DOJ tries to charge you with treason. How will that look? (And who cares? Get cracking!)
6
John McCain is the individual that imported the dossier from abroad. Accurate portrayal of Trump or shoddy stuff made up by Clinton or disinformation by Putin, make your pick, but it is John McCain who lend his name and stature to the dossier. It’s impact on our politics is staggering. My money is on the dynamics it unleashed costing the Dems the 2020.
4
Unfortunately, the "rules" (and attitudes) were completely out of date and ineffectual, for a criminal and his gang, who never play by the rules. The sound of sloppy raspberries resonates throughout the WH. Step up, Mr. Mueller. You have further responsibilities, as a citizen of this country. Do something while you can.
9
This is pure editorial, not “news.” Furthermore, asBarr has already noted, there was nothing that stopped Mueller from making a conclusion about whether Trump committed a criminal act irrespective of his ability to indict him.
Please New York Times, stop masking opinion as “news analysis.” It’s a disservice to the free press and to readers everywhere and just fuels the fake news fires.
4
@AVR If you read closely, you'll notice the heading at the top of the article: "NEWS ANALYSIS."
So why are you surprised that it's "not 'news'" ???
1
@AVR
It's almost comical how Mueller's words are taken as "gospel" by The Times. Barr has directly contradicted Mueller's version of events. Barr's viewpoint holds equal weight. All they can see is "defending Trump" and can, thus, dismiss him without any actual thinking.
2
Mr. Mueller fulfilled his obligations as a public servant with reserve and dignity. Now that he is retired, he seems to be wimping out on his obligations as a citizen and a leader. He obviously prefers to hide away out of the limelight, but like it or not he has attained an oracular status and he does the country a disservice by not seizing the opportunity and necessity to speak more transparently and don the mantle of leadership that our times require. History will not be kind if he deserts the battlefield at a time of crisis.
8
Mr Mueller's 10 minutes soliloquy about the Special Counsel's report was insufficient to counter Trump's innumerable "No Collusion, No Obstruction" video clips. Mr Mueller must also become a media figure and explain to the American voters precisely what his written report was meant to convey. The legalese of the written report was probably difficult for many voters to fully understand. If Mr Mueller does not want to leave all those people with the impression that the "Mueller" investigation was a big waste of time, "a witch hunt", and revealed nothing about Russian interference in the 2016 election and no attempt by a sitting president to obstruct the investigation, then he must appear in a public forum, like a Congressional hearing, to explain in plain English the true findings of his report. Right now Trump and his enablers in the conservative media and the Republican Party have interpreted the report's findings to imply something other than what the written report has said, and a majority of those polled seem to believe what they are hearing from the Trump support team.
8
Stop blaming Mueller and support an Impeachment Inquiry ASAP, as well as the Federal Courts' cases referred by Mueller's report.
"Appeasement in an international context is a diplomatic policy of making political or material concessions to an aggressive power in order to avoid conflict."
Appeasement and collaboration in WWII didn't work, and it's not going to work now.
Resistance works. Fighting for what is fair to all and right works.
10
Mueller is proving to be an insufferable boy scout. Like Jon Snow....his desire to be honest and forthright, and completely proper, ignores the needs of the moment, causing everyone around them to pull their hair out and beg for them, just this one time, to do what needs to be done. Mueller needs to realize that this is an existential moment in our nation, and he needs to step up and be realistic about what the public understands. He must be more direct and more clear.
10
Mueller did the best he could. If there were any mistakes, so be it. I don't blame him for Trumpian intransigence.
The wrong in this Administration is overwhelming, and it is tragic that 40% of the country doesn't see it that way.
It will take incredible patience on all our parts to get through this - that is, if we get through it at all.
8
Mueller let us all down -- the deeply serious nature of the accusations against this regime and its implications for our democracy warranted clear spoken findings, not confusing double negatives and reference to a heavily redacted report. There's a certain sophistry too in hewing to the narrowest definition of collusion. And the idea that a sitting president cannot be charged with crimes of the nature we're seeing is wrong on so many levels. Taken together, this makes the WH a safe haven for criminals...
87
@sue denim It's over. There will be no impeachment hearings. The narrative since DAY ONE was their was blatant obstruction & Mueller would be a major player in revealing this obstruction. But the only clear thing that Mueller did was to remove himself from the investigation, & also what he could possibly contribute to an impeachment case. But the press has gone berserk, spending more time on this than the time spent on things like climate change and income inequality. The excessive amount of attention to this can backfire miserably, with Trump being re-elected & not being the result of Russian interference. Is Trump daring the Dems to impeach him? Of course he is! And Dems like obedient lemmings are walking straight into the trap he's set. Hate to break it to the DNC it's too late for the GOP to have a come to Jesus moment. In for a penny in for a pound. They will let the Dems engage in pointless committee investigations, divisive intraparty debates over impeachment. Much energy will be wasted. Lots of bad blood sown. And in the end we won't learn anything new. And even if we did would anyone care beyond the beltway pundits? No. CNN reported that only 3% of Americans have read Mueller's report in its' entirety. 10% read most. So, 87%...the overwhelming majority of Americans don't care. I repeat they DO NOT CARE. Trump will never resign. The GOP senate won't convict him. His supporters won't desert him. It's time to move on & focus on more pressing issues.
1
Under our constitution , you are presumed innocent until convicted by a jury. There has not even been an indictment or allegation of crime. Trump is innocent and no amount of hatred of him or his policies can convict him outside of the due process standards of the 5th, 6th and 14th amendments to the constitution. Everything else is just partisan hyperbole.
4
Trump may not be able to be proven guilty in a court of law or by the Senate. But, that does not make him innocent.
7
@Independent Then articles of impeachment should be brought up by the House of Representatives so that Mr. Trump can defend himself against all those scurrilous accusations.
5
@Independent, impeachment and removal from office require only abuse of power, not a violation of a criminal statute. Trump should be impeached for his corruption, lying, obstruction of justice, violation of his oath of office, violation of the constitution, and all of his other wrongs -- none of which necessarily constitutes a crime.
1
Old approach: you allow the investigator to investigate, staying quiet as to not want to appear to be influencing or obstructing the investigation, and staying quiet as to not incriminate yourself.
Old Rule: If you don't take this approach, the media and oversight committees will punish you.
Trumps approach: smear the investigation and the investigator, thus obstructing the investigation and try to make it go away. Repeat incessantly that you are falsely accused and your accusers are criminals. Look as guilty as possible.
New Rule: If you take this approach, then the media will say both sides do it and keep it neutral, and not properly inform the electorate. Oversight committees, without urging from the misinformed electorate, have no desire to prosecute.
21
robert mueller is a gentleman. he doesn't self aggrandize. he's beyond conscientious. that the gop is overwhelmingly partisan, and puts their party's interests above the security of our nation's, is something he can't control. as a democratic voter, i too am left deflated with the incorrect spin that ag barr, and the trump enablers, have pronounced as the facts of the special counsel's findings. i hope that those that declare themselves as 'independent' party voters feel as i, and cast their 2020 ballot for a candidate that isn't donald. j. trump.
3
Read the report? All Americans should read the report? You must be kidding Mr. Mueller! That is no longer a thing here in the USA.
No, YOU read the report. In your own voice, read the report in open testimony before Congress. And give us interesting asides and anecdotes about key testimonies and evidence you found. Read for days and days on end. You can take as many breaks as you want.
You may not like it, but that is where we are. Your voice, your face, your reputation and your entire public life can help this country follow its “better angels”. You have the nerve now to ask for us to let you relax in the easy chair? No, Sir, this is the battle you are in. This is the battle for our country. Do not walk away. Congress needs you. We need you. You still have power that no one else can muster. You can rest later. Thank you.
39
Despite Trump's many attempts to obstruct this investigation, he was unable to stop it in process, so AG Barr was hired to sabotage the finished report: intercept it before it went to Congress, get out in front of it to lie about its contents, delay it, supervise strategic redactions, and deny Congress a complete picture of Mueller's findings.
The unredacted report should have gone straight to Congress. Barr has short circuited the process and altered the product. All members of Congress should be furiously indignant that they are not trusted with the complete report but sadly it's only Democrats while the president's allies are placidly silent. I thank Rep. Amash (R-MI), clearly a man of great integrity, for actually reading the report and taking a stand.
Mr. Mueller's brief address underscored what's most significant about his findings. Yes, the Russians interfered in the 2016 election process to provide significant assistance to candidate Trump and damage candidate Clinton. No, we have not mounted any effective self defense to protect ourselves from further interference, which is scandalous irresponsibility by the Trump administration. Yes, the president attempted to obstruct the investigation. No, Mueller is not free to indict him. That's for Congress to do, based on Mueller's findings.
Let's get on with it.
16
Their side has gunslingers and ours has a boy scout. Justice like this does not serve the public good because it is too dense and subtle for the public to understand, and allows injustice to thrive.
10
@memii.social If the point of this exercise was to protect Democracy against a corrupt president, it has so far failed.
1
Has anyone ever known a single mother who works her fingers to the bone - possibly working 2 jobs to keep her family afloat - who doesn't even have time to eat dinner with her kids?
When does Mueller think she's going to read his 400 page report?
This isn't, as Mueller seems to think, about laying it all out like a long trail of breadcrumbs. This is also about the reality millions of us live in.
11
Donald Trump's response and continued spinning of what the report actually says, and insulting and calling Robert Mueller integrity into question needs to be willing to appear before the Congressional Judicial Committee, along with his other investigators who are also being smeared as political hacks by Donald Trump.
I think Robert Mueller means well, but it's time to stop with the nuisance regarding your findings in the report, and come and state in clear language whether Donald Trump would be prosecuted if he were not the President, and explain some of your findings regarding the Trump Tower, and what you thought of Donald Trump's responses in the questionnaire, etc, etc.
I don't care if you repeat what you stated in the report publicly in questioning by the committee, it has a much broader and larger impact on the public who tends to pay more attention to what they see and hear for themselves rather than read a report of over 400 pages in government legalese.
7
And the democrats continue to wonder why we don’t come out and vote.
8
@dennis Great strategy. Stick your head in the sand. It's always someone else's fault. How about coming out to vote to elect someone you do want in there? Nah. I'm fine right here with my head in the sand.
5
Does Mueller think he is not going to have to defend every word of his report at some point? How crazy is that?
5
Let us have John McCain's name everywhere.
We must not loose site of this great American Hero, even though our President is unable to comprehend what a true American stood for. We all love John McCain.
Think of him and what he endured for our freedoms.
Then say to Mueller, he must stand up for the American people that is his duty, we hired him.
Our President diminishes and ridicules John McCain. Unthinkable.
Do not let Mueller and Barr diminish the Presidency any further.
6
We need to face the fact that the GOP is more than happy to embrace autocracy. They have no desire to preserve a representative republic. Plutocrats want plutocracy, pure and simple. So Trump is their means to an end. The evidence is there for us to see every day. We just want to keep our blinders on.
32
What I would like to know is if Barr asked Mueller what conclusion he would have come to on whether Trump obstructed justice if Trump was indictable and what response, if any, Mueller made? Or did Mueller tell Barr without being asked?
4
@Jay Orchard
Barr asked Mueller about the basis for his refusal to recommend charges. Mueller is on record, with witnesses, giving an answer that contradicts his own version of events.
Democrats won't want Mueller to testify because the narrative that he couldn't indict may fray if it's questioned more thoroughly, as Barr did.
1
Because the rules no longer matter, (Actually we're there along with laws), I think Mr. Mueller may have to re-think his decision not to appear before Congress. Again, it seems most Americans never read the report and really don't have any idea what's going on and that's fine with them. If we put on TV Mueller's words by Mueller for an extended conversation with the lawmakers, MAYBE they'll wake up like they did when Nixon's cohorts testified on TV before Congress. I watched Fox this morning. Barr and Sanders(Sarah) are getting by with SO MANY LIES, it sickens me.
19
So now we have gone full circle and look at where we are a repeat of the Watergate crisis and the long march to the impeachment process. Everything is set for central casting and the directors and the actors have begun their performances. Trump is willing to bet it all on voters agreeing with his opinion that the economy will tank if he is impeached and Nixon’s assertion that “it isn’t illegal if the President does it” is part of the constitutional authority granted to the office of the Presidency. Mueller came forward to set the record straight and lay down markers for Trump, Barr, congress and the American people. Instead of heeding his warning Trump and Barr have double down and ensured a public repeat performance by Mueller which will take this to another level. Barr’s determination that Trump can stop any investigation he does not like will only goad Trump to go further ie. congress can’t investigate and courts can’t rule. Mueller has warned everyone.
13
The frustration to which the writers refer is not Mr. Muller's. But it should be ours. I found his performance immensely disappointing. Such hair-splitting causitry has not been seen in this Republic perhaps since Jefferson reflected on slavery. Mr. Muller is part of the system and HE needs to work too if that same system is. That includes testifying without condition and truthfully before Congress as any American, much less government employee, is required to do when summoned. What could possibly lead him to think he gets a pass? Is there something in the water at the FBI that leads men like James Comey and Robt. Muller to imagine that their self-righteousness is so pure it may not be violated by the rules that apply to ordinary mortals, but rather that they alone are morally qualified to make the rules that should apply uniquely to them? I am neither comforted nor ennobled by this latest charade. Nor do I -- like speaker Pelosi -- thank the director for his service, it being so priggish, condescending, and still incomplete.
11
One has to seriously wonder: if Robert Mueller had been a prosecutor at the Nuremburg trials instead of Robert Jackson, would Hermann Goering have lived out his golden years in Buenos Aires?
11
“The report is my testimony,” Mueller said.
Fine and well. Except it is testimony that maybe 10 percent of Americans will consume and digest.
Trump's base won't read it. 400 pages? You kidding? They'll allow Fox News and Infowars to to interpret for them. Republicans in Congress won't read it because of the inconvenient truths they know are in it. Plus, if they are spied reading it by McConnell, Jordan or Meadows, well, ask Justin Amash what comes next. (By the way, when are the GOP members of House Intelligence Committee going to apologize to Adam Schiff?)
Too bad, too, because it is a fascinating read. It should be a required text in high school civics classes.
NO, Mueller comes from a different time. A time when Americans actively sought out the truth. A time when "America First" meant fealty to rule of law and the Constitution came first. A time when Trump would have been impeached, indicted and incarcerated for the diseases he has inflicted upon America.
41
@James J "when are the GOP members of House Intelligence Committee going to apologize to Adam Schiff?"
When Schiff produces the evidence he said he had on Trump collusion with Putin. Or he admits he is a habitual lier, unfit for office.
5
@James J: I concur about the civics lesson, the good part is that it will be a case study of the worst president in american history.
7
@James J
Adam Schiff has repeatedly lied about having evidence of collusion. When challenged, he backtracks and says something vague like, "The question needs to be answered."
But he wasn't questioning. He was lying about having evidence. He is a disgrace, and Nadler is only a little better.
2
Alas, every generation must learn anew:
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke
58
"Mush" Mueller persisted in his feeble, garbled presence while the feral, fake president used clear, sharp, strong and consistent political messaging. Nancy Pelosi does not have any Democratic messenger who can deliver the needed counter punches let alone effectively argue the anti-Trump, anti-Republican case. We lost the skirmishes, the battles and the war.
7
Mr. Mueller's job was to investigate the facts, and preserve the evidence that he found. It was not his job to say what he and his team thought should be done with his findings any more than it is the job of any private investigator who, for example, has been hired to find out whether someone's spouse is having an affair, to tell the spouse who hired the investigator what to do with the findings. The evidence uncovered by Mr. Mueller needs little if any "untangling," and even this pathetic Congress is capable of performing whatever "untangling" of the evidence may be necessary. The problem is that partisan Republicans, and timid Democrats, refuse to do what they ought to do. If asked by Congress what it should do with his findings, the appropriate response by Mr. Mueller would be: "Do I really need to spell it out for you?"
14
@Jay Orchard Actually, it was the job of Robert Mueller to recommend an indictment for crimes if he found them. That he could not due to a lack of evidence was clear and his implication that impeachment was the correct option was far beyond his authority as a special council and certainly beyond the ethics of an attorney.
Trump is presumed innocent , like any other citizen, and hatred of him does not justify an elimination of due process.
1
@Jay Orchard
Wrong. Mueller could have more identified specific crimes without charging. He did not.
1
Just a sidelight: Barr, to my recollection, entered office with a reputation for basic honesty and decency. Was he saving up his capital to spend it on a crucial moment such as this, or is it just another example of how Trump corrupts everyone who enters his orbit?
10
@Bluesq - AG Barr has always believed in the power of the presidency and demonstrated, once again, his determination to protect the office. He did something similar after the Iran-Contra hearings when he recommended that President George H.W Bush pardon people right and left, to avoid getting to the root of the scandal.
Here we are again.
15
Barr “applied” for AG by writing that paper that subscribed to the idea that a sitting president could not be indicted, and he assured Trump that he would not be another Jeff Sessions.
5
The president shouldered through the breach that the gentlemanly Robert Mueller provided for him. In retrospect, it was a public relations nightmare for the Special Counsel, who was constrained by judicial and professional temperament from indulging in the intemperate and shrill denunciations of the president.
Much worse, nothing that Mr. Mueller told us a few days ago counteracted the “exonerating” narrative composed by Attorney General William Barr. It was a stroke of pure genius for Mr. Barr to have gained the president’s attention with his 19-page memo re: the limits (or lack of them) pertaining to executive privilege. Barr was able, through guile and knowledge of all things Washington—as opposed to legal—lift the president out of his morass.
Mr. Mueller is now left looking like the Wizard of Oz—much hopeful expectation beneath the green curtain but, in the revelation, a sad impotence that only told us, “It’s all there; just read it.”
Meanwhile, the president and his AG left us all laughing. Isn’t that the first—and last—rule of comedy? Fool them and make them laugh at themselves?
2
If the Congress impeaches Trump, his best response is to parade the originators of the hoax which started the investigation in a perp walk THROUGH Congress. With all cameras on.
Nothing better than thoroughly humiliating those who think that it is smart to impeach an elected President for defending himself against a coup.
Do the perp walk right before the elections, and tell Americans that they will be the next target of the Democrats which they elect, if they dare to be politically incorrect...
5
You sound very confused. The only one that should be doing a perp walk, with the others that already have, is the President of the United States.
6
@otroad
Americans will not be happy to learn there was, in fact, spying on the Trump campaign. That may be a worse crime than obstruction in their eyes because millions of Americans voted and don't appreciate a group of bureaucrats trying to undermine an election.
If they didn't appreciate the Russians interfering, you can be sure they will not appreciate this behavior from their own government.
1
Mueller presented a document that Congress can now use to possibly impeach Trump. That was Mueller's goal. It was not his goal to emulate Ken Starr and be standing in front of the microphones everyday dropping his pearls of wisdom.
It was Mueller's job to get to the truth. It is the job of Congress to impeach, slowly and with only the facts. It isn't, nor should it be, a circus played out for the media.
16
We're praising Mueller for following the rules. I wonder if Mueller is following established guidelines for conducting one's self on a committee? Is he stubbornly insisting that the reports' carefully-chosen words are the only communication that the American public needs? While his team is telling him that perhaps that is not enough?
Does Mueller not realize that American citizens consider the reading of that report and the subsequent actions are the responsibility of the elected officials. Goodness gracious! What did we elect these people for! Do we have to do everything?! Work our jobs, pay our bills, take care of our families and communities, and read your 400+ report? Seriously?!
Mueller has some personal development to go through. It's the dawn of a new dynamic age. People in power often do not play fair. They have to be called to account. They will not like being called to account. They will use their power to hurt you. You can't cower. You must be more clever, and use your moral courage. Mueller, you have some personal growth to go through. The world has changed.
8
Again, the Democrats and the liberal media are spinning a set of facts that are just not true. First of all, there is a distinction between determining whether the President committed a crime and indicting the President. True, the DOJ has a rule against indicting a sitting President, but that does not, and did not preclude Bob Mueller from making a definitive determination as to whether the President broke the law and committed a crime. The reality is; Bob Mueller could not prove after 2 years of exhaustive investigation that at crime was committed. If he had, he certainly could have stated so in his report. And then Congress what have the responsibility of pursuing impeachment if they so choose. The Democrats and the press conveniently don't mention this very important point. Mueller could have indicated in his report a crime was committed if he found that to be true. He did not. The Democrats continue to waste the public's time with these investigations that are a political weapon to beat Trump in 2020. Let's call it what it really is - Presidential harassment and a witch hunt.
6
@Paul
Mueller report
“If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment."
Mueller conference
“Under long-standing department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional.”
6
Paul, the report clearly identifies obstruction instances by Trump. Isn’t obstruction of justice a crime?
7
@LM
If it was so clear, then why use double negatives? Why not indict the President publicly, and either have Barr lose face to contradict him, or let it proceed to Congress.
If going to Congress is the ultimate goal anyway, why not indict him and formally request that Congress do its job?
Why the passive aggressive hints and nudges?
1
I think that Mueller is right in saying RTFR “read the report. However for most people especially those of us with no legal training it’s dense and opaque. I bet a significant percentage of people wouldn’t know how to even download it if they wanted to. Mueller’s 8-9 minute statement with no questions allowed probably got through to many people more than the redacted report that Barr presented.
The House Democrats are going to have to find a way to get the redacted portions of the report and the evidence that Mueller collected. Maybe now that Mueller is a private citizen he will appear before Congress when called. Maybe some of Mueller’s team will also be able to shed some light on what they found.
I doubt that Mueller will be having many barbecue’s with Bill Barr in the future.
5
@Javaforce - YouTube has an hour-plus-long video by Vice of someone READING the redacted Mueller report. It's on CSPAN because members of the House of Representatives read it into Congressional Record, in part because of concern that POTUS Trump might be able withdraw it from public view with his ex post facto claim of executive privilege (which might have worked in our topsyturvy world). Amazon had a FREE copy of the report on Kindle with free Kindle apps to read it.
Too bad there aren't any blue dresses, cigars, or "genetic material," or this would be flying off the shelves.
4
In a democracy, people get the government they choose. For better or worse. End of story.
3
There is still the rule of law and the constitution. Being elected does not put anyone above either. Break the law or violate the constitution, lose your position and possibly go to jail.
3
Is that observation either accurate or helpful? The U.S. is a democracy, but we didn't get the government we chose in 2016.
4
@Dubious
If you look at the Constitution, you'll find that, like it or not, our current President, unlikable as he is, was chosen by the people's representatives. By the way, according to our Constitution, America is a republic; the word democracy doesn't even appear in that document because many of the founders feared democracy and fought to include provisions in the Constitution to protect against too much of it seeping in. That fight is far from over and the battleground is a population that cannot distinguish between a well-reasoned argument and sophistry. And are not even inclined to try in their anger over the inequalities and indignities they feel have been heaped upon them for decades. Hope some of that is helpful.
1
Trump has tried from the beginning to discredit investigations into him. Why? Because he has done plenty wrong. By discrediting the messenger he aims to discredit the message. Spread enough fear, uncertainty and doubt, and Trump might win in 2020 and deflect a prison term. Except right now 49 House Democrats and 1 House Republican publicly support impeachment. 11 were added in the last 6 days. If the rate holds, within a month, 40% of House Democrats will publicly support impeachment - a group too large to ignore. Trump's FUD strategy will fail. When the public, which largely does not know what Mueller found, learns the President broke multiple felony obstruction laws - and maybe others an impeachment investigation will turn up - the 40% who support impeachment today will ascend to nearly 60%; this happened with Nixon. At that point, GOP Senators will defect, trying to save their jobs. Trump is doomed, but only if Democrats pursue impeachment. Sooner would be better because Trump will thwart the investigation, and there remains a small chance he might succeed.
5
And not Barr is saying that Mueller could have concluded in his own on the guilt regarding obstruction. Really?
It will be interesting to see Barr throw Mueller under the buss and declare his own hands were tied by the content of the report.
And Barr's "I concluded along with Mr. Rosenstien that no crimes had been committed" stance will fall away.
Let the cat fight begin.
@Brian
Barr's already thrown Mueller under the bus, and I fear it's going to get much worse. Wait till the show trials begin while the election season is in full swing. A cat fight might seem rather quaint compared to where this has the potential to go.
1
@Brian Barr has dug a pretty deep hole for himself and Trump is making it deeper still. When is he going to go the route of John Mitchell?
2
Before the 2016 election, I used to debate my wife and friends, many who are lawyers, about the limitations of the US constitution. I didn’t grow up in the United States and so my brain wasn’t hard wired to believe that there were multiple checks and balances built into our system of Government. I kept going back to the same point that the entire system is predicated upon everybody respecting the unwritten rules. Once someone decides to ignore these rules, the whole thing breaks down.
We are witnessing now what happens when things are not written down. When the President doesn’t respect the rules or the other players and there are no clear cut laws that govern the types of scenarios we now find ourselves in. Members of his administration can also ignore congress and the courts because there are no real consequences in them ignoring a subpoena or defying a court order. We have an entire administration essentially running amok and there is very little that can be done about it short of an election where he President is sent packing. In the meantime, he and his team get to continue the lawlessness without much fear of any repercussions..
If we learn anything from this experience, let it be that we have to write things down! We can no longer assume that a President will just follow traditions and unwritten rules. What happens if the next one decides to stretch the norms even further?
63
@Kris We still aren't rid of this one. We are all assuming there will be a 2020 election but if the polls don't look good, expect something to happen to give them a reason to postpone or call off the election.
Right after the 2016 election Bannon said they were looking into postponing or calling off the 2020 election.
7
@Bill "postponing or calling off the 2020 election"
Is this normal or abnormal hysteria these days?
The only people who had issues with elections were Democrats, who are still trying to undo the one in 2016...
2
@otroad You watch too much fox. Bannon who was trump's chief advisor said it. You'll never deal with reality by watching fox.
9
The Russian interference into the 2016 elections should have been taken by Mueller with Obama, who was in charge at the time and chose to do do nothing about it. Mueller should have requested a million documents from Obama on that, just like he asked from Trump.
In 2018, when Trump was in charge, there was no Russian interference. That should have prompted even more of an impetus to find why was Obama so woefully inadequate in office, failing the American people.
Yet Mueller, a partisan hack, chose to do and say nothing on the matter. Even when stressing that the interference attempts were serious.
2
@otroadMueller is a republican. Obama approached McConnell about bringing up the Russian interference and McConnell made it very clear, he wouldn't support it. He'd do everything he could to call it interference by Obama. McConnell is anti-American.
21
@Bill "Obama approached McConnell about bringing up the Russian interference"
Obama should have taken ACTION against Russian interference. Obama was the President.
In 2018, Trump started counter cyber warfare. Quietly. Efficiently.
Talking was the only thing thing Obama was good at. Smoothly talking. And blaming it on others.
2
@otroad So you discount public information about the Obama administration addressing the issue with congress and McConnell refusing to cooperate. He determined that it would hurt the Trump campaign so it was okay to let it play out.
3
If the Republican Party had been concerned about the country and it's citizens....Trump would not have had their endorsement.....and or...Trump would have been Impeached long ago. Mr Mueller proves the point that playing by the Rules is much more difficult than breaking the rules. The Trump Administration is the worst in American History...what's worse is many of us wanted it this way.We endorsed and supported and voted for someone we knew was a con and a bully !! The ridicule he spewed during the Primaries towards even the other Republican candidates was astounding. The Access Hollywood Tape and the women who came forward and even Michael Cohen's testimony have not completely ended Trump's support! Too many of us apparently like the chaos and confusion of the current Administration.What is wrong with so many of us?? Thank goodness for Mr Mueller..but he's retiring! Who will take his place to stand up for the American People and for What is Right ?? All who did the same in Trump's Administration were either fired or resigned ! I sure hope this country can recover from this mess....we voted ourselves into this...we have to vote our way out !!
18
I believe this is the result of our cynicism. One reason Trump remains popular is that that so many believe in false equivalency. If Trump is very corrupt, it doesn’t matter because everyone else is a little corrupt too. It does not matter by how much. Farmers are going bankrupt and still not pulling support. You are right, this is astounding. In one election, we have squandered the sacrifices of our grandparents from the greatest generation. We can’t even agree that fascism and white supremacy are bad. It’s a sad sight to see.
3
Pelosi & others cowering from an impeachment inquiry are making this only about Trump.
Why aren't we worried about surviving him & not setting a precedent that the office can become a cesspool of lies & corruption so people will shrug it off next time we're faced with another candidate who defies the rule of law?
Trump's brazen response to accusations of sexual assault made the Senate candidacy of Roy Moore & Supreme Court confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh possible. Both shrugged off serious accusations: "Who? Me?"
Trump's monetized the presidency in defiance of the emoluments clause, placing his corrupt daughter & son-in-law in the White House - his daughter sits in on meetings with world leaders & Jared's spent "2 years on an international search for new partners or fresh financing that stretched from the Middle East to China" (NYT) while making policy w/o a security clearance.
Trump tried to illegally transfer money from the Defense Dept. to build his Wall, officially ripped babies from their parents & lies to the public on a daily - sometimes hourly - basis.
Anyone who thinks if Trump is not held accountable it's okay because he's just too slippery for impeachment & we'll go back to normality eventually is paving the way for the next criminally corrupt candidate - & there will be one.
We are setting a precedent that a criminally corrupt president without personal honor can remain in office.
Trump must be held accountable.
Or he's breaking the presidency.
24
@fast/furious - Until enough people READ THE REPORT and contact their elected Representatives, we're at am impasse. Congress NEEDS the unredacted report with all the underlying evidence to build the case for impeachment. AG Barr is currently in contempt of Congress and won't release the full, unredacted report with all the underlying evidence nor will he appear before Congress to explain why. That has to be resolved in court (the Supreme Court) before going forward with impeachment. Why? The report may only provide one or two incidents of malfeasance from a pile of options. Why that one? Might another one turn more people to at least listen to the charges and evidence? Americans are lazy and like to be "entertained," usually with blood and violence or sex and money. Sorting through ALL the evidence with allow Congress to pick the right example to win the case, for example, hush money payments. Would a payment of several hundred thousand dollars be more damaging and sway more people than a smaller monetary amount that also paid for an abortion, not that I know of either type of paymentexisting or being in the report. Does that explain the resistance to handing over everything?
1
It would appear that the honourable and disciplined Robert Mueller mistakenly brought a knife to a gun fight.
8
@Tom McAllister: Or realized putting poison on the knife and cutting with it before being shot would ensure he wasn't the only casualty
Mueller knew at least a year before he reported that the collusion he was asked to check was a bogus charge based on made up partisan take evidence.
Yet he waited patiently to be obstructed. When he wasn't, as all documents requested were delivered and he wasn't removed from office, he concocted some obstruction attempts.
With his last gasps, this partisan hack tried to get an impeachment started, based on criminalizing self defense against a coup.
No wonder he is afraid of answering questions on his shamefully degrading conduct...
PS How would those who still praise him take a two year no holds barred investigation into their lives based on concocted cockamamie stuff? Would they become criminals by calling the hoax a hoax?
1
Americans should not have to read the report.
That is why we hired a Lawyer.
That is why we contribute and vote for our Representatives, to represent US.
Every report has a conclusion. Mueller gave us none. No investigation of money.
As a popular saying goes, "Follow the Money", at least a look into the Trump finances would have shed some interesting facts.
Politicians, lawyers, actors, are the king's men, we can't wait till Humpty Dumpty falls from the Wall.
4
@s.whether Americans don’t have to read anything. But if you want to voice an opinion, you should have read the report before you do.
More importantly, Members of the House should read the report. Most haven’t, not even the first publicly released redacted version. As for the second, lightly redacted (98.5% unredacted) version, not ONE member of the House - Republican or Democrat - has bothered to read it.
If they haven’t read it, they can’t explain it to us.
And lawyers, particularly special counsel, don’t always come to conclusions, often because they can’t. They can lay out alternative outcomes and allow their clients to decide how to proceed. That’s what Mr. Mueller did.
2
I have always maintianed that Mueller was a big phony. The guy cost American taxpayers 35 million dollars. For what? Lots of issues with the FBI which he formerly ran and he did nothing about it. Mueller is just a pompous individual who did really nothing to justify the money that he spent on rent and salaries and other expenses. That money could have been used for children's lunches or cancer research.
Umm, you're ignoring the money generated from the sale of Manafort's confiscated assets. All those houses and suits made from strange animals could allow the government to come out ahead on this one.
1
I'm beginning to think that Mueller, like Nancy Pelosi, is being far too cautious. It's one thing to play by the rules; another to be a lawyerly naif in the face of a presidential bully who lies as he speaks and makes up his own rules, buttressed by a crooked attorney general who sold out his obligations to the rule of law to become another White House toady. Mueller's reading of the OLC memo was also wrong. It was just a memo, not an amendment to the constitution.
16
@Christy So knowing how Barr has acted to date what do you think would have happened if Mueller had indicated the campaign conspired with the russians or more importantly Trump obstructed justice with the numerous attempts to fire Mueller. It's one thing to pubically state that Session let you down and should have been your Mueller firewall and another to ask individual(s) to fire him. Mueller's problem was believing that Barr was a fellow boy scout.
1
The only thing that stands above all of this and is beyond any doubt is that this sitting president and his gang of perpetrators, excuse me, I mean G.O.P., are a terrestrial horror show and are eroding the foundations this nation was built on.
24
The D.O.J. is Trumps firewall; all the more reason for Mueller to come off his mountaintop, for one day, just one day, not nine minutes, one full day, before congress.
Over one thousand former federal prosecutors, republican and democrat have signed a statement attesting that the president obstructed justice.
30
@coastal - There is no reason for him to talk to Congress for one minute, forget a whole day, if Congress won't do its job and READ THE REPORT. Reading the report allows Congress to be prepared and ask questions that expand understanding, not "learn" what is already available and right in front of them.
2
Enough already. If Trump was a democrat he’d already be impeached.
Congress has a responsibility to the American people to uphold our laws.
Mueller should testify and put country before his ideology. If American’s were curious and intelligent enough to read the full Mueller Report, Trump wouldn’t be president. But we American’s are lazy and comfort oriented and Mueller should present his report in personal testimony so that we can maintain what’s left of our decency and try to, at least, take an ethical stand. If Trump leaves office with out being impeached, we are forever less then we should have been.
111
@Ariel You take a more charitable view of politicians than I do. It would take courage for the Democrats to impeach the leader of their party and that virtue hasn't been demonstrated in Washington for a long time.
2
@Robert
The Republicans controlled Congress after 2010
so it would have taken a Republican House to impeach and they would have. But, you are correct, Senate Democrats would not have convicted Obama.
2
@Robert - I think you have your parties crossed with the impeachment comment.
9
Here is a concern no one has addressed that I can find...if an impeachment inquiry is formally started, why would Trump and all his posse stop stonewalling and appear before the committee? What force would the congress have to force testimony that they have not already tried to use?
In effect, we are already in an impeachment process, because getting the information the House is requesting has no end game unless it becomes part of the impeachment process.
Trump and his waning group of supporters feels empowered to do whatever they want, so hopefully there is a method of forcing witnesses and information, otherwise there will still be enough enablers that the imperial president will be able to get all their wishes satisfied...abortion, courts, religion in schools, etc.
5
Well, let's be honest.
Today, the Republican Party is a privately owned entity, devoted to the welfare of the rich and the powerful, against the interests of those who think they actually count and are owed a part of the pie.
There is no such thing as a good Republican in the time of Trump, not here in Eugene Oregon, not in Washington D.C..
There is no such thing as a Constitution or rule of law in the time of naked power...other than as window dressing. The hero of the right is Putin, that strutting man who has won the world from a tiny throne.
Does anyone think that Putin cares about a constitution or if he or his oligarchs should listen to the courts or the opinions of the poor?
We are in the time of the fall of the American Empire, and like all empires, we are falling one greedy Caligula at a time.
Hugh
148
@Hugh Massengill
I'm poor because of some past official govt. policies regarding access to healthcare. I no longer have any illusions that I'm owed a part of the pie.
But as an American, I still believe I'm owed accountability and the rule of law. That's not asking much. This country was founded on the premise of the rule of law.
11
Mueller is almost a Greek tragedy. His sense of integrity and propriety effectively doomed his investigation. He said that one reason he didn’t charge Trump was “fairness” — that it would be unfair to charge someone who, because he couldn’t be taken to court, wouldn’t have the chance to defend himself.
Admirable, I guess, but it means Trump could shoot somebody and not face legal charges (except impeachment!). This is insane, and it puts us on the road to authoritarian rule or, at least, political ruin.
I’m getting tired of the Democrats, who are trying to make political hay out of this mess without having the integrity to pursue impeachment. They are squandering the majority they were given in November.
36
@Ker
I agree with what you say but it's curious that most people are blaming the Democrats for "not doing anything". What about the Republicans? Isn't this the root of the problem? Why are we not calling them out?
7
Robert Mueller failed America. His quiet demeanor worked in the 80’s but no longer. He has been scammed by the scammer in chief and can’t step out of his box to actually be infuriated by this. His efforts may have been a total waste of time. Wrong man for the job, most likely. Thanks Mr. Mueller for your service but it didn’t amount to much. Stop telling us to read the report and explain it to us.
72
@David Gifford You didn't like what Mueller did? Maybe you just don't like what he found out.
3
@David Gifford as Steve Bannon said: “Never send a Marine to do a hitman’s job.”
5
@David Gifford. It's readable, searchable, free, on-line, so you read it. That you don't care to is one of the reasons we have a mendacious, rapacious buffoon in the WH. I agree Mueller is too ok- school, but the problem remains: what will we do? Not reading the report is Not the answer.
9
According to the authors, Mueller "left some top lawmakers confused about how to proceed." They're not confused...they're lazy cowards who wanted Mueller to do all the work for them so they never have to take any risks. Even without the report, they could bring an impeachment charge right now for violation of campaign finance laws.
48
@Dario Bernardini The SDNY stuff is additional evidence of Trump activities and perhaps can be brought to light during the impeachment hearings.
5
@Dario Bernardini - that might be easier and grab people's attention. It's got sex, secrets, money, threats. Right up there with a blue dress, genetic material, and cigars.
3
Mueller did his job now it’s time for the politicians to do theirs. Democrats should quit sitting on their hands.
25
@Pekka Peitsi - the House of Representatives needs the unredacted report and ALL the underlying evidence to build a proper case. AG Barr is in contempt of Congress which has to go through the Supreme Court to be resolved.
3
@Justathot the DOJ cannot release the full unredacted report since it contains grand jury testimony, but you know that don’t you? Congress cannot use the DOJ as a private investigator for their partisan purposes.
I just love how Barr made a mess of the message to the American public.
He just claimed on a CBS This Morning segment that he was informed by Mueller that he would receive a redacted report from Meuller with summaries. When this did not occur, he was forced to prepare such a report that delayed the communication. Somehow, the actual summaries that Meuller and his team prepared throughout the 400 page report were also redacted.
It's obvious that Barr is unqualified and partisan. We need better government!
122
@Michael kenny Barr is setting himself up to be the next John Mitchell. charged with conspiracy, obstruction of justice and perjury.
17
Before I went to law school, I was a Foreign Service Officer for seven years and in the last two years worked closely with State Department attorneys. I started to think of attorneys as spoilsports, because they would say no to things I thought we should do. One attorney who became a good friend told me that if I went to law school I would understand. I went to law school to prove him wrong, but wouldn’t you believe I understand now that I’m a lawyer? A good lawyer’s passion is the law, and we don’t bend it for political ends. Justice doesn’t always get done, and we don’t always agree on the interpretation of the law, but we know the process matters. Mueller is still my hero. The fact that Trump and his sycophant have no respect for the law is a political problem for Congress and voters to resolve. Don’t blame Mueller for the stupidity of voters or the timidity of some Democrats.
86
@Katie Okay, yes, a good lawyer's passion is the law (as opposed to justice, I s'pose), but there is a place in the lawyer's repertory for strong advocacy. Case in point: Joseph Welch at the Army-McCarthy hearings. Granted, the proceedings were not the same as the Mueller inquiry, but Welch recognized the stakes and also saw the threat presented by McCarthy and his sleazy lawyer Roy Cohn (later to become Trump's sleazy lawyer). Mueller must see the threat of Trump and his sleazy henchmen (including, it sadly seems, Barr). He should have been a stronger advocate for his office and its efforts. His delphic utterances were okay for lawyers like you (and me), but the court here is the court of public opinion, and he could have made a more compelling case and still maintained fidelity to the Law and the lawyer's role.
16
@Katie foolishly Mueller thought that the rule of law applies in the US. It doesn’t.
5
@Katie
So now you are an enlightened lawyer with new respect for the law? So lawyers don’t spin things? Lawyers don’t expect the other side to spin things? Mueller, was a prosecutor, he was supposed to find stuff out, and prosecute. Trump used the English language, and a complicit media, to completely exonerate himself. Mueller, helped him by being so vague, and he certinly knew it. Waiting for Mueller to now, come around and do what he was suppoesed to do is, “Waiting for Gadot.” It’s never going to happen. Mueller, clearly is still the good Marine, who is reluctant to rat out the commander, even though it was his job to do so. A job, history will view, as an abject failure.
3
Friday. It's just two days after the Mueller statement. Trump says he is imposing a tariff on Mexico. And all media are no longer talking about Mueller.
The Mueller statement is crucial because it is a firm rebuttal to Barr. Mueller could not allow Barr to distort his report, and he fought back.
The media have already dropped Mueller (as they did the report) in favor of a tariff tweet.
Can't you see how you are being played?
Please, we are counting on you to save the country.
130
@jfs Good points. Congress needs to start an impeachment inquiry now. They can’t let Trump do crazy things just to stay in he headlines.
9
@Javaforce the US is beyond saving.
1
@jfs Mueller’s statement was anything but a firm rebuttal to Barr. It was a mumbled double negative, a nothing burger. “We didn’t say that Trump didn’t commit crimes”. Huh? You have to read it three times to try and get his point. Mueller left a gap big enough for Barr and Trump to drive a truckload of phony “no collusion, no obstruction” through.
A firm rebuttal would be, “We were prevented from indicting a sitting president, but Trump did commit crimes. Barr failed to present our findings.” And Mueller failed us.
4
Mueller should have to answer why he picked eighteen anti-Trump attorneys for his team. A judge would have disqualified them to sit on a jury for their bias that was obvious just by looking at their childish back and forth emails.
3
@Sophie Marie
Years ago in Washington D.C. I observed a jury trial where several of the jurors slept through most of the proceedings. The judge never said a word.
@fast/furious. The jurors must have been congressmen!
Trump doesn’t know the definition of the word “hoax,” as he keeps saying Mueller’s investigation was a hoax; but no one has the guts to tell him.
Mueller was investigating the extent to which Russia meddled into the 2016 presidential election and if it conspired with Americans.
He wasn’t trying to deceive the public. He was just doing his job. Trumps national security team stated that Russia meddled into US elections way before Mueller was even appointed. It wasn’t a hoax. It was an investigation.
7
@Oliver The meddling happened during the Obama administration and Obama and his staff did nothing.
2
@NVFisherman On December 29, 2016, US President Barack Obama signed an order that expels 35 Russian diplomats, locks down two Russian diplomatic compounds, and expands sanctions against Russia for its interference in the 2016 United States elections.
4
I keep hearing that these two men are friends. Mueller believes in the fairness of the process and that those involved will do the right thing. Barr wants to make the President a King. Trump just proved what Nixon said during Watergate. "If the President does it, it's not illegal" Almost 50 years of history up in smoke.
8
@Bruce Metzger: No it means the lesson wasn't learned and Trump and Barr replace Nixon and Mitchell, plus Mnuchin added his name to the mix.
Is the Attorney General of the United States or is the Attorney General of the Republican Party?
Partisan politics must not trump our national interests and well being: God, Country and Family first; politics second.
Time will prove that this republican administration is one the most, if not the most, corrupt and morally bankrupt administrations in our great nation's history. The sad fact that treason was likely committed by a President of the United States is a new low of the lowest kind for America.
I fear the Mueller Report is now being used by this republican administration to aid and abet its criminal efforts to cover-up, obstruct and destroy critical evidence that would be needed for impeachment.
How much more of this chicanery will we tolerate?
76
@Wood Odysseus
Family, Country, God if one is so called, then politics.
Now on to destroying Joe Biden, using the same scorched-earth tactics that worked so well on Robert Mueller. And when Biden responds with the same sort of cautious reply as Mr. Mueller, as we've already seen in his aide's comment that these attacks are "beneath the dignity of the office," we'll wonder if he isn't admitting defeat as well. Again and again, Donald Trump uses a flamethrower, while those who might constrain him use legalese.
10
@Mark Lebow: How many of those Trump voters will say
"fool me once; shame on you me fool me twice shame on me.
It's a bit embarrassing, the faith I had in the Special Counsel and The Report. I'm old enough I should have known better. No one is coming to save us.
8
@A Then let's save ourselves! See you (and/or your money) next year in the Midwest, where we must rebuild The Blue Wall. We will need your help.
2
The fault lies with Congress, not Mueller. He was very clear. Dare I say unambiguous. The Special Counsel can not legally accuse a sitting President of a crime. Congress has to do that. The Special Counsel cannot "explicitly instruct" Congress to impeach the President or he is in effect accusing the President of a crime. An act which is illegal.
Point in fact: Democrats are abdicating responsibility for a decision that is properly their own. Mueller laid it out. Congress needs to decide whether or not Trump's actions warrant impeachment. Democrats like Pelosi are trying to have things both ways. They want to be told what to do so they can claim they had no choice but to impeach.
Guess what? Mueller doesn't have the authority to tell Congress what to do. No amount of testimony is going to change that position. That's a point he made perfectly clear on Wednesday. The ball is completely in Congress' court.
20
Mr. Mueller wishes to act according to Justice Dept. rules.
Mueller's superior in the chain of command at Justice, Mr. Barr, expected him to make a judgment on whether the president acted illegally.
Mueller, an institutionalist, should honor the chain of command and the wishes of Mr. Barr and feel free to report to Congress as to whether he believes the president obstructed justice, broke laws or acted in bad faith.
4
Mueller played by the rules.
Trump and his Republican party enablers did not. Instead, they lied and cheated and did whatever they could to gain and maintain their power.
Does that remind you of another political party from the last century? A political party that used whatever cheats they could to gain power? A political party who did not play by the rules, when everyone else did?
1
Mueller is a brilliant lawyer, but he's incompetent at communication to the general public. He wants everyone to read his report, but few people even read the newspaper. His message is getting drowned out by Trump who is a master communicator, even though he's an incompetent president.
Mueller made it very clear that he doesn't want to testify in front of Congress and that, if they make him, he won't go beyond his report. However, unlike Trump, Mueller is a patriot. If he's subpoenaed, he'll testify.
When Mueller testifies, it will be must-watch TV for the American people. I have no doubt that he won't go beyond his report, but Congressional questioning will help him make his conclusions understandable to the American people and everyone (including those who didn't read his report) will understand them.
Mueller's testimony will have no effect on Trump's base, since they don't care about facts, but a lot of people who approve of Trump are not in his base. I hope that they'll reconsider once they have the facts.
12
It's over. You can stick a fork in it. There will be no impeachment hearings. The narrative since DAY ONE was their was blatant obstruction & Mueller would be a major player in revealing this obstruction. But the only clear thing that Mueller did was to remove himself from the investigation, & also what he could possibly contribute to an impeachment case. But the press has gone berserk, spending more time on this than the time spent on things like climate change and income inequality. The excessive amount of attention to this can backfire miserably, with Trump being reelected & not being the result of Russian interference. Is Trump daring the Dems to impeach him? Of course he is! And Dems like obedient lemmings are walking straight into the trap he's set. Hate to break it to the DNC it's too late for the GOP to have a come to Jesus moment. In for a penny in for a pound. They will let the Dems engage in pointless committee investigations, divisive intraparty debates over impeachment. Much energy will be wasted. Lots of bad blood sown. And in the end we won't learn anything new. And even if we did would anyone care beyond the beltway pundits? No. CNN reported that only 3% of Americans have read Mueller's report in its' entirety. 10% read most. So, 87%...the overwhelming majority of Americans don't care. I repeat they DO NOT CARE. Trump will never resign. The GOP senate won't convict him. His supporters won't desert him. It's time to move on & focus on more pressing issues.
5
The report is Mueller's testimony yet we still haven't seen the full non-redacted version. I say subpoena him to testify before Congress. In public. Force him to answer hard questions point blank. He doesn't get a free pass on this one.
3
All one needs to know in the aftermath of the release of Robert Mueller’s report, and his summary of it for those who didn’t read it, is that Trump’s, William Barr’s and Russia’s reaction to them were all identically and precisely on the same mocking and insulting page.
5
The headline simply states what has always been true for millions of Americans. Play by the rules, only to have someone in a position of power change them in the middle of the game. It’s only news now if you haven’t been paying attention.
6
“Mr. Mueller seemed to be urging Americans to read and digest the voluminous findings from his investigation.”
Mr. Mueller, this is like handing out copies of War and Peace to fifth graders, telling them to read it, and then saying that you won’t discuss it because it speaks for itself.
81
@Janet bingo! Totally unrealistic.
1
@Janet
Not to mention the redaction of key areas. Great analogy.
1
@Janet
It may be that Mueller intended his message for congress but your comparing the average voter's reading and comprehension level to a fifth grader is probably not far off of the reality. That reality is at the root of many of the problems in your society.
4
The Mueller report was a complete nothing. A complete waste of time. I read parts of it, read the summaries, listened to his bizarre 9-minute talk. Lots of double negatives and hiding behind "well established DOJ policiies" (as if they are the same as law). All it did was give that grifter a complete pass. It was disgusting.
2
@ronnyc Mostly of waste of taxpayer money. The attorneys who he hired will go out in private practice and make real money.
mueller has conducted himself in accordance with what he believes are the ethical guidelines of his profession. trump and barr are taking advantage of the limits mueller must (in good conscience) follow to spread their lies. this, my friends, is how evil operates.
IMPEACHMENT NOW!
3
It’s like Mueller Is bending over backwards to state the findings without upsetting Trump, or being the object of his ridicule. Same as Obama when he shied away from letting the American public know of the Russians attempts to influence the election, same as Tillerson and all the others who gets unceremoniously dismissed and insulted by Trump and go quietly. Same with the media generally, who took forever, and still don’t go far enough, in portraying Trump as the con man he is. Trump’s celebrity, willingness to go incredibly crude and low, and his bullying behavior has effectively uncovered cowardice throughout our government representatives (and media), with only a relative few exceptions, Mueller not being one of them.
4
I think the Democrats are just cowards, afraid that they will be attacked and called partisan - forgetting that they are being attacked and called partisan everyday. They are afraid that they will lose, and they will, because the Senate, run by a Machiavellian of unimaginable proportions, will "exonerate" without considering any of the evidence against the man of their party.
Instead of taking up the challenge, they are backing down, and setting the stage form more.
They are like a school child who thinks if they can get someone else to call out a bully they will no longer be bullied.
They are wrong.
2
Trump is not the only one operating in a rule-less, law-less world. His attorney general, Barr, changed the rules after the fact.
Barr now maintains that Mueller could have declared that Trump committed crimes, and that the only restrictions on him was that he could not _indict_ him.
So while Mueller was operating within the guidelines and this strange word he used -- "fairness" -- Barr maintains that since Mueller did not comment on the criminality he documented, Barr would instead: there was none.
Trump and his team not only refuse to play by the rules, they write new ones as they go along. It's no wonder Mueller wants nothing to do with any of them.
23
@avrds
At this point, Robert Mueller also wants nothing to do with us, the American people. We who desire that the president be held accountable - while watching the Democratic leadership cower in a corner. Mueller should be more than willing to testify before Congress and stop insisting that as the author of the report, he cannot have any opinions. Mueller is focused on being canonized, not helping our country fight it's way out of this sordid criminal enterprise.
4
@fast/furious Mueller came forward to set the record straight and lay down markers for Trump, Barr, congress and the American people. Instead of heeding his warning Trump and Barr have doubled down and ensured a public repeat performance by Mueller which will take this to another level. Barr’s determination that Trump can stop any investigation he does not like will only incentivize Trump to go further ie. congress can’t investigate and courts can’t rule. Mueller has warned everyone that he considers the constitution as the guiding document in the matter and anyone not acting accordingly is wrong.
2
@fast/furious
I totally agree with you. "Doing your duty" can only go so far. Isn't there some point at which members of the military are bound _by duty_ to speak up?
In the meantime, I find it ironic that Pelosi et al. are more worried about upsetting Trump's base than their own voters. I guess it's that old Clinton adage, where else can they go? But as his wife found out, they can stay home ... again.
I also agree with the voters quoted yesterday on the "front page" of the Times: "Why is Trump still in office?" I'm disgusted with the lot of them.
3
What is most distressing is the ease with with Trump’s supporters parrot his lies, the belief they have that the investigators were “spies” and that the Russians did not interfere. If a third of the country is that gullible, what is our future?
26
The way Trump took to going out on the White House lawn and get to have a 'gaggle' with the press, where he can work the rope-line, pick and chose whom to call on and which questions to repond to needs to ba called out for what it is, Censorship of the Press.
Trump is allowed to lie, spin, and exaggerate his viewpoints uncontested. And it is absurd this practice is allowed to happen.
The Press needs to consider boycotting this attempt at censoring truthful question and answer sessions, expressing their dissatisfaction with how this administration is systematizing their presentation of viewpoints solely in a way to get their preferred message out.
3
@merc
This administration has effectively terminated having daily press briefings and official presidential press conferences. People shouting at Trump from behind a rope line as he walks to his helicopter are what's left of "accountability."
3
Trump became the Republican Presidential nominee and won the 2016 election because the other candidates and Hillary Clinton played by the rules (e.g. avoiding outright lying, no personal ridiculing etc.) while Trump did not. The Trump-Mueller contest is just more of the same.
As far as Trump is concerned, Michelle Obama's line of when they go low we go high needs to be modified: "When he goes low we go high . . . and then he goes even lower'
13
Yes, the following is obviously the projection of the disordered, and tells us the truth about how he sees his own team: "On Thursday, Mr. Trump said that Mr. Mueller’s team consisted of 'some of the worst human beings on earth,' " but that is no excuse for remaining silent about this charge, and not defending the integrity of Mueller's team. Let us see who that person is. Who has the integrity to speak the truth to power and say "That statement about Mueller's team is diametrically wrong, they are actually some of the best public servants today."?
2
Sorry, Mueller didn't play by the rules! Special counsel was asked to investigate RussiaGate and come up with a clear cut decision. He didn't. He purposely passed the buck. He asked Congress to do his duty insofar as obstruction of justice is concerned. Why? He could have opined that there was or was not criminal activity on the part of President Trump and that would be that. But no, he followed his political script cowritten by his minion Democrat investigators and instructed Congress to initiate impeachment proceedings.
This is not the job of a special prosecutor. What Mueller did was not only inappropriate but unethical by the American Bar Association standard.
He failed the American people and he failed the test of being an apolitical prosecutor.
5
Every Senator and Congressperson needs to be asked a simple question by reporters and constituents and forced to be on the record, "Have you read the Report in its entirety?"
12
@Richard Robbins Exactly Mr. Robbins! And, if they have not, their name should go on a list maintained by the NYT and monitored until they can assert that they have.
The question Americans need to be asking members of Congress daily is "how much of the Mueller report have you read?" Then we shame the ones who've spouted on at length about the investigation without reading the report.
Until most of Congress has at least read the included summaries, impeachment is never going to happen. But I think once you really sit down and start reading the report, you realize there can only be one solution, regardless of your political affiliation. Trump has to be impeached otherwise we are no longer under the rule of law.
2
However anyone parses the saga of THE investigation, Robert Mueller maintained his integrity, fairness and respect for the law from start to finish. Mueller and DJT are polar opposites, the one high-minded, fair and honest, the other venal, corrupt and dishonest, and we all know who is which. It is ironic how the progress of the investigation has driven the point home.
I am afraid that Robert Mueller is too good for us. We know what we need to do. Will we rise to the occasion?
8
Robert Mueller played by the rules and it should be abundantly clear that he did his job and now the ball is in the court of the Congress to proceed with impeachment proceedings or not. If the latter, then the Country will be treated to a Trump show extradinaire where he will conduct a sweeping "witch hunt", his own version of the McCarthy hearings as he hears the dastardly words of his mentor Cohen urging him on. Yes, impeachment will make for great reality television and like Trump has insinuated - bad coverage is better than no coverage. Does he play by the rules? He plays by no rules, and when maligned or slighted he careens down the rails out of control. The conclusions reached by Mueller followed the facts and adhered to the dictates and parameters of the law - no smoking gun but clearly another instance where Donald Trump showed and continues to show a concerning and callous disregard and disrespect for the law of the land and the principles and tenets that define democracy. Vilifying men and women of principle, when extolling the virtues and character of thugs, is Trump's modus operandi and works as silent GOP stalwarts and his unthinking base continue to watch with approval as he repeatedly plays by his own idiosyncratic, bullying and outrageous rules. Yep, for Trump there are no rules and that should make us all alarmed and committed to working toward hastening his removal from the Oval Office.
9
It would do immense good if Mr. Mueller would report to Congress. He need only read out loud in his own voice the two Executive Summaries from the pages.
I am a teacher and I am sorry to report that most people don’t take the time to read. Because of spin in the media (and further efforts at obstruction by Trump’s camp), the actual findings of the report have not filtered down to half of the U.S. voting public yet.
That is alarming, but it is the new normal. We need Mueller to give us his version of “Reading Rainbow”, or for the younger set, “Between the Lions”. Thank you, Mr. Mueller, for your service.
3
Therein lies the problem. Mueller although honest and professional played by the book too much and Trump being the pathological liar, rabble rouser, ego maniac, bigot that he is took advantage of it.
Mueller should have said more clearly although anybody is innocent until proven guilty there was overwhelming evidence that Trump obstructed Justice (and not the wishy washy well he is not guilty but not innocent either) but in my view I cannot indict him and it is up to the Congress to take the next step ie ouster from the office so he could be brought to justice or if the republicans refuse, when Trump is voted out or term limited then indict him.
2
Trump low life and obvious demeanor is suspicious and all rhetoric is not becoming of the office of the President of UNITED States of America.
Mueller did the job he was given and worked with the tools of the job that prevented him from being able to finish the job the way most people would like.
Now it's up to congress to do the job they are suppose to do and do it the right way so there are no mistakes.
As far as Trump goes he always has and always will use gaslighting or propaganda to make himself look good but in the end the truth will over take him.
1
So mueller played by the book?
He did not investigate Trump for obstruction of justice because a president may not be indicted.
Why , then, did Mueller investigate collusion with Russians and declare Trump innocent? What if Trump had been guilty of collusion?
Is collusion to influence election results a crime that allows the indictment of the president?
Robert Mueller was appointed by a Republican Deputy Attorney General, Rod Rosenstein. The Republicans got just what they wanted, a credible investigator who was not a Democrat.
Mr. Mueller never was non-partisan and he was never the investigator the Democrats had hoped for. He was a Republican and he did not have an agenda that included publicly interfering with Republican control of government. Accordingly, he conducted his inquiry in a credible manner and produced a report that invited Democrats to impeach the President without producing the actual evidence the Democrats would need to impeach The Republican President.
1
It's not just the Trump factor.
Mueller conducted this investigation as an old-school lawyer would. It is scholarly, precise and detached. It assumes that other parts of the legal system would act on the findings. (Even though Congress is not a court).
But lawyers nowadays know that they need to use the bully pulpit. They need to explain their findings and arguments to a broader audience. Look at Alan Dershowitz. Look at Jeffrey Toobin. Look at Sonia Sotomayor. They all understand that that the wider audience matters. Silence doesn't work.
It's too bad. The report is excellent but not actionable in a real-world way. It does not bode well for future special counsel investigations.
2
Mueller was always going to adhere strictly to the process. I think it was ever unlikely that he would find a smoking gun on the 'collusion/conspiracy' issue (Trump did not spend years in the NY property development business without learning how to isolate himself from criminal financial and labor practices) and given the makeup of the jury - the Senate - there was no chance he would have enough for a conviction. That's what prosecutors do.
For me, by far the most important question was: did Russia attempt to influence the outcome of the election? Mueller answered that in the first substantive sentence of the report. It would take an investigation with far more resources than Mueller had - are you listening, Congress? - to answer the corollary: can the success of that effort be estimated? And if a reasonable inquiry based on solid data were to find that the outcome was indeed changed by that effort, only a do-over would serve as a correction. The Constitution doesn't allow for it? Change it then.
1
Mr. Mueller is in some ways like an old tiger, who has fought the good fight, but now toothless, is no match for modern technology, whether it be in facing a despot armed with automatic weapons, or an eager public waiting to hear the truth in clear language.
At this point, I don’t think Mr. Mueller has the energy or fortitude to take on not only a wayward President , but a political party that has made a faustian deal to support him.
It is summer, and time for Mr. Mueller to recuperate in Maine, and for other stronger and perhaps more vigorous and braver tigers to emerge and save our country.
I agree. I understand that not everyone is interested in reading the 448 page report. It is difficult to find the time. But it shold be considered a civic duty for citizens to read the report of if they cannot understand the words in the report have someone explain it to them.
The president and his defenders are counting on folks not wanting to take time away from watching some mindless TV program and actually think for themselves.
As in Watergate, most citizens are not going to read it.
I am fortunate that I had parents who encouraged me to read and question things that i did not understand.
Vote for the progressive candidate in 2020 in all local, state and national eections.
1
If "playing by the rules" means that a prosecutor conducts an investigation of an elected public official by assembling a staff of assistants solely from people who supported, contributed to, and voted for the defeated opponent of official, then yes, Mueller "played by the rules."
2
I hope Congress does subpoena Mueller to testify and answer questions as to what his investigation and report uncovered relative to Obstruction of Justice. He can say it is outlined in his report, but lets hear him answer some questions as to why he chose to let the Law be obstructed and not declare it. We need justice and Trump is not above the Law.
70
@JRMRight, although should not be necessary to have to go on and on read the report.
@JRM
Agreed! It's important that Americans have a chance to hear Robert Mueller testify before Congress. Even if he's simply reading from his Report, Americans need to hear his oral testimony. We all saw & heard how powerful Michael Cohen's public testimony was.
As one of the talking heads on TV said this morning - Robert Mueller asked Americans to read his 400+ page report. Many Americans are too lazy to do that. They would rather wait & see the movie. Robert Mueller testifying before Congress would be the movie.
5
@JRM
I, for one, would like to hear him answer:
- “If he were not president, based on the evidence your team has gathered, would you have indicted him?”
- “Do you, or do you not, believe that based on the evidence your team has gathered, Congress should start impeachment proceedings?”
1
Mr. Mueller did what was asked of him: an investigation. Now it is up to Congress to do what is their responsibility, their legal mandate, with the information from that investigation.
87
@Paul our Congress is highly dysfunctional. You can wait until doomsday for them to do anything constructive.
1
We wanted the words of a hero. We got...the ambiguity of a lawyer.
130
Who knew that the special counsel was not only a Vietnam veteran and a former FBI director but also a practicing ascetic and Buddhist?
6
@SGKWhat did you want, it was clear as day and in the morning trump prove to not be able grasp Russian acts of aggression. The inability to tell them it was egregious to see how much is being reveled.
@SGK Mueller did his best here but he's trying to avoid any possibile accusation of bias or adding drama.
Unfortunately Republicans are quite happy to take advantage of his integrity.
18