He won't fix his mistakes.
1
One day soon -- it will happen before Labor Day -- Trump will issue a series of tweets to the nation stating “I am hereby pardoning Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, Michael Flynn and myself and my family and all the other persons still being investigated and persecuted by our lying FBI in connection with the FBI’s fake investigations of us.”
“It's time to get back to making America great again”.
This will result in yer another great “Constitutional crisis,” multiple lawsuits, months if not years of Congressional investigations and much gnashing of teeth, but he’ll get away with it because Mitch and Trump’s other stalwarts in the Republican Party -- recognizing the advantages to them of having a President in the White House who is always ready to issue fresh pardons to money-grubbing political criminals like themselves -- will want to maintain him there.
Crazy is as crazy does. We ain’t seen nothing yet.
3
Really great points to clarify with Mueller. Maybe one other point that could be raised. Why did Mueller comment on insufficient proof to clear Trump of obstruction rather than finding sufficient evidence to warrant an impeachment hearing? Our judicial process is all are presumed innocent until proven guilty. It is nearly impossible to prove innocence and that is why it is assumed. The focus is on obtaining evidence of guilt. With Mueller finding 10 or more instances of potential obstruction of justice, why did he not comment on whether this was sufficient evidence for a congressional hearing? Why did he conclude and talk about proof of innocence? I believe he avoided the rightful conclusion for reasons that need to be clarified.
2
At the end of the day, Mueller is a Republican. One can hardly be a Republican in the current modern sense without being a “birther.” The entire Republican Party has moved to the far-right and the pressure on mueller to conform is overwhelming. He is Republican and thus takes in a steady diet of Fox News. Had Mueller been investigating a Democrat I suspect there would have been zero ambiguity. And he would have been testifying gleefully to a Republican held House. We would not be wondering where the counter intelligence report is or whether is exists at all. It is that world now.
3
Great piece! The FEC commissioner did a terrible disservice by giving the impression the foreign campaign help is somehow obvious. Examples:
1. During the campaign, Trump coordinates with Mexico a visit with Mexico's president in Mexico City. It costs the Mexican government tens of thousands of dollars in security, catering etc. It results in millions of free media exposure for Trump and makes him look presidential. Is that something of value given to the Trump campaign? YES. Should it be illegal? Or course not.
2. China imposes tarrifs on agriculture products from Trump supporting states to try to weaken his support there in an effort to make him lose in 2020. Is that meddling in our elections? Of course? Should those Chinese officials be held criminally liable? Of course not!! What if a Chinese official casually discusses this anti Trump tariff strategy with a Biden campaign official at some diplomatic party? Does this then become a crime?
C'mon America we ned to have a sensible discussion about this and the FEC needs to clearly lay out exactly how it's going to enforce the law.
Russia supplied the North Viet Cong ammunition during the Vietnam War. That ammunition killed some of Mueller's friends. It's hard to fathom that Mueller has forgotten about that. Roger Stone / Wikipedia / Julian Assange still have to play out.
At this point, Trump is a stepping stone to a major Indictment of Vladimir Putin. I suspect there are major events to unfold over the next year.
The law is plain.
Foreigners do not get to make contributions to any election, and an American may not solicit, accept, or receive any such contribution.
Oppo research has value because it costs money to carry it out.
52 USC §30121. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition
It shall be unlawful for-
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication (within the meaning of section 30104(f)(3) of this title); or
(2) a person to solicit, accept, or receive a contribution or donation described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph (1) from a foreign national.
(b) "Foreign national" defined
As used in this section, the term "foreign national" means-
(1) a foreign principal, as such term is defined by section 611(b) of title 22, except that the term "foreign national" shall not include any individual who is a citizen of the United States; or
(2) an individual who is not a citizen of the United States or a national of the United States (as defined in section 1101(a)(22) of title 8) and who is not lawfully admitted for permanent residence, as defined by section 1101(a)(20) of title 8.
It was clear during the 2016 campaign that Trump was asking for and wanted foreign interference and welcomed it. And his administration has done nothing to discourage a repeat of the same interference during the upcoming election. In fact this reader/citizen wonders how the GOP can look at itself in the mirror and not see its own image growing uglier with each round of lies and cruelties they inflict upon this country and its people.
Trump's actions and statements invited the investigation. His continual innuendoes and lies are confirmations of his untrustworthiness and lack of integrity. Mueller did his job. That the GOP wants to continue the charade of lies is not his fault.
3
A law professor should know better than this. Speaking against a candidate is free speech, and is permitted. Handing over opposition research to a campaign, to use as the campaign sees fit, is not free speech; it is a campaign contribution, and campaign contributions from non-Americans are illegal.
There are certainly many aspects of federal election law that could benefit from clarification. This is not one of them. When Trump's campaign officials met with Russians promising to turn over "dirt" on Trump's opponents, they attempted to violate federal election law. That attempt was illegal, even if it was unsuccessful - only because the Russians showed up without the promised "dirt."
4
Thus far in the Trump presidency, every judicial process established to stop the dismembering of our constitutional, democracy has failed to make headway against the destructive practices of a corrupt Trump presidency. I had high hopes that Mueller, an American hero if ever there was one, would have moved the rule of law ahead. I hope he does so on July 17th.
It's good to see the saintly Mueller, revered hero of national security bureaucrats of every persuasion, receive some cogent criticism. He knowingly made controversial legal assumptions that he allowed to be buried in the mind-numbing bulk of his report.
A better outcome would have seen Mueller first and separately disclosing to the public his legal framework for public discussion, then later issuing the full factual report for review. In that way the debatable legal premises could have received targeted attention and adequate discussion before being overtaken by the factual thicket of the complete text. And Mueller would have denied Barr the lamentable opportunity to preemptively muddy the legal waters with his partisan spin. Whatever Mueller's merits, he was a poor strategist.
One hopes, but does not expect, that Mueller will be forthcoming in his testimony before Congress. One fully understands Mueller's desire not to get his dainty patrician hands soiled by the vile mud of contemporary politics. But if that was his uppermost concern, why did he accept the appointment in the first place? Can Mueller have credibly believed that this investigation was going to finish up anywhere other than in the vulgar political arena?
Contrary to his lengthy and sterling reputation for thoroughness, Mueller seems to have taken this job knowing full well that he was mentally unprepared to finish it. His upcoming Congressional testimony offers our hero a last chance to get it right.
2
Impossible to place a DOJ policy that states a sitting president cannot be indicted on the same footing as the Constitution, which clearly spells out that the president is not above the law and can be subject to impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors. Mueller danced around indicting Trump but he cannot dance around the direct questions he will surely receive on July 17. The central question to ask is this: If there were no DOJ policy prohibiting indicting a sitting president, would you have indicted the president for his obstructive actions?
140
@nzierler
And the panel should ask: If it's true Mueller couldn't even SPECULATE whether Trump should be indicted, how come Barr was able to not only speculate, but actually DETERMINE in just two days that Trump didn't obstruct justice?
Considering Barr doesn't feel bound by this anymore, what does Mueller think now?
24
@nzierler
If Mueller testifies that it was DOJ policy that prevented indictment, he will in effect be calling out AG Barr as a liar, which I'm pretty sure that he is.
8
@nzierler Mueller said he would no go beyond his written report. Why would you expect him to answer such a hypothetical question?
3
I want to hear Mueller's testimony yet sadly, I am doubtful it will change anything. The full report should have been made public upfront rather than allowing Barr and Rosenstein to rewrite their own summary.
Ever read--or hear of--a book entitled "Bodyguard of Lies"?
Dealing with massive British counter-intelligence and disinformation during World War II. They were pretty busy back then!
And they did this too:
"Nibble little mousie--who's nibbling on my housie?" ("Hansel and Gretel").
They feinted all over the place. Made as if to attack the Reich here. Or there. Or everywhere. Knowing Hitler--unwilling to sacrifice one square inch of all his many conquests--
--would rush troops here. Or there. Or everywhere.
I think the GOP has taken a leaf from that book.
Quietly, indefatigably nibbling away at democracy in America.
I am reacting (of course) to this latest horrific decision from the Supreme Court. Which has dealt a body blow to the integrity of our elections.
But there have been other blows as well. One of which (obviously--this hemming and hawing when the subject of "foreign assistance" comes up.
I do not--not for a moment--consider Mr. Mueller an unscrupulous plotter, smiling fiendishly--taking an ax to the foundations of our democracy.
But gosh! Wish he'd spoken out more plainly--more clearly. Given us a clarion call--not a flourish on a harmonica.
He may yet. God grant.
Turn back (pardon my language) the rodents of the GOP--
--"nibbling at our housie."
We want that house to STAND--
--not collapse in a pile of rubble--
--all platitudes and well-worn pieties--
--that accomplish nothing.
2
Funny how "playing by the rules" shields one from criticism and transforms you into a moral coward.
1
What joke this has been. This did not work now it's a rape story/lie.
The Mistake...was in Reality.. with those of us who decided Voting for an Obnoxious Bully was a Great Idea! After all...after... his election to the Presidency he'd start acting like a President! The criticism leveled at women's looks,the Handicapped,immigrants,fellow Republicans,and former POW's etc..and let's not forget the Access Hollywood Tape of...well ...just plain Locker Room Talk...it was all going to change when he was elected!! Of course it hasn't because...he'll need another term to really become more Presidential. Also with another term...he'll be able to see his work on the tariffs, the big beautiful Wall...Mexico will pay...you'll see..and N. Korea...will all come to fruition! Esp. with the North Korea issue.. it will be no problem since he and Kim are in Love! There's a letter to prove it! Our allies will come around and will back us with Iran etc. Look at all the American manufacturers building factories here in the US !!Remember ...blame Mueller... and Vote Trump 2020...for 4 more years of Increased MAGA...and so much winning you'll beg FOX NATION TO STOP !! VOTE TRUMP..and BLAME MUELLER...it's a ...GREAT IDEA !! Win...with the Loser...or Lose with a Winner...or something like that!
1
Mistakes... or cowardice?
Prudence often time is cowardice.
2
Again and again some people "put their faith" in the Special Counsel. They thought he was going to bring to sunlight the rat's nest of the president's affairs. They thought he was going find collaboration with foreign agents. They acted on their feelings, not their rational side.
What Special Counsel did uncover was a rat's nest and a bunch of rats are serving prison time. There are others who are now being called to testify before Congress, the latest being two PR hacks.
Special Counsel was totally careful with the findings. There was not enough there to support charging King Rat due some legal restrictions and interpretations. So Special Counsel left it to Congress to determine what to do next.
Some folks now call Mr Mueller personally unpatriotic. That is dummy thinking. He fulfilled his responsibility to the letter of the law, as was his duty.
It was obvious that Mueller was sandbagged by William Barr's demands to finish the Report, as, in NOW.
1
Mueller is a Republican, and my guess is he'll weave and dodge, although in a gentlemanly way. Even if he thinks Trump is a stone cold crook, he'll never say so.
1
Don't count on it.. The man is a GOP pure blood-- In the end he'll bow down to McConnell and Barr .. He will offer vague spineless answers- and open the door to more questions than answers.
Corporate Capitalism and their buying off the US Government has destroyed everything .. I can't help but think Mueller is responsible to a small extent.
For his service in and during the Vietnam War, (Mueller's) military decorations and awards include: the Bronze Star Medal with Combat "V", Purple Heart Medal, two Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medals with Combat "V", Combat Action Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with four service stars, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and Parachutist Badge. -- Wikipedia
I hope he wears all of them when he testifies.
This will enable Trump to wear all of his when he is impeached.
1
The only mistake Mueller made is considering Barr a friend.
Trump is freaked because he understands the power of television, if he understands nothing else.
Actually seeing and hearing what Mueller found out about Trump will make a far bigger impact than reading the report, which few people have read.
2
I think it highly unlikely he will go outside of what is in the report. He did not, after all, do the investigation himself. He relied upon his staff and so it is they, in most cases, who had direct contact with the witnesses and evidence. Also, remember the Repubs will be asking questions too.
1
Even a law student at Fordham would question the analysis by the professor. He acknowledges that the Clinton campaign sought dirt on the Trump campaign. We all know that they did it through a cutout law firm and a research organization. This was a sophisticated political operation. They knew what they were looking for and they knew that Steele was doing it and they knew he was using Russian sources. So they in fact knew that they were dancing with the law on campaign contributions. This is like hiring a crime organization to kill someone where the organization farms out the contract to a specialized contractor (for instance an ex-Brit spy). The one who solicited the action and was aware of the law and the actors will be held responsible.
Now the Mueller document says that it could be difficult to prove that the Trump organization in meeting with a Russian lawyer to get dirt understood that this could be criminal (even if they knew that it would be politically embarrassing if such meeting became public).
Do you think that it would be difficult to prove that the Democrats (experienced with election law and running campaigns) would raise the same doubts as to intent?
Why is it that the Clinton campaign was not investigated either then or now by Mueller. Mueller could initiate (even through other US attorneys) actions against Trump campaign officials for crimes totally unrelated to the campaign and which occurred years before. Why did he not do so with the Clinton team? Ask!
Mr. Trump's ethical standard could not be more clear: if I am not in jail, I have done nothing wrong. He subjects himself to no ethical standard other than: what can I get away with?
It follows that the more vague the law, the happier Trump and his adherents will be. Trump is constantly pushing the legal envelope. Congress with a Senate led by Mr. McConnell will never clarify the law in such a way that Trump's actions may be clearly defined as illegal. Good luck trying to get that done.
So, Congressional staffers, any chance of getting this column, with appropriate arrowed annotations, onto the desks of the people you provide reports for at least a little before the testimony is scheduled?
I'm sure it would provide some real material to compose questions over and might also help to minimize the usual grandstanding and posturing--on all sides--that these testimonies generally elicit from the questioners.
1
There is a fundamental flaw in this opinion piece. Fusion GPS- for whom Christopher Steele worked- is a research and intelligence firm based in Washington DC. It is an American company. Neither Clinton nor the Republican presidential candidate who originally hired Fusion were soliciting and accepting help from a foreign entity.
Another point-largely forgotten- is that Steele is highly respected for his work- which includes uncovering the FIFA bribery scandal.
4
@FS I don't think his point about foreign research was in reference to the Steele Doc. It seems more to reference to the coordination with foreign entities. For example, when a presidential candidate requests a foreign power to "Locate Hillary's emails" and then the foreign power hacks the opponents emails and releases them to the benefit of the candidate that requested it.
1
It is clear that Mueller speaks lawyer instead of english. I wish them luck with his testimony. They should get Al Franken to ask the questions.
30
Mueller can't fix his mistakes because he didn't make any.
He was tasked with looking into Russian meddling into the 2016 election, which he did and there was a certain person that didn't want him doing that (DJT) and yes he probably did obstruct the investigation.
However it was not Mueller's task to charge that person with obstruction, that's the lazy people in congress's job and maybe after they hear what Mueller has to say they might do their job?
50
And what about “coordination” with the Russians? Seems pretty clear to me that event without a “smoking gun“ recording of Paul Manafort or Roger Stone talking to Russian operatives, there was plenty of signaling, phone calls, back channel coordination, etc. between the Trump Campaign and Russian linked folks of all sorts. (“ ... 101 known points of contact ...”) Given the article’s quote regarding the nature of how to define such coordination based on law and not DOJ OLC rulings, I would agree that Muller should have called this out as a key finding. So no, he is definitely not blameless - but there’s lots of blame to go around here.
7
@BTO Wrong. It was incumbent upon Mueller as a public servant in a special role to be VERY CLEAR FROM THE OUTSET what he viewed his role to be. If he secretly believed he had no power to indict the President or even imply that he would if he could, he should have said so very publicly. Then his view could have been corrected by a court and he could have been directed to perform a valuable service, or he could have been written off by everyone as being tasked with something unimportant had his view prevailed. He didn't do that, and we ended up with the worst outcome - an investigation that seemed consequential, but was not, and which Trump/Barr could then spin. Mueller and his team blew it. Don't blame Congress for that. Congress passed a special counsel law; Mueller chose to secretly interpret it in a bizarre fashion and keep that from the public. He and his team own that blunder, an epic fail.
2
@BTO
Dear BTO,
While this article was interesting in theory, you have gone straight to the point. Congress knows their powers and responsibilities to hold the Executive Branch accountable...what are they waiting for...Christmas...impeach the scoundrel already.
2
Mr. Mueller conducted an investigation, not a trial. His conclusions do not establish legal precedents. This commentary, by a law professor no less, is so much hokum. He volunteers an opinion, elaborates far-fetched interpretations, and tries to misconstrue Mueller’s conclusions. As a result, overall a pretty weak essay.
1
Mueller attended the wedding of William Barr’s child. Is that a clue?
3
It's clear by now that Mr. Mueller, a career bureaucrat, and deft navigator of the system, was able to neatly dodge making himself the target of either side. Kudos to him. But he failed his duty to determine whether crimes were committed by Trump, which he all but declared were. Instead, he punted this to Congress, and so far Congress has also used their considerable talent for foot-dragging and ducking of responsibility, leaving Americans with the same questions we had 2 years ago.
If we are to get to the bottom of this we need Congress - Democrats - use every tool at their command to compel Mr. Mueller to testify completely and without continuing to dance the line of "It's not for me to say". In fact, it is. We taxpayers paid the bill for his exhaustive investigation, and we are owed the full accounting. What is NOT for him to say is who gets to see the evidence. If we have a criminal in the White House, then we need to know that and be able to take action to get rid of him.
This is why an impeachment hearing is so imperative. Mueller chose not to interview Trump, and several other key witnesses, nor did he examine all relevant documents because he didn't want to get into a big fight with Trump over executive privilege. That information must come to light and be examined. I believe it is, it will prove beyond any doubt that Trump committed crimes, and at that point, even some of his defenders will finally decide to abandon him.
Don't treat Mueller with kid gloves.
4
Let me see if I have this straight! Mr. Mueller and his group of reasonably accomplished lawyers made mistakes that need to be fixed. How come the mistakes are being made by the investigators and seemingly none by others.
That seems to be based on Mr. Trump's abilities to find loopholes in the findings and thus clear himself of all collusion and obstruction. Really!
If the Mueller report had been edited by God and was a perfect instrument, the current president would have disregarded it and said God and Mueller are wrong. Even if God said "Mueller is right in all points in his report" the president, with no soul, would have blast God.
Mueller worked within the framework of numerous laws, loopholes, restrictions and the Republican Party to hone a
report that was unusually fair.
If you want to call out the villains there are plenty to go around, Let's start with the president, his family, the AG, the Deputy AG, the White House Counsel, the foreign countries trying to take us down, the Supreme Court and lastly the Republican Party whose sole goal is to make this country a one party country anyway - democrats, green, and other parties extinct.
The larger question is not whether Mueller can fix any mistakes (if that is what you want to call them), but whether the 60 million who voted for Trump and the 63 million who voted for Hillary will have an "awakening" as a result of the Mueller report and join together to keep the country from "going to hell in a handbasket."
2
@Tom Osterman....and the people said...AMEN ...BROTHER !!
Maybe I'm over-simplifying, but it seems like one way to remediate this problem would be for Congress to pass a law to make it illegal not to report to the FBI if a foreign entity approached a campaign with information that could influence an election.
Of course, with McConnell controlling the Senate this probably is not practical at the moment.
2
Oh, my, Mueller does not agree with Prof Shugerman's understanding of the law. How could he be so obtuse? Time for Mueller to 'fess up.
Just what we don't need. Obscure law school professors nit picking a complex report, obviously prepared with great thought and diligence.
Maybe the law needs to be changed (without infringing on the First Amendment), but there clearly is support for Mueller's work. That's enough. Please move on to something productive. And don't expect any revelations when Mueller testifies. He's already said his report is his testimony.
3
If I could, I would ask:
"Mr. Mueller, were there any areas or persons that you felt deserved investigation that were not allowed to look into?"
I'd give a lot to have him answer that openly.
1
@woodswoman,
*that you were not allowed...
(Does anyone else wish the Times had an edit option?) :-)
This is all nothing. The Mueller Report is nothing. Mueller’s testimony before Congress will do nothing and change nothing.
The Russian interference is nothing, and is the least of the problems with Trump.
The real problems with Trump are his hardline stance on all of the darlings of the Republicans: tax cuts for the ultra wealthy, denial of climate change, deregulation of banking and business, and repression of blacks and Hispanics.
Because he checks every box of the Republican Party, Trump will never be impeached, unless he makes a colossal mistake. He will be re-elected in a landslide.
@Mr. Little,
We're going to need people get beyond their defeatism for just a little while; we're not going to have many chances to fix this before it becomes the country's standard and our democracy's gone for good. Please, one more time?
1
@Mr. Little Re-elected in a landslide? Hmm, not sure where you are getting your information from. He didn't win the popular vote. Voting stations were closed, voters repressed, help from a foreign government (or two) and the guy still didn't win - win.
But we are sure losing with him occupying the White House.
2
@Mr. Little - people keep saying this - "he will be re-elected in a landslide". He's been polling in the low 40s for his entire presidency. Where is this landslide going to emerge from?
4
dude, Mr Mueller is NOT our savior. We must save ourselves. WE MUST SAVE OURSELVES.
When in the course of human events...
7
Mueller has stated that he will only be speaking about information already appearing his report. While much is there to talk about, it troubles me to think he may not be offering opinions and viewpoints about anything other than what we've already read. He seems to be a very cautious man, able to keep his focus tight. As much as I wish he'd open up and really speak his mind, I'll be more than a little surprised if he does any of it. I predict this will be about Mueller protecting Mueller, his team, and his report.
I will be watching though, in the hopes I'm wrong. He could tell us a lot if he wanted to, and he wouldn't be breaking any of the rules either.
6
No democracy could survive Shugerman's hairsplitting. I thought I knew what coordination meant when I began the op ed, but by the end I was hopelessly confused.
If a candidate for public office can be ambushed by such word games, then no one but a lawyer will feel safe running. If the law can't be stated more clearly, then it is not law, and should be disregarded. Mueller was right to be cautious in interpreting such vague language.
Even more irresponsible is Shugerman's attempt to do over the Mueller report. Far worse is the Times' irresponsibility in publishing it. Mueller has issued its report. Are we going to relitigate it till kingdom come?
Give democracy a chance. Save our elections from being decided on the basis of impenetrably obscure regulations, and let's move on.
4
@Ian Maitland, It would be lovely if we didn't have to complete law school to understand some of these regulations. If often seems to me the authors use three words where they only needed one.
2
You are retired and have opted for a quiet, serene, life. Then one day you are asked to come in and head a Special Counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election. As a Republican lawyer who served as the sixth Director of the FBI, a graduate of Princeton, and a Marine Corps officer during the Vietnam War - who received a Bronze Star for heroism and a Purple Heart - you do not have many options. It is your patriotic duty to accept the task.
You send out those you trust to collect evidence on matters relating to the investigation. They come back each with a pile of information, all pointing to a corrupt president who views being in the WH an opportunity for promoting himself, his business, and setting the stage for making big money in future.
You have been an FBI director. You know the president is supported by violent white supremacist and armed extreme right in the country. You don't want to see blood running on the streets. But you know putting that mess out can just do that. You are also worried that revealing everything to the public will leaves you no peace. You will be hounded by Trump supporters for the rest of your life.
So you write a report that does not provide munitions to those who want to impeach Trump. But you charge all those who have been "aiding and abetting" the president. You think that should give enough indication to the public that there is a conman in the WH. Then you go on TV and plead to everyone to be left alone.
29
If Mueller was worried about violence in the streets and muffled himself to avoid it, all he did was to turn the heat up on the simmering water.
When Trump loses the election he will cry “rigged” and those racist, radical far right will be in the streets- much as the are in Oregon- willing to foment violence to assist the Republicans from voting on climate change legislation. I fear that is just a taste of what will happen, since Trump plans on being president for life. He will fight to stay in power.
7
@Eddie B. Aptly put but as a tax payer I wanted more than what I got. Either way but I wanted more.
4
@Sarah, I think people should've paid big attention to what happened in Oregon. The militia is just itching to use the stuff they've been gathering up. There are not a lot of them, but it would have to be Governors calling out the National Guard, if necessary; I can see Trump refusing to do it.
1
Why should the President - or someone campaigning to be President - be above the rule of law ?
That's the present absurd Department of Justice policy as it Kafkaesquely stands now.
Certainly if the President were committing rapes, murders and thefts during his term, I think the American people would accept that the President should be actively prosecuted.
And the current President is a walking-and-talking Obstruction-of-Justice with no regard for the rule of law.
Robert Mueller should plainly remind Congress and America that if the President were an ordinary citizen, he would in fact be in jail today for multiple federal crimes.
The Presidential veil of impunity for high crimes and misdemeanors should be lifted.
Mr. Mueller, you didn't fight heroically for your country in Vietnam just so a lying, draft-dodger with a loud mouth could make a complete mockery of you and your country, did you ?
Did you ?
40
I agree that "thing of value" has been turned into hash.
However, Mueller made clear that he is not going beyond his report. He certainly is not going to redo it verbally. He isn't going to create and apply a new definition of campaign laws, all for this oral testimony to the Committee.
It just isn't going to happen.
Nor should it. It should have been in the Report. It wasn't.
"Ah, my Report was wrong, let me tell you now" is not the way this should be done. It won't be, not by a guy like Mueller for sure.
This is now something for Congress to fix, in a new clearer law. They won't. They don't want to. They just want to bash each other with it.
2
Until we had a corrupt, chaos creating liar in the presidency. his devolving team of misfits as staff and his traitorous supporters in the Senate, we didn't need clarification. An even minimum degree of ethics guided thinking. Now that we are led by a band of bandits who operate totally with lies and diversions we must think like mob lawyers.
7
Mueller's testimony will be the equivalent of his report: a nothingburger. No reason to think otherwise.
That DOJ memo has no more constitutional standing than an opposing opinion, yet Mueller took it as though it were legally vetted like a SCOTUS decision. This is absurd; he needs to go back to law school and retake Admin law and Con law.
4
@Rich
A "nothingburger," right. Agreed, it's a great little word. But you provide zero to back your assertion.
The report makes a clear case for obstruction of justice and plainly states that if it could have exonerated Trump it would have done so. It did not.
Mueller presented the facts for Congress to make a political decision on impeachment. And several hundred federal prosecutors signed a letter stating that if Individual 1 was not the president, that individual would be prosecuted for multiple felonies.
So, your "nothingburger" is pretty nourishing.
1
Anything of value means what it says. ANYTHING, be it a copper penny, a bit of gossip, or Hillary’s e-mails.
2
@Thomas, even simpler would be to say you can't accept anything that will help or enrich you in the campaign. No information, no money, no presents. Anybody who doesn't get it, doesn't want to get it for a reason.
1
For two years, while Mueller and his team maintained radio silence, the media continually reassured the public that Mueller was an ex-marine, a scrupulously honest prosecutor and former FBI Director, but most of all, a real patriot.
After “completing” his investigation and releasing his report to the tender mercies of Bill Barr, he has refused to speak publicly and had to be subpoenaed in order to force him to speak before Congressional Committees on a matter of absolute importance to US national security.
So much for Mr. Mueller’s patriotism.
111
@Jack Shultz
Agreed. Right now, Mr. Mueller disappoints on many levels.
But in the words of CIA operative Gust Avrakotos ("Charlie Wilson's War"):
"We'll see, said the Zen Master."
3
If you say it in writing you don’t have to say it orally. Nadler says he needs testimony because people are like the President and to lazy to read.
8
@Jack Shultz Democrats were the ones who were touting his straight arrow rectitude, fair and uncompromising approach and honesty, until his investigation didn't give them the result they wanted, then they turned on him.
1
I feel foolish that prior to the report being completed, I put any faith, hope, and dreams in Mueller at all. I won’t make that mistake again.
56
@Anne
Don't despair. Consider how crazy Republicans are, and how corrupt. Would Jim Jordan take Mueller's word if he found anything negative about trump? How about Mitch? Right now they control a big part of the country and I'm sick of tip toeing around them, but they have to be appeased. Anything other than totally down the middle is extremist and liberal and dismissed by the 35-40%. Also, do you think Mueller expected Barr's nasty trick? I think without that, the country would've gotten the summaries it was supposed to get, and there'd be a demand for removal.
I think Mueller produced a road map. I think he's probably dismayed that no one understood it. Well, some of us did, but I doubt enough of the right people did. Also, this is a huge national security problem. Imagine seeing what he saw, raw. Must be scary. Makes me think about Mueller saying hey guys, he's bad but he's also an idiot, handle him by barricades when possible and eliminate the Russian threat because the next guy they hire might not be an idiot, yet millions of Americans have proved they are.
Or, you're right, and we were suckered and now we are screwed. Either way, we can not lay back and take it, we have to fight back. We should put faith in our system and trust in ourselves and take it all back. I cannot imagine a job that would compel me to do what they all seem to have done, which is line up with the enemy in exchange for whatever. I would resign.
5
In all my life, I have never seen a report or inquiry by someone who spent as long in government as Mueller did, that was not basically a whitewash.
7
How about handing over polling data to a foreign government that is targeting your opponent with misinformation? You know, like Paul Manafort did and then covered up.
Right, that's giving away a thing of value, but also more like conspiring, in the collusion sense.
6
He is simply going to say that I provided a report. Read it and do your jobs. It is not for me to rouse political action. That is what politicians do and I am not of that ilk. You have the right to criticize me, but in any case, my job is done. I am off the clock. As a citizen, I have to answer a subpoena, but do not have to add anything more than what I spent 2 years writing. After today, I will go back to my home and get on with my life out of politics. After all, I have a life. Some of you, I wonder if you do. In any case, not my problem.
4
Campaigns should be required to document to FEC that all people working on the campaign for pay or for free, including contractor are US citizens if foreign nationals are not to provide anything of value to a campaign. I suspect most all campaigns don’t ask and don’t require documented proof of US citizenship..
Absent this requirement, it is trivial for foreign sources to interfere in our elections and the campaign can just say I didn’t know if the involvement is discovered by law enforcement or media becomes a problem.
2
I would like to know if Mr. Mueller felt that he had enough to charge Donald Trump if he weren't president.
8
@Glenn Thomas He addressed this both in the report and in his remarks. He must be so frustrated that no one is bothering to read or listen - I know I am.
4
"Value" has nothing to do with it. Russia is a serious adversary, if not an enemy. Canoodling with them in any way borders on treasonous activity.
18
For the Mueller appearance to the congress to have any substance we must first stop calling him a Fair minded individual without a political leaning.
We judge people by the company they keep, and Mueller’s good friend is no other than Barr.Yes Barr , Trumps Attorney General who had stated long before Mueller's report was given to Barr to draw his conclusions , that he thought the whole investigation of Trump was a Wich hunt, which is why Trump appointed him for Attorney General. Mueller is a registed Republican, & blood is thicker than water. The Deck has been Stacked to white wash Trump.
Congress must treat Mueller as an adversary which he is, he is far from a Saint.
18
Impeachment is the job of publicly elected officials, and as such is substantially dependant upon public perception. Like it or not, based upon the evidence collected by Mr. Mueller a determination of wrong doing is highly subjective... the polls tell us so.
I cannot see how Mr Mueller could have come to another conclusion, without furthering the rift in public perception and likely skewing it in Mr. Trump's favour.
I understand people had invested emotionally in the process and had high hopes... but lets be honest, Russia collusion is a thin gruel that is way down the list of reasons the Trump should not be president. It is a fool's hill to die on. I suspect Mr. Mueller is no fool, and will continue to slowly back away.
"It is illegal for any person to solicit, accept, or receive anything of value from a foreign national in connection with a U.S. election.”
“Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing"
So Trump has already broken the law? Great. Prosecute him already.
26
@Fincher - oh, just toss it on the pile with all the other laws Trump has broken, as if it makes any difference.
2
You Trump derangement people need to give it a rest...your credibility is long gone so just stop...
3
@Knute The ENTIRE report has yet to be seen by the American people. Wanting the complete truth does not make any American deranged. It makes them a Patriot.
1
@Knute Who exactly are you talking about? I suspect it’s not actually the people who’ve lost credibility. But I would say describing them as suffering from “Trump derangement” would be accurate.
People who were too lazy to read the 400 page report now get to hear the juicy excerpts live.
Hopefully he will restore the material which was redacted except for legitimate national security material.
8
@MIKEinNYC
Remember the Republicans will also be asking questions, this will not end well for Mueller.
1
@Knute
Right, Meadows and Jordan. I'm sure Mueller will be terrified.
1
Sowing uncertainty may be the refuge of scoundrels, so that justice may be flouted in an ever changing environment. We need, given our Trumpian (Machiavellian) times, a firm statement in the positive...instead of the vagaries of 'negatives' that Mueller brought up. His appearance in Congress shall benefit us all...provided the questions remain pertinent, likely leading to the confirmation of our deep suspicion, that Trump obstructed justice and gained the upper hand with Putin's help...to assault the presidency in 2016...and a likely 'repeat' in 2020, unless we put a stop on it.
7
It's amazing to me that when a normal person is accused of a crime, prosecutors like Mueller prepare an iron clad case and leave no wiggle room or vagueness, but when anything trump is investigated, extenuating circumstances always show up to muddy the waters. Attorneys like Barr earn kudos for a life of integrity, yet, when confronted with trump toxins, fold like a beach chair when it comes to face facts.
It's good to be king, says donald. I wonder what the poor people are doing tonight. (not)
40
Like an old fashioned Russian bureaucrat Mueller is the ultimate “company man”. His report painfully twists and turns it’s way to rationalizing his failure to act. He allowed Barr and Rosenstein to conclude, “nothing to see here”. Since then he has been hiding. Don’t expect anything different when he testifies.
24
@Dean Grey It wasn't his job to act. It was his job to conduct the research and write the report, which he did.
If being "the ultimate company man" means doing his job as it was delineated, then yes he is that. The responsibility now lies with those whose job it is to act on the EXPANSIVE material he provided.
4
Perhaps he did his job as narrowly described as possible. Scores of respected prosecutors throughout
The country have disagreed with Muellers narrow interpretation of his role and conclusions.
Let’s get real. Lots of good info in the report then obfuscation at the end. He didn’t clearly state his conclusions. He let his bosses do that. You can defend, “just doing my job”, but at this point in time the country needs a little more.
1
@Dean Grey - I suspect that as a lifelong Republican, Mueller never wanted to go down in history as the guy who pulled the trigger on bringing down the Republican Party and was hoping to leave that to somebody else.
That's why he doesn't want to go on TV and say out loud in plain language what his report really reveals: that the president is a flagrant criminal and his Republican enablers are complicit.
4
Law professor Shugerman blabbers nonsense. Mueller's appointment was to investigate Russian collusion and not campaign finance and other things. Mueller Report is nothing but the manipulated files prepared by Rosenstein.
It's known to all that Americans stood in long lines in the November 2016 election and voted to elect a president. Federal Election Commission has also stated that voting and counting machines kept in all states were not plugged in internet and therefore Russians couldn't cyber attack American election process. This clarification by FEC quashes the entire Mueller report. But the Democrats,using the fabricated Mueller report which is not dealing with Russian collusion but irrelevant issues, are harassing dignified officers with subpoenas.
How ridiculous is Mueller's report can be assessed from the fact that Manafort's Ukraine link was long before Trump announced his candidacy and Flynn meeting with the Russian ambassador was after the election. And again, what has Hicks got to do with Russian collusion? It's by deviation and manipulation that Mueller produced his 448 page report.
Mueller is not a judge and his report is not a judgement. He's a retired police officer (FBI), and like a cop he has used all criminal tactics to trap innocent persons who had absolutely nothing to do with American election. He's a colleague and friend of Comey. Can we expect any fairness from him? In addition, the cunning Rosenstein was there to supply manipulated files.
2
@Abraham Yeshuratnam
Yet people walking by with thumb drives could target individual machines without internet access. They could open up the machine to wi-fi and stand within 60 feet to beam in and out.
Only need to do so in certain counties, and the Kremlin had sent observers to our elections accompanied by our own people to figure out how it worked.
Dignified officers? Where?
9
@MystLady
Thumb drives? Really?
Most election machines have no open ports to insert them into. Further, election judges would stop them unless the judges are all crooks. And they aren't.
Electronic voting machines, the ones on which votes are cast, and the ones which do the counting, are not wifi enabled. If any are, they can be disabled easily.
There is very little that can be done about this in practice.
Suppose Russia did indeed do extensive opposition research showing Hillary Clinton was up to no good. Instead of supplying this information to Donald Trump, they could simply publish it in Russian newspapers, where US law doesn't apply. The next day it would be reprinted in the NY Times and the Washington Post - with many caveats, perhaps, but it would be out there.
That's what happens when you try to make it illegal to discuss what everyone is talking about.
4
He told everyone already that Trump committed crimes. If you don't have the ability to proceed with that information there is nothing else that can be done.
There is right and there is wrong and if your response to wrong is to hope that the people of the US become enlightened then you are deluded, because that is not going to happen.
7
I believe the "anything of value" question can be easily answered. If the Republicans are complaining that Clinton paid millions for dirt on Trump they cannot now say that information about Clinton obtained from Wikileaks via Russia has no value.
Mueller seems to have been purposely vague in some areas and refused to make a conclusion for what I believe the reason is that he didn't want history to list him as the man that brought down a president even if in his heart of hearts he knows that Trump is a criminal.
I think the House is going to find that Mueller will be firm about not going any farther then what is already in his report.
4
@VMG
Or maybe some of this was under pressure. Rosenstein has skin in the game. He wrote that recommendation about firing Comey. Barr worked for a law firm that worked with Kremlin linked oligarchs, closely. His son in law works for the White House in some way. Rudy G. works in Ukraine for a Kremlin aligned mayor.
The guy who ran the campaign did this before, in Ukraine, down to the lock her up part with a female candidate running against his guy. Manafort's guy, Yanukovich, pretended he was pro Western until the last minute. The Ukrainians eventually toppled him.
I hate to sound like a tin foil hat person, but these things are all true. There's good reason to believe Mueller dropped "neither could we exonerate him" as a kind of Easter egg. Once found, it would trigger the public and Congress to act.
4
Mueller is a pro and has a history of doing well in everything he was assigned him.
He is also a by the books, I only do the job I was asked to do.
He said although Trump wanted to be a traitor, his underlings stopped him and it did not rise to the level of treason and also Trump obstructed justice in Mueller's opinion at least 10 times.
He is handing it off to the Congress, state courts and the people and the Justice Dept (as soon as Barr goes) to do something about it.
5
Mueller is a Republican and he will not give what the democrats have been seeking. For the GOP it has always been party before country. Don’t expect anything new with his “testimony.”
11
I like the approach recommended by the author here. It's foolish to expect Mueller to say anything substantive not already included in the report, but it would be a good use of hearings to put the legal loopholes/vagaries surrounding campaigns' "collusion" out there in the open for people to be aware of going into 2020.
There might have been nothing illegal about that Trump Tower meeting as the law currently stands, but as a non-lawyer/politician, it sure seems to me that even accepting this meeting without mentioning it to the FBI is immoral and unpatriotic. I'd be interested in hearing Mueller and Congress explain why/if it would be problematic to have a law that simply states that if you're running for office, and you're approached by a representative of a foreign government offering assistance with your campaign, you have to report that to the appropriate US law enforcement agency or suffer legal penalties. Even if the offered assistance never materializes (as was apparently the case with the Trump Tower meeting), a failure to report the contact indicates a willingness to accept such assistance, which should be disqualifying for a candidate, in my opinion.
7
@Hans
I'm not sure there aren't laws about this, are you?
1
Congress must ask Mueller to fix his mistakes? Don't you think he will just repeat them and make Trump's case stronger? And even if he tries to clarify, Trump and all his allies with ignore all the subtleties. What makes the author think Trump or his people will pay any attention to what the FEC says, if they don't actually ridicule it?
Mueller has been a great disappointment, and I expect he will be a disappointment again when he testifies to Congress. He won't say Trump committed a crime, he will spout legalese.
Democrats have to move on and focus on winning the next election. I don't think they can win by whining about the last one.
6
Mueller should bring the summaries he created for our current AG to the hearings as well as the full report. The House is responsible for providing a check on the Executive branch, which includes the white house. I would definitely like to see those summaries.
Blue wave 2020 !
7
@joe parrott
I'm pretty sure they're in the report, and you can download it for free. I read summaries at the beginning of each part. They would have done nicely and were almost totally at odds with Barr's statements.
10
"A prosecutor’s duty is to explain the law clearly and correctly — not only to the subjects of the investigation but also to other candidates and to the public."
No. Definitely not. The prosecutor is the legal party responsible for presenting the case in a criminal trial against an individual accused of breaking the law. This is his job and nothing else.
Particularly a prosecutor is not allowed to clear or define embattled legal provisions - this is the exclusive job of a court or authorities with decision power - neither would he be entitled to fix or amend insufficient or dysfunctional law - this is the exclusive job of legislators.
The prosecutor has to interpret the law wether a conviction is likely to reach or not. If the provision is so unclear and evidence are too weak then there is no suffiicient probability of a guilt verdict and so he should not start indictments doomed to failure. This are general rules proven as best practise in millions of trials worldwide.
According to this rules Mr. Mueller did everything correctly. An major obstacle by an intervention based on constitutional law was to worry about here.
The author may be right that campaign finance law might be unfortunate or not desirable. But Special Counsel Mueller is the very last person to clarify or improve this law in this proceeding limited to investigate crimes. (BTW: In my eyes he had been very critical of some provisions of criminal law he had to struggle with. That´s a prosecutors job.)
3
@ws
What rules? The rules of procedure? Or substance?
@Rich
The rules written by Neal Katyal that established the special counsel and the rules given by the Deputy Attorney General.
He could ‘fix his mistakes’ in a few short sentences.
1. “We did not conclude there was ‘no collusion,’ and our report nowhere says that.”
2. “I thought we were quite clear, but allow me to clarify: Neither the evidence nor our report ‘exonerates’ the President and others in his campaign and in the White House from unethical and criminal misconduct. I chose to follow Department of Justice guidelines which forbid criminal indictment of a President while in office. That does not mean Donald J. Trump and others in the White House is not subject to censure now, or to criminal prosecution absent those guidelines, or that they cannot be prosecuted after Trump leaves office.”
3. “I have been a practicing attorney for about four decades; I am thoroughly familiar with the rules governing conflicts of interest in the practice of law, public and private. Donald J. Trump is not a lawyer and does not appear to understand those rules; nor do the many amateurs who have addressed ‘conflict’ issues on television. No one who participated in our investigations or in writing our report has a conflict of interest as defined in the rules. Furthermore, where we have found even the appearance of a conflict, as with investigators whose emails indicated partisan animosity towards Donald J. Trump, they were promptly removed.”
4. “We found substantial, troubling evidence of Russian interference favoring Donald Trump’s election. It appears quite possible he would not be President today otherwise.”
33
@chambolle
See, I read all that in the report. Didn't you? But you're right, he should say those things again. I thought he made it clear that Rosenstein and Co. gave him comically constructive parameters that seem to be done up to avoid any prosecution at all when administered in combination with the sitting President can't be indicted memo. He can't say his bosses are stopping him but he can paint that picture with what he does and doesn't say, if that makes sense. That's what they mean by nuanced, he's saying a lot at once. It's obvious he had to get around a lot of crap to not exonerate the President.
@MystLady...Poor Mueller..the majority of us count on Barr, Fox News ...the NYT etc. and the major networks to do our homework for us! As you say the majority of us won't read it for ourselves.So they held conferences where they read the Report out loud! There's even a Play where the actors act out the Report !! Not only will many of us not read the Report...we won't Listen to it either !! Maybe just maybe...on July 17th...we can shout to our own Countrymen and Women and say...hey...AMERICANS..PAY ATTENTION.....LISTEN TO MUELLER !!!
It seems we’ve become a nation impelled by responsibility avoidance.
I hope, with some trepidation, that Mueller will rise to the occasion, going beyond simply reading from his report.
10
"A prosecutor’s duty is to explain the law clearly and correctly — not only to the subjects of the investigation but also to other candidates and to the public. This duty now falls to Congress and the F.E.C. Good-faith candidates deserve fair notice of where the line is, and bad-faith candidates need to be deterred by clarity."
This was the most striking paragraph for me in this article.
In view of this, Mueller has failed. And I'm sad to say I have little confidence that Congress will rectify this. The only thing I see with any clarity is that our system is failing us.
26
Robert Mueller, himself a victim of McCarthy style politics, can put this to rest or initiate motion to a kinetic confrontation. Just tell the truth. Plain language for all understand.
9
Is opposition research a thing of value? Of course it is. Campaigns routinely pay for opposition research, which pretty much defines it as a thing of value. And the fact that opposition research is provided without compensation does not diminish its value. Mueller and the FEC should have said so unequivocally.
16
@Duane
Some might be worth more than others.
With such momentous implications it seems as if Mueller and his teams were careful about precedent. I could almost hear them saying that while all of these things are currently referring to Donald Trump he's likely an anomaly. This is how it would happen if it was a normal President. This guy, mr. Trump, will need to be dealt with through a different method. Maybe there's room to say what they did was not against the law. That doesn't mean that it was right or that it should allow Trump to remain in office or to escape impeachment at least. Some other candidate could do this or similar and it could be completely innocent. But with partisan manipulation a president could be removed for doing things that aren't nefarious. That's exactly what Trump and his goons are squawking about all the time on television. They're making it seem like this is a political coup when in reality it seems as though we've got a Muscovite Candidate installed in the White House somehow, and they're using the system against us.
I see it as Mueller trying to prevent future politicians from using this whole roadmap for indictment on others. But I also see this as Mueller saying this guy is not your normal President he's a national security risk. Do something they won't let me do. Impeach (indict) and remove. I can't say it, but I'm saying it.
2
I seem to live in a country in which more and more things might be classified as obviously wrong, but legal. Just today, our Supreme Court basically declared partisan gerrymandering to be permissible. The rationale seemed to be that both sides have done it, so we're going to stay out of it.
My moral compass, or what's left of it, tells me that partisan gerrymandering is wrong, that both sides have done it is irrelevant, and that this decision was arrived at by five partisan hacks some of whom were themselves put on the court improperly.
I'm happy to have the legal deficiencies in Mr. Mueller's report exposed, but am increasingly pessimistic that they will be addressed in time to keep our next election from being hopelessly corrupted.
I think Mitch McConnell and the rest of his Republican wrecking crew should be thankful they live in such an apathetic, indecisive country. Had they been alive in revolutionary France, the guillotine would have been waiting for all of them.
124
@Vesuviano
"I seem to live in a country in which more and more things might be classified as obviously wrong, but legal."
That's for sure, and the decision on partisan gerrymandering is a excellent example. But there are many others, as you suggest, among them being perpetual lying by the so-called president. It seems to be argued that (a) if action is not expressly prohibited by law, it's OK, and (b) if that prohibition is inconvenient, it's to be ignored. "Law" is what you can get away with, and such concepts of right/wrong, good/bad, moral/immoral, just/unjust, and fair/unfair are but quaint signs of weakness.
19
@Vesuviano
"this decision was arrived at by five partisan hacks some of whom were themselves put on the court improperly."
And there you have it. "We can't attack the system that got US here - it makes our utter illegitimacy too plainly and painfully obvious going forward."
3
@Vesuviano - Vive la révolution!
2
We do not know what co-operation, agreements, coordination exist or existed in the private conversations held between President Trump and President Putin (or other Russians).
The possibility of "You help me, I'll help you" either made directly or indirectly may always remain unknown. We do know that President Trump seems to still desire to build towers in Russia (and perhaps in North Korea, Saudi Arabia, even China) in the future.
Collusion by any other name is just as sweet .
Doug Giebel, Big Sandy, Montana
20
Oh but we do, and so do you. We saw it happen in real time. There were other things we didn't see in public but take a look at manafort and Hannity going back and forth by text message calling each other in the middle of the night. I'm certain messages were run back and forth. There are many ways that messages could have gone back and forth and you and I know that somehow that's what happened.
You mean Campaign Finance Law that has never been enforced? That Campaign Finance Law? Or perhaps you mean the Federal Election commission that couldn't find the Atlantic Ocean if it marched East until it's hats floated? That Federal Election Commission? The F.E.C. is probably (Deliberately) more dysfunctional then the Congressional Committee on the needs of Civil War Veterans. Campaign Finance law? That may even be a bigger joke. Neither party Republican or Democratic and few Candidates want a functional F.E.C. or Campaign finance laws. Even if you get such a president elected (However Unlikely) getting such reforms through Congress? That's more fantasy than Lord of the Rings. It isn't any Congresses (either House, Either Parties) interests to do so. And proclaiming the public good? Well the next time that motivates congress it will be the first time. I'm not holding my breath.
And the Congress isn't asking Mr. Mueller to fix his mistakes. What there asking is him to rewrite to suit them. Truth has nothing to do with what either side wants out of this mess. Neither side is much interested in the truth nor does it much suit them. I suspect neither party can afford much look at what was going on around the election of 2016.
2
@Stephan
So what if it's never been enforced? Perhaps the reason it has never been enforced is that this is the first time that we have had this type of behavior. Maybe no one has ever done this before because the people who ran for president prior to this loved the United States.
Mr. Mueller can no longer hide behind a shield of bureaucracy. The lack of clarity in much of Mueller report - along with his "statement" of May 22 - has raised legitimate questions that need to be answered. On July 17, I hope that Mr. Mueller has the humility and grace to clarify the findings in the report. And I hope he has the courage to answer all questions to their fullest. Like so many others, I have been longing for the truth. I hope that on July 17, Mr. Mueller can finally provide it.
19
Additional questions: what does Mr. Mueller think of the body of encrypted communications that the investigation did not decipher? Do these contain evidence pointing to foreign influence and meddling? Can Congress compel these to be revealed?
16
@Ann
The encrypted stuff, I assume, has been seen but cannot be referred to or acknowledged because of the sensitive nature of the collection of that encrypted data. Seems to me we've got ways of seeing that stuff but it has to be denied.
Otherwise, why have Mueller come out to correct the record? His press conference had specific statements in it for a reason. He could've had another person give a wrap up or a goodbye but instead he emphasised things in that report. It was like a big exclamation point on various situations in the report. He had to tread lightly, he can't say he knows the whole lot of them are in on it. Yet he's letting us know this is serious and this is the fire alarm ringing. This is a unique and uniquely dangerous situation with Trump& Co., use the remedy they gave us in the Constitution.
Conveniently timed before the release of the IG's report.
And that is no coincidence.
4
There is no mention of any Special Counsel in any Article of the American Constitution.
Robert S. Mueller, III never ran for nor received any votes from the American people nor any of their elected representatives for his position.
Congress has the duty and the power to check and balance the President of the United States and all of his Cabinet and White House lesser minions regarding Trump collusion with the Russians and Trump obstruction of justice in the investigations into Trump collusion with the Russians.
The Nixon and Clinton era impeachment DOJ opinion that a sitting President of the United States can be criminally indicted clearly has no credible basis in the Constitution. A President is merely an individual person and citizen. Being President is a temporary elected office job.
21
@Blackmamba
4th paragraph 1st sentence 'cannot' instead of 'can'.
1
It seems that Mueller hoped even his GOP colleagues in the Senate would see what he laid out before them, and act appropriately. Instead Mitch heeled to Trump's barks and continues to stonewall his entire senate.
Thank Mitch, Mr. Mueller, for being compelled to testify.
46
@Don
You do realize all impeachments must be started by the Democratically controlled House? How is this fault of the Republicans in the Senate?
1
@Lord of the Dance Surely that doesn’t require spelling out, does it? The day 20 Republicans in the Senate go on record that they are willing to put country over grifting, the House will start the process.
1
Mueller can explain his position. The DP and the GOP do not understand it. Perhaps the DP can see a way to impeach Trump in office rather than wait for him to lose the 2020 election to pursue him. Trump will not be re-elected if the DP can get a good candidate.
7
interesting article. Mr. Mueller has done so much damage nothing can correct it for years to come because of too much partisan politics. instead, he should tell the congress strong areas of his report where Mr. Trump was arrogant to take law in his hand for a punishable actions. Mr. Trump must face a punishable action by the congress. otherwise, the western democracy and the current constitution (independent three branches) become weak and become subject to further misuse by future presidents.
13
The author is correct, IMHO.
Even Jeb Bush illegally received money, during the last election cycle, from a firm with Chinese owners who have clear connections to the rulers there.
The Twenty-first Century needs an "anti-saloon League" of sorts to drive changes to the government we have because it does appear that Americans have less than what we were promised.
26