Mueller’s parting shot
William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection writes this about Robert Mueller’s final remarks (supposedly final) on the guilt or innocence of Donald Trump:
Robert Mueller’s statement today could have served only one purpose — to breath life into Democrat attempts to commence impeachment proceedings against Trump.
Mueller didn’t add any substance to the 400-page report, and most of his statement was related to procedures…
The substance of the statement on Russia collusion/conspiracy was brief and shut the door…
But most of the substance was on obstruction. Mueller reiterated that the Office of Special Counsel could not clearly determine that Trump did not commit a crime, or it would have said so. “‘If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”
This is a completely unfair standard and not what prosecutors normally due — investigations are not to find that a person did not commit a crime, but to find if the person did commit a crime.
More important, Mueller made clear that he considered the Special Counsel’s Office bound by DOJ policy against charging a sitting president with a crime, so his office never reached a determination one way or the other. Mueller made clear that under the Constitution, there were other mechanisms for dealing with a president accused of wrongdoing. Without mentioning impeachment proceedings, Mueller certainly must have intended to suggest it.
If that is Mueller’s view, that his office’s hands were legally tied from even reaching a decision, then why investigate at all? And why issue an opinion that he could not find “with confidence” the president was not guilty? Mueller could have expressed an opinion on guilt short of charging the president, much as he expressed an opinion that he could not find the president clearly not guilty.
In other words, Mueller declared orally what the Mueller Report had declared in writing and in a great many more words: Despite the usual legal standard of innocent until guilty, we require Trump to have proven his innocence and he could not do this [impossible] task. Therefore, impeach him!
Professor Jacobson goes on to indicate he thinks this forces Pelosi’s hand and makes it necessary for her to give in to the baying impeachment hounds in her party. I still don’t think so, although that may indeed end up being the case. I think she’s too politically savvy for that and knows how unpopular such a move would be among the general public. She also knows that the Senate would make short shrift of it:
GOP senators say that if the House passes articles of impeachment against President Trump they will quickly quash them in the Senate, where Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has broad authority to set the parameters of a trial.
While McConnell is required to act on articles of impeachment, which require 67 votes — or a two-thirds majority — to convict the president, he and his Republican colleagues have the power to set the rules and ensure the briefest of trials.
“I think it would be disposed of very quickly,” said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).
The original impeachment idea was that Trump would do so many awful things, or that the attacks against him would be so successful—or both—that a great many GOP senators would join in the vote to convict him after impeachment. It sure doesn’t look as though that would happen. Even Mitt Romney, who appears to detest Trump, has gone on record saying “no.”
[ADDENDUM: Links to more can be found here.]
Sean Davis, The Federalist:
https://thefederalist.com/2019/05/29/mueller-just-proved-his-entire-operation-was-a-political-hit-job-that-trampled-the-rule-of-law/
“If there were any doubts about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s political intentions, his unprecedented press conference on Wednesday should put them all to rest. As he made abundantly clear during his doddering reading of a prepared statement which repeatedly contradicted itself, Mueller had no interest in the equal application of the rule law. He gave the game, and his nakedly political intentions, away repeatedly throughout his statement.”
Mueller was never operating in good faith.
The electorate appears so pillarized right now, I’m not sure an impeachment effort would move the needle at all.
They still like Trump for the original reason they liked him, when he was promoted by the New York Times and its ilk. Because they think he is vulnerable. They like having a controversial and scandal-prone Republican leader, who caused a split in the party. (The alternative would have been an elitist and out-of-touch leader, if someone like Cruz or Romney had won. There is no normal Republican.)
These statements and investigations are warnings. There is supposed to be no way for him to get out of this thicket.
The implication is for Trump to back off and then he’ll be left alone, for a while. If he keeps pushing, there might just be some pushback. Better play his part, as a patsy, like Bush did, lest some unfortunate incident should happen.
Mueller’s Parthian shot.
Why this guy is supposed to be a pillar of rectitude and fairness is beyond me, because neither his past record, nor his statement evinced Mueller’s supposed rectitude and fairness.
This guy is obviously a weasel in a pin striped suit—a high ranking member of the Deep State—and he gave a sly and weaselly political statement, aimed directly at impugning Trump, and ramping up calls for his Impeachment.
Mueller didn’t have the guts to directly call for Impeachment, but it was very obvious that his statement—going into great detail about how DOJ policy prevented charging a sitting President with a crime, but that other “political” means i.e. the Impeachment he didn’t mention, could do the job—was very deliberately intended to strengthen the calls for Impeachment coming from the most radical leftists among Congressional Democrats.?
He also intimated, it seems to me—that the suspicions he and his team had, and the things they had turned up—that he was prevented by DOJ policy from using—and that he and his team had to admit didn’t amount to actual proof of obstruction—could be used as a road map for Impeachment.
His statement also turned the centerpiece of the American judicial system—that the prosecution has to prove someone guilty, not that the defendant has to prove that he is innocent—on its head, by using the phrase, “‘If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”
By the end of next week there will be Impeachment bill before the House. Of course it will not stop there in the House. The Dems just can’t stop hurting about Hillary’s loss. I expect that there will be several Rep to join the Dems. In the Senate it will die a quick death, but the Dems will use that to continue to hit at Trump and Barr. The IG report and the Atty that Barr appointed to look into things will continue, with the Dems doing their damnedest to discredit Barr. Not going to be pretty at all.
Mueller’s statement has given cover for, and is already galvanizing Democrats to get their Impeachment chaff machines going.
Funny how–within just a few minutes of Mueller’s statement–all these Democrats were immediately ready with their statements calling for Impeachment, it’s almost as if things were somehow coordinated.
Chaff machines which Democrats will try to employ to throw so much obscuring, glittering chaff into the air, that most people will be mesmerized by their Impeachment show, and not notice the revelations that will come out of all of the classified documents President Trump has ordered AG Barr to release.
They need to impeach him. Or they need to shut up about it. Didn’t Pencil-neck Schiff say he had proof of collusion? why wasn’t that turned over to Inquistor Mueller? and if it wasn’t isn’t that obstruction of justice?
What say you, Mr. Schiff?
P.S.–It was reported that AG Bar was OK with Mueller making his statement.
Since Mueller acknowledges that he is a DOJ employee, and is under the supervision of AG Barr, I’m kind of surprised that Barr would have allowed Mueller to make this inflammatory statement–which dumps a huge bucket full of gasoline on the embers of the Impeachment fire–to be made.
It is the nature of the scorpion to sting.
Better play his part, as a patsy, like Bush did, lest some unfortunate incident should happen.
Bush pursued certain objects in foreign affairs and internal security vigorously. (And, at the beginning, had the support of much of the Democratic caucus for so doing). Otherwise, he had scant interest in confrontations with regnant political establishments. (See Gov. Daniels’ remarks on this point, or recall his temporizing over stem cell research). The rudest thing he did was nominating Samuel Alito.
Bush refused to publicly reply to his critics / detractors / enemies. He may have been a patsy in that regard.
Agree with the general sentiment that the American political class, center and left, has basically adopted the Marxist view of law; and in so doing echoes the upside down principles of “socialist legality”; only a step or two removed – to this point – from the theories of Krylenko, and Vyshinski.
Trump is basically be accused of a kind of thought crime … for showing insufficient zeal for, or even contempt for the original pretexts and grounds mooted for an indictment.
This is a pretty remarkable social development, this assumed guilty unless proven to be innocent notion. But it’s typical, and indeed essential, to any totalitarian trending system, wherein boundaries and limits are viewed as mere impediments to, or structural inefficiencies in the way of, achieving the all encompassing, everlasting, irresistible progressive end.
Get thee over to Babylon Bee
https://babylonbee.com/news/robert-mueller-assures-liberals-he-will-one-day-return-to-judge-donald-trump-before-being-taken-up-into-heaven
Snow on Pine, I’d assume AG Barr is playing the long game; knows Mueller’s squeaks are bullshit and will be shown as such (gives the electorate credit, in other words); knows already the major extent of materials to be declassified and finally, the refutation those materials will make to the fantasies Democrats, their press minions and the Obama people have been spinning. He may, therefore, simply rest easy on it. No worries.
‘If we had confidence that Mueller clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”
Prove a negative, buster.
I think sdferr is correct. My confidence in Barr continues. Oh, BTW, Mueller has never been a pillar of rectitude. He’s just a swamp creature.
…I’d assume AG Barr is playing the long game; knows Mueller’s squeaks are bullshit and will be shown as such…
sdferr: That’s my take. Barr and Trump bat last.
As the Neo blog commenting community is well aware – we are in the midst of a great political and cultural war.
The Great Gray Snake spoke today, quickly followed by the Nasty Little Rodent. NLR called the Attorney General a liar. But Bill Barr will call his bluff.
The octopus squirts his ink
they still have nothing…
though they sound much like HUAC did…
on another note
i wonder if any of the new ones are in the US via Venzeula and the caravans
These statements and investigations are warnings. There is supposed to be no way for him to get out of this thicket.
brair fox never did catch brair rabbit…
Re Trump’s crime:
“While we recognize that the subject did not actually steal any horses, he is obviously guilty of trying to resist being hanged for it.”
As I have pointed out here several times before, absent good will, and a tradition of loyalty and fidelity to our Republic, to our system of government, and to each new incoming President, any President and the people he has chosen to run his Administration (Presidents currently limited by law to about 9,000 appointees), have very little actual control over a Federal government workforce that today consists of 2.1 million Federal employees—and especially those in the higher echelons—who make up the the “permanent bureaucracy.”
A permanent, apparently overwhelmingly Left-leaning bureaucracy, some of whose members have an attitude.
The attitude that Presidents and their Administrations—their policies and plans—come and go, while these bureaucrats will still be working at their desks—4 or 8 years later—watching this departing Administration’s moving vans, the outgoing President, his people and their families, and his plans and policies—heading out of town.
Thus, for any order, policy, directive, or plan they don’t like, all they have to do is to “resist”—to lose (or perhaps even alter), or to “be unable to find” documents or electronic records and communications, to classify and to redact them, to ignore, slow roll, water down, partly or ineffectively enforce a President’s plans, policies, directives, and programs—and hope to wait the President’s Administration out.
Thus, I can certainly believe the reports that some Federal bureaucrats in the DOJ, FBI, and Intelligence Community (and likely in other Departments and Agencies as well ) have apparently been making objections to–“resisting” orders to turn over the classified documents that President Trump has now ordered AG Barr to evaluate and, to declassify.
“Resist” because these documents would very likely reflect very badly on them, and on their Departments and Agencies; might even result in reduced budgets, the curtailing of these bureaucrat’s power, and the power and reach of their Departments, Agencies, and programs; could conceivably result in some trials, and even some jail time.
Many decades ago the standard practice was for an incoming President to fire all of the government employees in what was then a much, much smaller, less specialized and technologically sophisticated government/Administration, and to install his own, presumably loyal people in their positions.
Too bad we can’t do that today.
In the face of this built in, institutional “resistance,” outside of Trump Administration officials identifying particularly influential, key resisters, calling them in and firing them, I don’t see how this President or any President (particularly a conservative one) can be assured that his orders will be, and are actually and fully carried out.
sdferr: That’s my take. Barr and Trump bat last.
and Trump has a few things in his quiver now they reacted to his potential use of powers to unseal things..
they forget that he needs nothing from washington after this is over
whether this is his lame duck term or not (not likely)
they better be careful that he dont lead them to a legal scorched earth on secrets knowing that he wont have to deal with his own mess on the way out.
some of these nice powers are from past statements imprudently placed
Presidential Records Act (PRA) of 1978
The PRA changed the legal ownership of the official records of the President from private to public, and established a new statutory structure under which Presidents, and subsequently NARA, must manage the records of their Administrations.
and i have tried many times to have someone talk about this
but this wont work either
Unknown to most Americans, a vast set of laws gives the president greatly enhanced powers during emergencies.
123 statutory powers that may become available to the president when de declares a national emergency (An additional 13 statutory powers become available when a national emergency is declared by Congress.)
I don’t think Pelosi has a choice. The monkeys are dying to get that prize in the coconut even knowing it’s probably a trap. Let’s just hope:
A) The American electorate is fed up
B) Barr’s unsealing/investigation reveals something really damaging.
It’s unbelievable to me that Mueller is such a partisan dufus.
The double negative — so am I getting it right now? . . .
While I cannot declare (and be telling a truth) that Robert Mueller engages in sexual intercourse with pigs,
I also cannot declare with ironclad certainty that Robert Mueller does *not* engage in sexual intercourse with pigs (for the simple reason that I do not surveil Mueller 24/7).
Is that how it works now?
Chris Matthews is going nuts about Impeachment right now. That Castro in the House is in favor of it.
C’mon impeachment! C’mon!
It’s too late for Democrats to take the sane road. They’ve done nothing but double-down and now there’s a reckoning coming.
Going sane just means they sit quietly and get buried by the counter-investigations. Not that orange jumpsuits become haute couture. (I wish!) But they can kiss the 2020 elections goodbye and take 4-8 years to rebuild.
Their best bet is where they want to go anyway. Impeachment. Full-on offense, non-stop lying, hysteria. Who knows. Maybe they will distract their voters, maybe something will turn up or maybe Trump will swindled into a terrible error.
I don’t think it will work, but it’s worth a try. In for a penny; in for a pound.
There’s a lot of that goin’ around–see Comey and Hillary.
Comes the news that the IG has found that a high ranking FBI official, an unnamed Deputy Assistant Director (DAG) “…engaged in misconduct when the DAD: (1) disclosed to the media the existence of information that had been filed under seal in federal court, in violation of 18 USC § 401, Contempt of Court; (2) provided without authorization FBI law enforcement sensitive information to reporters on multiple occasions; and (3) had dozens of official contacts with the media without authorization, in violation of FBI policy. The OIG also found that the DAD engaged in misconduct when the DAD accepted a ticket, valued at approximately $225, to attend a media-sponsored dinner, as a gift from a member of the media, in violation of federal regulations and FBI policy. ”
Yet, given this litany of his misdeeds, the DOJ declined to prosecute this FBI Deputy Assistant Director.
Honestly, I don’t think that the DOJ or FBI, CIA, or any other of these Departments or Agencies can actually “reform” themselves.
Institutional survival is just too strong an entrenched force in these agencies.
They have to be reformed/restructured from the outside.
Actually, it would be better to just dissolve them, and start all over again, with new people and a new agency.
See https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/05/office-of-inspector-general-finds-top-fbi-official-illegally-leaked-to-media-including-sensitive-info-sealed-by-fed-courts-doj-declines-prosecution/
We’ve got a new crime — Obstruction of Nothing. No crime, no act, no legitimate investigation is necessary, just have the temerity to run, and be elected, instead of “The Most Qualified Person to Ever Run for President.”
Document Hide and Seek–
P.S.—In practical terms, how can you be assured that you are going to be getting all of the documents that are responsive to your request?
Picture a very large, multi-story federal office building, and on pretty much each floor, you have very large offices, a lot of them containing many large heavy metal filing cabinets. Multiply that by a couple of dozen or even 50 or more buildings, and many hundreds or perhaps even thousands of filing cabinets.
A few, or perhaps many of these offices have secured, locked, heavy duty file cabinets in which classified information is stored, and each one has an associated log, that is supposed to record which files are taken out to be looked at/worked on, by who, and for what time period. Are those logs complete, and accurate?
Then, there are regular and secured electronic records. What about e-mail and cell phone records?
How, unless you are intimately familiar with all of the types of records you are looking for, the document—paper and electronic—flow, which documents might be required to be generated, how they are supposed to be filled out, what information they should contain, and where they might be stored, what electronic communications are recorded and those devices and records kept, can you really have any great assurance that you will find/be provided with all of the existing and relevant documents you have requested?
How many of the key players in this whole attempted coup have we been initially assured had good reputations, where people of the highest caliber, professionals, honest people, with only the best interests of the country at heart, only to find out that they were anything but, that they were–some of them–just not very smart, that they were contemptuous of a large percentage of voters, and willing to ride roughshod over the Law and our Constitution in service of their Leftist ideology and political agenda, in a word, weasels.
Well Mueller just proved himself a weasel, just a lot better dressed, classier, and less theatrical version of Jim Comey.
Here’s hoping that AG Barr is actually a civil servant who does live up to his good reputation.
Herr Müller is a reprehensible human being who fits in better with his relatives of the Reich, most Im sure served as Einzatsgruppen.
I do hope his female relatives received their just rewards when the untermenschen Russians vanquished his beloved Reich.
Christoph Walz should play him in the movie.
My comment to the Mueller WSJ story:
For two years Mueller has shown himself to be non-objective, pro-Democrat, pro-weasel (Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Hillary uninvestigated and unindicted), rude, and crude (i.e., “no questions”).
He is an appalling un-American .
Well, Dershowitz has suddenly realized Mueller is a left wing partisan hack. Waking up at latest. Better later than never Al.
Henry D,
Recent brain damage? Head hitting the window shield, baseball to the frontal lobe? Otherwise your comment is just more leftist propaganda. Try again to sound cognizant. 🙂
Wait! Suppose Mueller is a triple-agent?
A loyal Republican who actually refused to return to FBI, worked with Trump to lead the lemmings off the cliff?
Now THAT’S a conspiracy worthy of Roger Stone
From what I’ve read, it appears that the only official in this whole mess who has actually upheld his oath, been a man of integrity, is Admiral Mike Rogers, the former head of the NSA, who discovered the unauthorized contractor access to the NSA database, who informed the FISA court about it, and who apparently went to the White House, and told Trump that he was being spied upon.
Is PillowC trying to win a general election amongst the American public?
They got voter fraud for that, don’t worry. And criminal or migrant votes. Don’t worry about that “general American public” non sense.
I went over Meullers comments a few times, and i realized that all he says are basic truths of the powers of his office…
does saying a basic truth imply something? is it accidental or meant to?
the dems think the most important thing he said was that it was not up to his office to prosecute the president that is something for congress…
a basic truth of his office and powers..
one of the things i have a tussle with all the time is that i say things quite plainly and its quite obvious that people live in a world of deluded inuendo and a plain sentence is a world wind of suppositional thinking over what could be a plain sentence.
its quite clever in that such plain truths that say nothing, imply nothing, etc.
are rorschach test in that it allows a person to paint whatever bias or point they want to it, as it supports nothing, denies nothing, and is akin to stating the sky is blue..
Kind of sort of reminds me of the scene in “Life of Brian” where he loses a sandal:
The Shoe Is The Sign – The Beginning
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka9mfZbTFbk
on another note the dems are screaming we have to get him OUT before he uncovers what? see below:
Honestly, I don’t think that the DOJ or FBI, CIA, or any other of these Departments or Agencies can actually “reform” themselves.
There is growing interest in “weeding out” much of the Intel community.
Here is one argument.
At the moment, it isn’t very impressive in either of the two main activities with which it’s entrusted: spying on our enemies and supporting our friends. You can see this easily enough. The Israelis, not the CIA et al., made off with the Iranians’ secret nuclear plans. So much for effective espionage. And there are two very closely linked enemies, Iran and Venezuela, that should be prime targets for subversion, but we don’t seem to be making good progress.
The CIA networks in China and Iran have been rolled up and executed over the last several years due to leaks, traitors or failure of cryptography.
The CIA and MI6 seem to have been too busy trying to overthrow the US President.
Honestly, I don’t think that the DOJ or FBI, CIA, or any other of these Departments or Agencies can actually “reform” themselves.
They meet Fr. Paul Shaugnessy’s definition of ‘sociological corruption’.
From a distance, the CIA reminds me of the Burdick / Lederer take on the Foreign Service ca. 1954, offered through the voice of their protagonist, Gilbert MacWhite. MacWhite sends a letter to his superior telling him that in his time in Southeast Asia, about 300 Americans had passed through the embassy. By his estimate, about six were doing useful work in the American interest. MacWhite is replaced as ambassador by a lushington who was recruited to the Foreign Service from the staff of an ad agency.
So now Mueller has officially joined another former FBI director in deciding that he and he alone determines what the law is or isn’t. Comey inserted intent into a criminal statute that did not include intent, and now Mueller has created a new determination of guilt or innocence. Not Preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt, but now it’s “we can’t exonerate him”. What a couple of arrogant Weasels!
J.J. on May 29, 2019 at 4:41 pm said:
Re Trump’s crime:
“While we recognize that the subject did not actually steal any horses, he is obviously guilty of trying to resist being hanged for it.”
* * *
meme picture here
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/D7yv71PU8AAZhgj.jpg
AesopFan: 🙂