When he was appointed in May 2017, Robert Mueller seemed like the perfect choice as the special counsel to oversee an investigation into allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. He was, after all, a decorated officer of the Marine Corps, a District Attorney, a distinguished FBI director and a Republican who could not seriously be accused of political bias.
Yet it turned out that, despite Mueller’s reputation as a straight shooter, when it came to writing the report, he had difficulty bringing himself to pull the trigger. His report released on April 18, 2019, is a fugue of non-conclusions. The report found that there was insufficient evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt a criminal conspiracy of the Trump campaign with the Russians, despite ample evidence of cooperation and collaboration. And it declined to make any finding on obstruction of justice, despite a mountain of evidence showing multiple attempts by the president to do exactly that.
It didn’t help that these non-conclusions were embedded in a densely written 447-page tome that practically no one has had the time and persistence to read, or that, before its release, the findings were twisted by several weeks of spin by the attorney-general and the president, with repeated false claims that the report found “no collusion, no obstruction, total exoneration.”
Nor did Mueller enhance his reputation for clarity in his one short public statement on May 29, 2019, in which he tersely advised people to read his report, declaring unhelpfully that “the report speaks for itself” and declining to answer any questions. He stated his hope that this would be the last time in which he would make a public statement about the report.
Mueller appeared this morning testimony before the Congressional Judiciary Committee. Famously monosyllabic, Mueller is a reluctant witness, only appearing after a long negotiation and as a result a congressional subpoena. Nor is the expansiveness of his testimony likely to be enhanced by the letter he received on July 22 from the Department of Justice strictly limiting his answers to matters covered in the unredacted portions of his report. Although Mueller may not be legally bound by the terms of the letter, his inclination has always been to play things strictly by the book.
Three Questions Mueller Must Answer
For this high-stakes standoff, Neal K. Katyal, the former acting solicitor general in the Obama administration, helpfully suggested that there are three questions that Mueller can, and must, answer with a single yes or no. Chairman Nadler's questions followed this plan.
First, did your report find there was no collusion?
The fact that Mueller’s report finding of ample evidence of collaboration, albeit insufficient to prove a criminal conspiracy with Russia, has been clouded by the repeated false assertion by President Trump and Attorney-General Barr of “no collusion.” The term, “collusion” is not a legal term and the report made no finding on that issue, one way or the other. Enabling Mueller to state on national television that the report did not find that there was “no collusion” helps confirm that the many statements by the president and the attorney general on this issue are false.
Second, did your report find there was no obstruction of justice?
Mueller’s report made no finding on the crime of obstruction of justice despite evidence of multiple attempts at obstruction, apparently because of the Department of Justice ruling that a sitting president cannot be indicted for any crime. The simple one-word confirmation by Mueller that the report made no finding on the crime of obstruction of justice helps confirm that the president’s and attorney general's repeated claims of “no obstruction” are also false.
Third, did your report give the president complete and total exoneration?
Mueller’s report states that, given the mountain of evidence of obstruction, if the investigation had found insufficient evidence of the crime of obstruction of justice, it would have said so, thereby implying that there was obstruction. This contorted finding indicates that the repeated statements by the president and the attorney general that the report is a complete and total exoneration of the president are false. Mueller's one-word answer to this simple question helps confirm this basic fact.
As the hearings unfold, they appear to be concentrating on these core questions, with answers that may help deflate the systematic disinformation campaign conducted by the president and attorney general over several months.
Pursuing these three questions questions, formulating them in different ways, and hammering them relentlessly, so as to get a variety of soundbites that will confirm to the American people that both the president and the attorney general are what in more traditional times used to be known as outright liars.
And read also:
