Mueller Investigation pt 6

[ArchSas]

And I'm saying that his neutral response was far more credible than flat-out calling Trump a liar. Now he can say he did his job dispassionately and failed to be drawn into a game of political point-scoring.

He was drawn into that game anyway, and his reluctance to call out Trump made it easy for him and his supporters to mislead the American public. To me, that's a much bigger issue than some high-minded ideal of projecting objectivity. And again, in the end it really didn't do him any favors. During the investigation Trump was attacking him, and afterward, he was still attacking him; to the president and his supporters, there was no way Mueller was going to be seen in a favorable light, regardless of what he actually did (short of actually exonerating Trump). If someone has enough of a problem with reality that calling Trump a liar about a simple, provable fact will make them shut down, it's probably not worth trying to appease them or coddle their feelings when the cost is letting the president control the narrative and mislead people. But, we clearly have different opinions on that.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Mueller limited his testimony in order to prevent either the left OR the right using it to score partisan points. And to avoid compromising ongoing investigations.

If you watched his testimony or read a transcript, you'll know that not only did his limited testimony impede the talking points of the questioners on the right more than those of the questioners on the left, but that it made clear that Trump and those around him had acted illegally - both by soliciting help from a hostile foreign government and then lying to cover it up, but also by committing perjury. He also expressed his personal disapproval.

His testimony wasn't the be-all-and-end all of the matter, just as his report wasn't. But nobody should have been expecting it to be. That he did his job while sticking strictly to the limits and parameters of that job should come as no surprise to anybody, given that the one thing that everybody agreed on about Mueller was that he was the most by-the-book guy that it's possible to be.

There's just one big giant flaw in this hypothesis. Mueller did not manage neutrality in his handling of the report unless he was dumb as a rock.

He handed it over to the guilty party's lawyer and withheld it from the House whose responsibility it is to check the POTUS.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

There's just one big giant flaw in this hypothesis. Mueller did not manage neutrality in his handling of the report unless he was dumb as a rock.

He handed it over to the guilty party's lawyer and withheld it from the House whose responsibility it is to check the POTUS.

Then Congress should change Title 28, Chapter VI, Part 600.8 which requires the Special Counsel's Office to submit their conclusions to the Attorney General. At that point it becomes an internal document and has lots of legal implications, Federal Regulations require this document to be treated "as confidential."

600.9 then goes on to give the AG latitude:

(b) The notification requirement in paragraph (a)(1) of this section may be tolled by the Attorney General upon a finding that legitimate investigative or privacy concerns require confidentiality. At such time as confidentiality is no longer needed, the notification will be provided.

ETA: sad to say, but a lot of the rules that are stymieing this were put in place after Clinton so as to limit the publicity of an investigation.

(c) The Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions. All other releases of information by any Department of Justice employee, including the Special Counsel and staff, concerning matters handled by Special Counsels shall be governed by the generally applicable Departmental guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal investigation, and relevant law.

Mueller going rogue with his report to anyone but the AG would be a federal felony and a huge breach of legal ethics. It also would have played into the "witch hunt(!)" narrative.

ETA: sad to say, but a lot of the rules stymieing this were put in place with Democrat support after Clinton so as to limit the publicity around an investigation.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Then Congress should change Title 28, Chapter VI, Part 600.8 which requires the Special Counsel's Office to submit their conclusions to the Attorney General. At this point it is an internal document and has lots of legal implications, Federal Regulations require this document to be treated "as confidential."

600.9 then goes on to give the AG latitude:

Mueller going rogue with his report to anyone but the AG would be a federal felony and a huge breach of legal ethics. It also would have played into the "witch hunt(!)" narrative.

Oh brother.

A number of options have been posted here including noting Barr was not neutral. So what there was an ordinance. If Congress had tried to appoint a truly independent counsel, Moscow Mitch would have squelched the whole thing.

I lose track of who the Trump supporters are in this forum. But I take it you're happy dear leader is temporarily off the hook given you are citing some excuse instead of looking at the fact a criminal enterprise has infiltrated the government (that is the label the House has given to who they are investigating).


You should watch the movie, "Mark Felt: The Man Who Brought Down the White House" and read about the Pentagon Papers to see how real patriots deal with such situations.

 

[theprestige]

Then Congress should change Title 28, Chapter VI, Part 600.8 which requires the Special Counsel's Office to submit their conclusions to the Attorney General. At that point it becomes an internal document and has lots of legal implications, Federal Regulations require this document to be treated "as confidential."

600.9 then goes on to give the AG latitude:



Mueller going rogue with his report to anyone but the AG would be a federal felony and a huge breach of legal ethics. It also would have played into the "witch hunt(!)" narrative.

On the other hand, when whistle blowing is the right thing to do, it's the right thing to do.

If Mueller's report has damning evidence that is being suppressed, how can he not speak out? Even Oliver North was willing to risk jail time in the service of a higher cause he believed in.

In which he believes.

Anyway, Mueller either has nothing, or he has something, and is too much of a coward to take a stand on it.

---

I also find it hilarious that when he was persecuting Manafort for unrelated crimes, the argument was that he should follow the cases wherever they lead.

Now that it looks like he had nothing but unrelated crimes, the argument is that he turned over all the good stuff to other investigations.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

in the end it really didn't do him any favors. During the investigation Trump was attacking him, and afterward, he was still attacking him; to the president and his supporters, there was no way Mueller was going to be seen in a favorable light, regardless of what he actually did (short of actually exonerating Trump).

You are assuming that it wouldn't be any worse if he took a partisan stance. In the end it may not have done him any favors, but it didn't do him (or the FBI) any harm either.

I for one appreciate what he did. "The report is my testimony". We don't need Mueller to tell us that Trump is a liar. We don't need an 'authority' to make our minds up for us. We just need the evidence. Mueller investigated and gave us the evidence. Now its up to us to decide what to do about it.

If every republican congress critter says "That Mueller is sure credible" and then decides to vote to make Trump god-emperor, what has Mueller's credibility done?

Something very important - it has destroyed their credibility.

But what if Mueller had somehow managed to back Republicans into a corner, forcing them to get rid of Trump? That's one down, no others to go, and they get credibility points that they don't deserve.

But why should that matter, and why it is worth the damage Trump is doing to the country? It matters because if we are to break the partisan divide we all have to come together over common ground. This won't happen until the majority of republicans realize that Trump's way is the wrong way. So we need to keep Trump in play - because the more harm he does, the more people will wake up to it.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Oh brother.

A number of options have been posted here including noting Barr was not neutral. So what there was an ordinance. If Congress had tried to appoint a truly independent counsel, Moscow Mitch would have squelched the whole thing.

How is any of that Mueller's fault? Barr wasn't even the AG when he got appointed, anyways.

We had a ****** hand, casting around for scapegoats doesn't change anything.

The guy did his job to the letter and he's an ******* for it?

Well, ok. Let me know when the tantrum is over.

Also, good luck finding allies willing to walk the straight and narrow when it matters.

I lose track of who the Trump supporters are in this forum. But I take it you're happy dear leader is temporarily off the hook given you are citing some excuse instead of looking at the fact a criminal enterprise has infiltrated the government (that is the label the House has given to who they are investigating).

Ahh, because I'm not subverting my personal principles to momentary, but ultimately futile and pointless, opportunism I view Trump as "dear leader."

I'm pretty damn looney left. But I can read the damn CFR just fine and it doesn't have any provision for extraordinary circumstances allowing the SCO to make up new rules as they go.

For the record, I think it's awful how the layers of jurisdiction are currently organized. Congress seems to like wielding its enumerated powers by declaring which executive agency can do stuff while also allowing them to decide what to report or not about how they are going about it. Seems like the general idea is to not receive any bad news that might get all over them. If bad news does come out, several people will be sat down in a chair in the middle of a horseshoe shaped desk and get yelled out for the cameras.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat.

 

[Venom]

I also find it hilarious that when he was persecuting Manafort for unrelated crimes, the argument was that he should follow the cases wherever they lead.

Now that it looks like he had nothing but unrelated crimes, the argument is that he turned over all the good stuff to other investigations.

prosecuting.

And there are twelve of them. The S.D.N.Y. investigation probably the most important of them right now.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

How is any of that Mueller's fault? Barr wasn't even the AG when he got appointed, anyways. ....

Oh poor wittle Mueller. It wasn't his fault.


Puhleese, go apologize to someone else. I ain't buying it.

 

[smartcooky]

You are assuming that it wouldn't be any worse if he took a partisan stance. In the end it may not have done him any favors, but it didn't do him (or the FBI) any harm either.

I for one appreciate what he did. "The report is my testimony". We don't need Mueller to tell us that Trump is a liar. We don't need an 'authority' to make our minds up for us. We just need the evidence. Mueller investigated and gave us the evidence. Now its up to us to decide what to do about it.

All anyone has to do is READ THE ******* REPORT!!!!

Therein is contained all the information needed so that anyone (at least anyone with an ounce of intelligence and/or integrity) can see for themselves that Trump, his family, and almost everyone involved in his election campaign are brazen criminals. Any American who has not read the Mueller Report is selling their country short and does not deserve to call themselves American. Hell, I've read it from cover to cover three times, and I'm not even an American.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

I think there were still things he could have said that didn't compromise ongoing investigations.

A direct statement that "Trump is lying when he said my report exonerates him" is 1) accurate, 2) makes things completely clear with no way to misinterpret what he said, and 3) doesn't compromise investigations.

He did say that...

The fact that he was... subtle... in the whole 'They acted illegally'

This seems more like you saying that you weren't really paying attention, than that Mueller actually did anything wrong.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

There's just one big giant flaw in this hypothesis. Mueller did not manage neutrality in his handling of the report unless he was dumb as a rock.

He handed it over to the guilty party's lawyer and withheld it from the House whose responsibility it is to check the POTUS.

...as he was legally required to do.

 

[Belz...]

What's the point of 'credibility' if nobody listens to what you say?

Maybe he wanted to stay credible in the eyes of his colleagues, or his friends, or family, or whoever would listen. Maybe he was doing it for himself. Who knows? The point is that he wasn't obligated to do things the way you would've wanted him to.

Your only argument seems to be "Its partisan", but as I pointed out, its a simple statement of fact.

I said he wanted to avoid the appearance of partisanship.

 

[PhantomWolf]

...as he was legally required to do.

This is the bit I don't get...

Here is the pertinent section of the Appointment...

(d) Sections 600.4 through 600. l 0 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations are applicable to the Special Counsel.

Going and looking, 600.8 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations says:

(c) Closing documentation. At the conclusion of the Special Counsel’s work, he or she shall provide the Attorney General with a confidential report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by the Special Counsel.

Mueller had zero choice in the matter, and why anyone would expect a rule following, straight shooter like Mueller to do anything other than impartially obey the Law as it is written I don't know.

 

[Belz...]

Oh poor wittle Mueller. It wasn't his fault.


Puhleese, go apologize to someone else. I ain't buying it.

This is just frustration that Mueller didn't have the impact you hoped he would.

 

[Segnosaur]

I'm combining these because they're saying the same thing, and can be addressed in the same way.

All anyone has to do is READ THE ******* REPORT!!!!

Therein is contained all the information needed so that anyone (at least anyone with an ounce of intelligence and/or integrity) can see for themselves that Trump, his family, and almost everyone involved in his election campaign are brazen criminals.

I think there were still things he could have said that didn't compromise ongoing investigations.

A direct statement that "Trump is lying when he said my report exonerates him" is 1) accurate, 2) makes things completely clear with no way to misinterpret what he said, and 3) doesn't compromise investigations.

He did say that...

The fact that he was... subtle... in the whole 'They acted illegally'

This seems more like you saying that you weren't really paying attention, than that Mueller actually did anything wrong.

I was 'paying attention'. I recognize that, if you look at what Mueller said and 'read between the lines', you would recognize that he accused Trump of perjury, that Trump wasn't exonerated.

The problem is not me. And the problem is not the people "with an ounce of intelligence and/or integrity". Its not us who are the problem.

The problem are the ~40% of people who continue to support Trump, regardless of whatever racist or idiotic comment he makes. Those are the people who will not 'read the report', or if they did, wouldn't understand what exactly they were reading. Those are the people who will hear the comment by Mueller about how 'It doesn't exonerate him' and fail to make the connection that "Trump said it exonerated him, Mueller said it didn't. Trump must be lying". Its those people who need to be presented with simple, direct statements, like "Trump lied about exoneration", and "Barr lied about white house cooperation".

Now, granted, you probably won't affect any of the hardcore members of the Trump cult, and you may not turn any of them from Republicans to Democrats. But if you get Mueller explicitly stating "Trump lied" (or got him going after people closer to Trump), perhaps that might cause a few Trump supporters who were sitting on the fence to decide "I thought Trump was honest, but he's not. Maybe I'll sit out the 2020 election". You won't get that with some report that Trump supporters probably won't read, and you won't get that from the Democrats, because Trump supporters can dismiss their statements as 'partisan politics'.

 

[Segnosaur]

This is just frustration that Mueller didn't have the impact you hoped he would.

Hey, I'm frustrated too.

Mueller was in a unique position... someone who was a republican, who's reputation was as a 'straight shooter', and who's actions carried a significant amount of weight. And he got off to such a great start... dozens of indictments, people testifying about Trump's criminal activities on national TV.

Then, he fumbled the ball on the 1 yard line.

Finished the report when there was so much more that could have been done... more indictments (like to Trump's inner circle), more avenues of investigation. Failed to properly challenge Trump regarding the report, and handed off a bunch of related investigations to someone who was likely to quash them as soon as he could. Mueller talked about the integrity of elections, and then relinquished power to the people who were destroying the integrity of elections in the first place.

If a football player makes a spectacular 99 yard run from one end of the field to the other, and drops the ball before he crosses the goal line, you will be frustrated (despite how impressive the run was). So Mueller's failure to finish things is going to be frustrating because in the end, he dropped the ball.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

You don't have to "read between the lines" to recognise that Mueller accused Trump of perjury, or that he wasn't exonerated.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

Hey, I'm frustrated too.



Mueller was in a unique position... someone who was a republican, who's reputation was as a 'straight shooter', and who's actions carried a significant amount of weight. And he got off to such a great start... dozens of indictments, people testifying about Trump's criminal activities on national TV.



Then, he fumbled the ball on the 1 yard line.



Finished the report when there was so much more that could have been done... more indictments (like to Trump's inner circle), more avenues of investigation. Failed to properly challenge Trump regarding the report, and handed off a bunch of related investigations to someone who was likely to quash them as soon as he could. Mueller talked about the integrity of elections, and then relinquished power to the people who were destroying the integrity of elections in the first place.



If a football player makes a spectacular 99 yard run from one end of the field to the other, and drops the ball before he crosses the goal line, you will be frustrated (despite how impressive the run was). So Mueller's failure to finish things is going to be frustrating because in the end, he dropped the ball.

Ok, let's explore the alternate reality.

Mueller illegally sends his report to Congress. Then what?

 

[theprestige]

Ok, let's explore the alternate reality.

Mueller illegally sends his report to Congress. Then what?

Depends to whom in Congress he sends it. If it's addressed, "To Whom It May Concern, Congress, Capitol Hill, Washington, D.C., USA", then probably nothing happens.