Mueller: No Coordination With Russia But No Exoneration of Trump; Barr and Rosenstein Decide ‘No Obstruction’

by on March 24, 2019 · 8 comments

in Politics

Attorney General William Barr has released his “summary” of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report – and it’s a doozy. I’ve just read the brief 4-page letter Barr sent to Congress today and since released to the public. (See letter below.)

First off, Mueller does not find any coordination or conspiracy between Trump and his people and Russia.

On the issue of obstruction of justice, however, Mueller punts, and while – according to Barr – does not exonerate Trump on other matters, left the decision of whether Trump did obstruct justice to Barr and Rob Rosenstein. And guess what? They – Barr and Rosenstein – have decided there’s not enough evidence for any obstruction of justice by Trump.

Of course, Barr decided this way back almost a year ago. According to CNN:

In a June 2018 memo, William Barr reached a decisive and controversial conclusion that Trump’s interactions with ex-FBI Director James Comey would not constitute obstruction of justice. A copy of that memo was released to senior Justice officials in December.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said William Barr’s letter “raises as many questions as it answers.”

The Democratic leaders said Congress needs “the full report and the underlying documents so that the Committees can proceed with their independent work.” “The American people have a right to know,” they said in a statement.

Here’s the full statement:

“Attorney General Barr’s letter raises as many questions as it answers. The fact that Special Counsel Mueller’s report does not exonerate the president on a charge as serious as obstruction of justice demonstrates how urgent it is that the full report and underlying documentation be made public without any further delay. Given Mr. Barr’s public record of bias against the Special Counsel’s inquiry, he is not a neutral observer and is not in a position to make objective determinations about the report.

And most obviously, for the president to say he is completely exonerated directly contradicts the words of Mr. Mueller and is not to be taken with any degree of credibility.

Congress requires the full report and the underlying documents so that the Committees can proceed with their independent work, including oversight and legislating to address any issues the Mueller report may raise. The American people have a right to know.”

But read for yourself; here’s Barr’s 4 page letter – with my yellow headlining, (without the opening masthead):

{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }

Avatar Shelly Schwartlander March 24, 2019 at 3:10 pm

During the nomination hearing of William P. Barr, for attorney general, he introduced family members in attendance and most of them work for the Justice Dept. and/or local law departments of state and other government close to D.C. I believe. I remember thinking, for him and his family the Justice Department is like a family business. It was just an impression but seemed at the time quite a few of them are very close to it, Nothing like the degree of nepotism Trump and his kids, and son-in-law “enjoy” but I’m sure his support for the president’s “innocence” on top of appointment in the way he obtained it benefits them all.

Reply

Avatar kh March 24, 2019 at 3:20 pm

I don’t know what sort of investigation can ever really prove something didn’t happen.

Did not establish that collusion occurred.
Did not establish that obstruction occurred.

It goes without saying that either could’ve possibly happened, so it’s peculiar that they felt the need to spell that out on the obstruction issue.

Reply

Avatar Natalee Flóres March 24, 2019 at 4:25 pm

I seriously don’t know how anyone could be invested in this story unless wordplay is involved. In which case I don’t feel like journalism is any less deceptive. Meow, my understanding is that American politics are a popular topic worldwide and that many parties would like to influence a US election. Why Russia? Why not our major trade partners or something?When I used to read the rag regularly, the boogey man was always US corporations, they’re trying to buy Washington! So I don’t see how “Russia” is even remotely as significant. This is wordplay right? What are we talking about?

Historic examples of election interference include: the poll tax. Can anyone fit Russia into the historical context of election interference? Another example: strict voter ID laws or slippery language used to explain items up for vote.

Usually there’s like a motive involved in a crime. For example: the US could give Russia unfair trade advantages or something. Anyone got any leads on like a motive?

This whole story is just fluff right? Is anyone denying that?

Obviously the 2020 election will be awesome. Until then: Trump is still better than W. Prove me wrong. Lol.

Explain to me like I’m 5

Reply

Avatar Jeff Smyth March 24, 2019 at 4:37 pm

The Roooskies must’ve gotten to Mueller. That’s the only explanation. I’m going to check for commies under my bed before I go to bed tonight. I suggest you do too.

Reply

Avatar Natalee Flóres March 25, 2019 at 1:44 pm

It just sounds so vague. There’s like 144.5 million people in Russia. I think you guys are talking in wordplay. I don’t get it. I read the news and blogs and feel misinformed. If you’re making jokes about they Rooskies is a good sign that none of this is substantial, just kind of an existential thing like how xenophobia in the cold war was. If it was a real story that gave a bad impression of “Russia”, wouldn’t people also defensively be saying, hey don’t generalize Russian people or Russian culture?

I can’t really form an opinion when it sounds like nothing.

On the other hand, hypothetically, if Trump started trying to dismantle the EPA, I would be like oh hell no. Probably there’s bribe money from entities who wish to pollute. That would make sense. Trump might fully understand the science of climate change but maybe doesn’t care about the future living conditions of the world’s vulnerable people.
If that were the case I’d say remove Trump for putting self-interest before the greater good. (I get that there’s levels differences between unethical behavior and something like lying under oath.) I’m just asking does he even care about the common good?

Same question goes to those reporting on this story. Are you reporting just to report. Or is there an interest in objectively explaining the story to the reader?

Reply

Avatar Richard March 25, 2019 at 8:15 am

I expect the Trump deplorables are doing cart wheels for the feckless president. Collusion is not a crime, obstruction of justice is a crime. The report still paints Trump as untrustworthy. So stand by your man Natalie because it’s all fluff right? We will see what SDNY has to say about that.

Reply

Avatar retired botanist March 25, 2019 at 8:36 am

Ack-well, if so, that was $25 million (as of Dec 2018) worth of fluff for us taxpayers. And what have we got for it? A four page summary that basically says 1) you can’t indict a sitting POTUS, 2) DOJ isn’t allowed to say ANYTHING derogatory about anyone who hasn’t been indicted, 3) only 2 white collar criminals will serve very short sentences, and 4) now Congress will chase their tails some more to figure out whether to sue, who to sue, stand in line at SCOTUS, form some more committees to decide whether anyone is morally corrupt in this pathetic saga, and basically continue to not solve any of our other pressing national issues.
So while two more Parkland students are the victims of our gun culture, we can look forward to spending more taxpayer $ and a full year of Legislative, Judicial, and Executive displacement activity. Yet NZ can start real problem solving in about 6 days.
Color me super-sick of our judicial process- now THAT’S the wordplay right there…

Reply

Avatar thequeenisalizard March 25, 2019 at 9:20 am

Lets try this scenario. Trump found to have colluded with Russia. Trump guilty of obstruction of justice. What do you think will happen when every Republican is so far up his ass, and the Dems to afraid to anything because it might hurt their chance for being elected or re-elected? Nada, nuttin’, zilch, zip, diddly-squat. Sounds about right to me.
Take a second and Google oligarchy.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Older Article:

Newer Article: