Many opinions on Mueller statement on Russian interference investigation

Perhaps the most important comment from Robert Mueller, but largely lost in the noise:

And I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments: That there were multiple, systematic efforts to interfere in our election, and that allegation deserves the attention of every American.

Of course Donald Trump has an opinion on the Mueller statement.

And of course that totally misrepresents what Mueller said.

We conducted that investigation, and we kept the office of the acting attorney general apprised of the progress of our work. And as set forth in the report, after that investigation if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so.

We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. The introduction to the Volume II of our report explains that decision. It explains that under long-standing department policy, a president can not be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited.

The Special Counsel’s Office is part of the Department of Justice, and by regulation it was bound by that department policy. Charging the president with a crime was, therefore, not an option we could consider.

And beyond department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.

Here is Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Full Statement

And a range of opinions:

Shame on Robert Mueller Alan Dershowitz, The Hill
True to Form, Mueller Delivers the Facts Frank Montoya, New York Daily News
Mr. Mueller, We Need to Hear More Robert De Niro, New York Times
Jim Comey & Robert Mueller: Two Peas in a Pod Julie Kelly, American Greatness

 

 

Previous Post
Leave a comment

18 Comments

  1. Reply
  2. There’s a huge amount of the fact-free anti-Mueller rhetoric on Fox News and other right-wing propaganda outlets, and it all points to a single strategy: Discredit Mueller and his findings. Which is deeply bizarre if, as President Trump and his allies keep claiming, Mueller had “exonerated” Trump.

    Of course, they don’t actually believe that. They know that Mueller is accusing Trump of serious crimes and calling on Congress to impeach him. So the right-wing panic is a reaction to that, and an effort to rally the conservative base behind the Trump-as-victim narrative.

    Still, the benefit of this propaganda push is that it educates those who are pretending not to understand what Mueller meant. He made a point of saying that Trump had not been exonerated, and that the Constitution has a clearly defined process for dealing with criminal accusations against a sitting president.

    As far as President Trump and the right-wing press is concerned, that’s perfectly clear: Mueller thinks Trump committed crimes and he would like Congress to take him down.

    Reply
    • Pink David

       /  31st May 2019

      “They know that Mueller is accusing Trump of serious crimes and calling on Congress to impeach him.”

      What planet are you on? Mueller had all the power he needed to recommend indictments if he believed there was the evidence for it.

      His report was very clear, he did not have evidence to make any charges. To claim Mueller is now ‘accusing Trump of serious crimes’ is unhinged. He was the prosecuter for crying out loud.

      If he really has made a call for Congress to impeach Trump, then that is unconstitutional. Mueller worked for Executive Branch, not Congress.

      Reply
      • The fact that Mueller’s press conference is being treated as communicating new information, when in fact he only reiterated what the report has said for weeks, is indicative of a vast failure on the part of American institutions.

        It’s easy to blame the media, but the fault is also that of Congress, which has fallen down on the job of engaging with the report and communicating its contents to the public. They’re the kids who didn’t do the reading.

        Mueller leaves no doubt:
        1) He didn’t exonerate the president because there is evidence he committed crimes.
        2) Justice Department policy prevented him from charging the president with any crimes.
        3) The Constitution leaves it up to Congress to act—and that’s impeachment.

        Reply
      • Duker

         /  31st May 2019

        “Mueller had all the power he needed to recommend indictments if he believed there was the evidence for it.”
        No . he clearly said its was existing policy that a sitting President ‘CANT be indicted’, its for Congress to do that ( Impeachment by the Congress is really indictment, the Trial is by The Senate) as well by saying he had NOT cleared Trump
        The Constitution allows ‘High crimes AND misdemenours’….so not necessary for the worst of worst crimes. Obstruction of justice is the most common one., which certainly applies to Trump. In the end they WILL get him for income tax evasion once his term is over , maybe even other stuff from Muellers investigation, which could be done by this man of his sucessor
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Attorney_for_the_District_of_Columbia

        Reply
        • Pink David

           /  31st May 2019

          “No . he clearly said its was existing policy that a sitting President ‘CANT be indicted’, its for Congress to do that”

          Why did he spend two years investigating something he had no prosecutorial powers in? Why didn’t he clearly state this in his report?

          Reply
          • The inquiry wasn’t specifically to find if the president had committed a crime or not. It was much wider than that.

            Reply
  3. Patzcuaro

     /  31st May 2019

    Different perspectives.

    Reply
  4. Alan Wilkinson

     /  31st May 2019

    And beyond department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge

    Hypocritical arsehole. That’s exactly what Mueller is doing.

    Reply
    • Yes it must be quite a shock to Trump supporters that Mueller didn’t exonerate President Trump … and that AG Barr misrepresented Mueller’s report … and that President Trump has finally acknowledged the Russians helped him win …

      I suspect that the Trump supporters have grown to believe their own propaganda – a potentially fatal move.That’s why they misperceive Mueller as carrying out some deep state travesty, rather than simply applying the system of processing presidential crimes. Ignore all the evidence of obvious crimes in the Mueller report. Ignore Mueller telling us that department policy prevents him from labeling those actions as crimes. The one reliable “truth” Trump supporters return to is the sacred value of Bill Barr’s word.

      If you can’t trust the slavishly loyal AG, handpicked by a president whose sole criterion for the job is to ignore its ethical guidelines and protect him at all costs, who can you trust?

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  31st May 2019

        Diversionary crap. As I said, Mueller is doing exactly what he says is a violation of the principles of fairness. Deny that if you can.

        Reply
  5. Robert Mueller has the appearance of a man having an existential crisis. He’s looked into the belly of modern Republicanism and realised his tribe has betrayed every principle he holds dear and collaborated with the country which, for most of Mueller’s life, was the enemy.

    He’s also now experienced the bullying the right-wing media aim at anyone who questions their ideology.

    Reply
    • Griff.

       /  31st May 2019

      The attacks force others in the same profession to reevaluate their ideology.
      We see the effects in academia where the number of Republican supporters has declined significantly due to the Republican war on science.
      We will see the same in law and justice as a result of Trumps rhetoric and the lack of response from the Republican establishment .
      https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/02/27/research-confirms-professors-lean-left-questions-assumptions-about-what-means

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  31st May 2019

      He’s a mate of Coney and just enjoyed two years of high profile and paid political limelight which he is now trying to portray as not an unjustifiably long witch hunt with no witch in sight.

      Reply
      • Duker

         /  31st May 2019

        hes a mate of Barr too !
        Of course he knows Comey ..both were FBI directors

        They did find a ” witch” , who they couldnt touch, but its a lie to say they did nothing for 2 yrs work
        You clearly dont know ‘Russian interference in the election’ was the principal reason for the investigation
        Thats why AG Sessions recused himself, he met secretly with Rusian diplomats when he was part of Trumps team.

        Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team indicted or got guilty pleas from 34 people and three companies during their lengthy investigation, which is now complete.
        https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031772/mueller-indictments-grand-jury

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  31st May 2019

          Don’t be absurd, Duker. Mueller was funded and set after Trump directly and in immediate response to his firing Comey. He didn’t discover anything about the Russian interference that the Intelligence agencies didn’t already know and the meaningless charges against them were just political theatre for partisan purposes.

          Reply
          • Duker

             /  31st May 2019

            Read the Link’shttps://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Appointment_of_Special_Counsel_to_Investigate_Russian_Interference_with_the_2016_Presidential_Election_and_Related_Matters.pdf

            The FBI investigation started during the election….they knew Flynn was lying…and other prominent members of Trump campaign were secretly meeting Russians . Rember the Trump Tower meeting..which Trump himself directed putting out the false claim it was about adoptions…when his people got information that Clinton campaign dirt was available…..and it wasn’t a Google search

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  31st May 2019

              Crap. It was a “get Trump” political op instigated by Comey and his Opama-licking mates as is perfectly obvious in Rosenstein’s appointment letter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s