The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Special Counsel Robert Mueller made a surprising choice in the obstruction of justice investigation of President Donald Trump, according to a summary of his final report by Attorney General Bill Barr. He chose not to make a choice; instead of saying whether charges against the president for obstructing justice are warranted, he presented the evidence for and against the charge without coming down on one side.

Trump and his allies have cheered this report, but the reality is much dimmer than they think: One of the most respected prosecutors in the entire country thinks there is a strong case to be made that the president obstructed justice, even if that case isn’t decisive.

But Trump took vindication from the summary of the report because Barr said that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein — both of whom are potentially conflicted in the obstruction case — decided that there was not sufficient evidence to bring a charge of obstruction.

It’s a jarring assertion — one that understandably pleased the president — and there’s no reason to take it at face value. Why would Mueller decide not to come to a conclusion on this issue, only to let Barr and Rosenstein have their say?

According to a source who spoke to the Daily Beast for a recent report, however, this isn’t what Mueller wanted. He wanted Congress to decide:

A source with direct knowledge of the investigation told The Daily Beast that it was their interpretation that “Mueller was making a case to Congress, who (unlike DOJ, in Mueller’s view) is empowered to weigh the lawfulness of a president’s conduct.”

If this is accurate, then we need an explanation of why Barr decided to present the findings to Congress in the way that he did, instead of letting Mueller’s investigation speak for itself. Mueller, Barr, and Rosenstein must all testify on this matter before Congres to get to the bottom of the question.

Advertising

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Colbert Weighs In On Supreme Court Overturning Roe V Wade

Image via YouTube

Now that the Supreme Court has decided to ignore the will of the people on abortion with their unconstitutional reversal of Roe v. Wade, women living in red states are wondering what will come next.

Late Show host Stephen Colbert weighed in on the ruling and discovered one fundamental flaw -- turning women's freedom over to the "elected representatives."

Keep reading... Show less

Mark Meadows

Cassidy Hutchinson, a top aide and advisor to then-White House chief of staff Mark Meadows revealed to the House Select Committee that her boss had warned her of the apparent potential for violence on January 6.

Hutchinson, who worked for Republican Sen. Ted Cruz and House Minority Whip Rep. Steve Scalise before moving to the White House in 2018, says Meadows told her the morning of January 6 that “things might get real, real bad.”

Keep reading... Show less
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}