That’s my initial reaction to a New York Times report that some members of special counsel Robert Mueller’s team are unhappy with the way Attorney General William Barr characterized the team’s findings on The Russia Thing, on “collusion” and on “obstruction of justice.”
Good ever-lovin’ grief, man!
I maintain a flickering semblance of faith in William Barr. It’s in danger of going out.
Mueller and his team concluded 22 months of investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians. Mueller handed his findings over to Barr, who then issued a four-page summary of what he said was Mueller’s report.
Well, it turns out that the AG might not have given us the straight scoop on what Mueller concluded. The NY Times is reporting that some of Mueller’s investigative team believes the report is more damaging to Trump than Barr has let on.
We need to see the report. We need to read it for ourselves. William Barr should keep some of it secret, but not much of it. I concede that national security matters are off limits.
But what in the name of juris prudence did Mueller conclude? How did he reach that conclusion? And is the attorney general running interference for the president of the United States? Is he more loyal to Donald Trump than he is to the rule of law?
Is it any wonder that Donald Trump hates the NY Times? Of course not! The Times and other media around the country are doing their job. They are telling us what we need to know.
I’ll add just this caveat: I would feel even better about the veracity of what the investigators have told the NY Times if we would hear from Robert Mueller himself.
However, this bit of information that has smashed through the current news cycle gives me grave concern about the attorney general and his commitment to telling us the whole truth and nothing but the truth.