Thank you for serving our nation, Robert Mueller

Robert S. Mueller III — a man of enormous skill and accomplishment — doesn’t need a word of thanks from chump bloggers such as me, but he’s going to get one anyway.

The special counsel has completed his work, handed it to Attorney General William Barr and this morning he might be sleeping in a little. He deserves the rest.

Mueller has spent much of his adult life serving the United States of America. He took on a huge task in early 2017 when Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed him special counsel to examine that “Russia Thing” alluded to by Donald John Trump.

He accepted the bipartisan praise that came his way upon the appointment. Mueller then assembled a first-class legal team to examine allegations that Trump’s presidential campaign “colluded” with Russians who had attacked our electoral system in 2016.

He had to deal eventually with Trump’s incessant blathering of recriminations against him, his team. The president challenged Mueller’s integrity, his honesty, his commitment to fairness, the legality of his work.

Through it all, Mueller kept quiet. He was stone-cold quiet. Mueller’s operation was leak-proof in the extreme. Mueller went about his work. He indicted more than 30 individuals. Mueller secured convictions (including guilty pleas) from about a half-dozen top Trump aides.

The man’s commitment to public service is well-known: service during the Vietnam War as a combat Marine; as a federal prosecutor; as an assistant attorney general in a Justice Department led by William Barr; as director of the FBI under two presidential administrations, one Republican and one Democratic.

He conducted himself with professionalism and dignity, which in my view was in stark and glaring contrast to the conduct exhibited by the nation’s 45th president.

I have declared my intention to accept whatever findings Mueller has reached. If he exonerates the president of wrongdoing, then so be it. I would accept those results not because I want the president cleared of any funny business, but because of my implicit trust in the special counsel and the work he has done on our behalf.

The probe that Robert Mueller conducted was not a “witch hunt.” It was a search for the truth. I believe he has found it, in whatever form it takes.

Forgive the cliché, but thank you, Robert Mueller, for your lifetime of service to the nation.

What if Trump changes his mind?

The thought occurs to me. Here goes . . .

Donald Trump has said he wants special counsel Robert Mueller’s report on alleged collusion, conspiracy and obstruction of justice to be made public. The president said he doesn’t object to the public seeing what Mueller produces.

But the president is known to change his mind. Sometimes on a whim. On a dime. Without warning.

What might happen if after seeing an outline of the report’s findings the president changes his mind? Suppose he calls Attorney General William Barr and instructs the AG to keep the report from Congress. Don’t release it to the public.

My question: Would such an act constitute an impeachable offense?

Wait for Congress to get Mueller’s findings; then we’ll know

This is just a hunch. I want to share it anyway.

My hunch is that when U.S. Attorney General William Barr releases Robert Mueller’s findings to members of Congress, the lid is going to fly off the report and we’re going to know all there is to know — immediately!

Mueller turned his report over to Barr. It was locked up tighter than a hermetically sealed drum. No one knows its contents.

Barr is going to look it over. He said in a letter to Congress that he might let lawmakers know as soon as this weekend.

That would be great!

I am tired of waiting on these results. I happen to believe that House members and senators who represent us out here in Flyover Country want to do what we demand of them. Put another way, they know they’d better do what we demand . . . or else!

So, if Barr delivers the findings to Congress by the weekend, I expect we all will know what Mueller has concluded about collusion, obstruction of justice, conspiracy, you name it.

Don’t wait too long, Mr. Attorney General.

Wide range of conclusions to draw from Mueller findings

Robert Mueller’s submission today of a final report on alleged “collusion” involving the Donald Trump presidential campaign is fraught with peril or is brimming with joy, depending on whose side you’re on.

The special counsel has turned over a tightly sealed report to Attorney General William Barr. He said he would recommend no further indictments. Donald Trump Jr. is off the hook; so is son-in-law Jared Kushner. By “off the hook,” I mean that Mueller isn’t going to issue any indictments.

We can run all over the field trying to determine what Mueller has produced.

He might have produced a finding of no criminality, no wrongdoing, no unethical conduct, no collusion, no conspiracy. Nothing! Zero. The president can high-five what’s left of his White House staff, unlimber his Twitter fingers and blast away at Mueller.

Or . . . Mueller has determined something quite different. He might find that there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian goons who attacked our electoral system in 2016. He might conclude there was conspiracy to collude. He might have found an obstruction of justice at any number of stops along the way.

There might indeed be nothing worth prosecuting, but there might be enough in that report to conclude that the president has committed an “impeachable offense” or three, maybe four.

Whatever we learn in due course — and I hope it’s soon — I am prepared to accept whatever Robert Mueller has concluded. He is a professional. His integrity is intact. Mueller is a former FBI director whose tenure was extended past the term of a Republican president (George W. Bush) for two more years by his Democratic successor (Barack H. Obama).

I just want the AG to let us know quickly.

There remain many more hurdles for Trump to clear

Robert Mueller III’s submitting of a report to Attorney General William Barr signals the end of a long, national marathon.

The special counsel turned his findings over to Barr today. He’s done. Finished. He can go home now, put his feet up and relax.

I have been watching and listening to cable news broadcasters wonder about the report and whether it means that Donald Trump is home free.

I can answer that one. No! It doesn’t mean that at all!

The wait begins

We don’t know the contents of what Mueller has found. He said today there are no more indictments coming from his office; Mueller didn’t talk about what federal prosecutors in New York might do.

Mueller began this probe two years ago into whether the Donald Trump campaigned “colluded” with Russians who attacked our electoral system in 2016. Has he found collusion? It beats me, man. We’ll know eventually.

If the special counsel finds no criminal activity to prosecute, that doesn’t mean he didn’t find unethical behavior; it doesn’t preclude Mueller scolding the president for conduct that he might find reprehensible.

With no finding of criminality, does that end any talk of impeachment? Well . . . no. The impeaching of a president is a political act. There need not be criminal acts involved for the House of Representatives to impeach a president. The House came within a chip shot of impeaching President Nixon in 1974, but it did not have a criminal charge to hang on him; Nixon quit before the full House actually voted.

The question of impeachment will center on whether Mueller has found enough misbehavior to warrant such a drastic act. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi doesn’t want to impeach the president. Why? She knows the Senate won’t convict him in a trial.

So, where do we stand?

AG Barr is believed to be preparing to decide in fairly short order whether to release the findings to Congress and then to Americans out here among us.

I hope he makes as much of it public as possible.

If the AG does the right thing, then we’ll know all we need to know.

Lieberman makes a case that McCain would not

Joe Lieberman served with John McCain in the U.S. Senate. They were of different political parties, but they were dear friends.

The late Sen. McCain, a Republican, has been in the news of late, courtesy of the hideous attacks mounted by Donald Trump. Lieberman, who entered the Senate as a Democrat but then became an independent, has declared that Trump’s criticism of his friend is unconscionable.

He has written an essay in defense of McCain, saying that his friend wouldn’t answer Trump directly. As McCain’s friend, Lieberman said “I will.”

So he has.

You can read his response here.

Sen. Lieberman speaks for many Americans — even those of us who didn’t cast our votes for McCain as president in 2008 — who believe the senator was a heroic warrior and a dedicated public servant.

We also believe the president has been shameful in his attacks.

Now . . . the wait begins

Robert Mueller III has handed off the report the world has been waiting for to Attorney General William Barr.

Well . . .

His work is finished! Now it’s up to the attorney general to do the right thing, which is to say that he must release Mueller’s findings to Congress and to the rest of us. That would be you, me and the rest of Americans whose money paid for this two-year-long probe into allegations of “collusion” between Donald Trump’s campaign and Russians who interfered with our election in 2016.

Mueller has submitted a letter to Barr. He hasn’t revealed a single thing about what’s in the report. The AG likely has a good idea of what’s in it; he likely knew what it contains even before he received it.

I understand that there are limits to what the AG can and should release. He doesn’t want to implicate individuals who aren’t charged with crimes, if anyone has been implicated in potential criminal activity.

However, now that Mueller’s work is done, it should not take the attorney general very long to determine how much to divulge to Americans — such as me — who are waiting to know what Mueller has found.

To borrow a Watergate-era phrase: Do not, Mr. AG, keep us twisting in the wind.

Amarillo ISD complaint offers opportunity for ethics lesson

A constituent of Amarillo’s public school system, has peeled away the shroud from a story that has been brewing in the community for several weeks.

Marc Henson has filed a complaint with the Texas Education Agency against a member of the Amarillo school district board who, according to Henson, interfered with a high school coach’s ability to do her job. The board trustee, Renee McCown, badgered former Amarillo High School volleyball coach Kori Clements, griping about the playing time being given to the trustee’s daughters.

Clements quit after a single season coaching in one of Texas’s most storied high school athletic programs.

There’s a lesson to be learned, no matter how this story plays out.

It is that elected officials — be they school board members, city council members, county commissioners, college or university regents — have no business meddling in the day-to-day work of the staff members who serve the public.

I am going to presume that Renee McCown received that advice as she was preparing to become an Amarillo public school trustee. If she never received those words of wisdom from senior school administrators or fellow trustees, shame on them for neglecting to inform her.

If she got that advice and then ignored it, then shame on her.

I am acutely aware that all of this is an allegation. However, it rings more credible to me — and to others who are much closer to the matter than I am — every time I consider it.

McCown hasn’t denied anything publicly. Clements’ resignation letter set the table for a heated community discussion. Marc Henson’s complaint to the TEA has blown the lid off the alleged culprit in this bizarre story.

As for the lesson to be learned, it is a simple one. Read my lips: Elected officials set governing policy and then let the paid staff implement that policy. Period. End of story.

Any involvement in the implementation of policy beyond that simple mandate smacks of unethical conduct and must be dealt with sharply.

Resign from AISD board, Mme. Trustee

You are entitled to call me an interloper, an outsider, a peanut-gallery spectator if you wish, but I want to get this off my chest right now: Renee McCown, a member of the Amarillo Independent School District Board of Trustees, needs to resign her seat and disappear from school politics.

I’ll now get this off my chest as well. I am not an entirely nosy outsider. I lived and worked in Amarillo for 23 years. I spent most of those years commenting on public school affairs from my post as editorial page editor of the Amarillo Globe-News. Yes, I’ve moved away, but I retain a deep interest in the affairs of the community.

McCown has been named in a complaint filed by an Amarillo ISD constituent, Marc Henson, who has submitted his gripes to the Texas Education Agency. He has accused McCown of acting unethically by pressuring a former Amarillo High School girls volleyball coach, Kori Clements, into giving her daughter more playing time. McCown reportedly was unhappy that her children weren’t getting enough time on the court and told Clements to do better by her daughters.

Clements quit the vaunted AHS Sandies program after a single season and accused the board and the AISD administration of failing to give her the backing she needed to do her job as an educator.

If this is true, and I believe the accusations are credible, then the trustee has committed a serious ethical breach of conduct by interfering in the duties of an educator who answers to administrative staff and to the board of trustees.

Is McCown actually guilty of what has been alleged? I don’t know. I do know that she hasn’t spoken out publicly on the matter. Her silence — along with the silence of her board colleagues and administrators — speaks volumes about what Henson has alleged in his complaint to the TEA.

There have no denials. No responses of any sort.

I happened to be in Amarillo recently and I had the pleasure of attending an AISD board meeting in which Clements’ resignation was the topic of the evening. Several school system constituents admonished the board for its conduct in the matter. They scolded trustees and administrators for failing to give Clements the support she deserved.

I was struck by the amazing body language of trustees. Several of them — including Renee McCown — refused to look their “accusers” in the eye. They all kept their heads down, looking at something on the dais in front of them.

It was an off-putting display of arrogance, not to mention cowardice. It also appeared to my eyes to be highly instructive of what was being said to them directly by the people whose taxes pay for operation of the public school system.

I do not know Renee McCown. However, I know enough about this story to make a couple of presumptions.

  • Her standing is likely damaged beyond repair, given what has been discussed openly and what has been alleged officially at the agency that governs public education in Texas.
  • It will be impossible for her to continue functioning effectively as a steward of Amarillo’s public school system, given all that has transpired to date.

She needs to resign. Moreover, a public apology to the coach and to her constituents would be in order as well.

Jared used personal e-mail for government work? Lock him . . . up?

What’s going on here?

Republicans all over America have been chanting “Lock her up!” in reaction to Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail server when she was secretary of state. They’re still hollering it, although not in the numbers or with the volume they did in 2016 when Clinton was running for president of the United States.

Now there’s this: Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of Donald Trump has been using a private, personal server to send e-mails relating to government business.

More questions arise

Do we start the chant to “Lock him up!”?

The info comes from Abbe Lowell, Kushner’s lawyer, who has told the U.S. House Oversight and Reform Committee about Kushner’s use of personal e-mail servers to conduct official government business.

I’m straining to hear something — anything — from the GOP side of the political divide. I’m listening for chants to toss the president’s daughter’s husband into the slammer.

Silence! That’s what I’m hearing.