Tag Archives: Robert Mueller

national news

Impeachment is a loser . . . at least for the time being

Elizabeth Warren needs to shake the rocks out of her noggin.

The Massachusetts senator and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination thinks the House of Representatives needs to commence impeachment proceedings against Donald Trump now.

Don’t wait, she said. Do it now. Immediately if not sooner.

Warren is aghast at the dishonesty, duplicity, deception and dissembling that special counsel Robert Mueller revealed in the Trump administration. It all starts rotting at the top, according to Warren.

So, let’s get on with it, she said.

Wait a minute. I know Sen. Warren is aware of this, but impeaching a president carries a huge political gamble. Is she really saying that she believes the Senate would convict Donald Trump of unspecified “high crimes and misdemeanors” if the House actually were to impeach him? Let’s get real.

I, too, am flabbergasted by what Mueller has revealed in his 448-page report. He didn’t find evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian election hackers in 2016. He also declined to clear Trump of obstructing justice, saying Congress has the authority to act. Some of the language Mueller used in that report is scathing in its tone.

Let us face a hard reality, though, shall we?

The House can impeach with a simple majority. No sweat, given that Democrats now hold a comfortable majority in that chamber. But then the bar gets a whole lot higher in the Senate, which needs a two-thirds majority to convict the president of any impeachable offense. Republicans still hold a majority in the 100-seat Senate. Does anyone seriously believe that enough Republicans will abandon the president and join Democrats in convicting him? Pardon me while I laugh out loud.

House Democratic elders, led by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, understand the reality of impeaching this president. The House could approve articles of impeachment, but the current Senate isn’t going to finish the job.

The political recourse rests at the ballot box. It’s that simple. To send the president packing, Democrats have to nominate a candidate who can make the case that the nation deserves far better than it has gotten, according to Robert Mueller’s finding.

American voters will take care of the rest.

media news

WH press flack: tailor-made for her job

Well now. What do you think about this?

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s long-awaited report on his probe of The Russia Thing and alleged collusion and obstruction has disclosed that Sarah Huckabee Sanders is good at her job as White House press secretary.

By that I mean she is able to lie with a straight face. Just like her boss, the president of the United States.

It turns out that Mueller determined that Sanders lied when she told reporters that Trump fired FBI director James Comey because the FBI boss had lost credibility within the agency he led.

Her pants shoulda caught fire!

Lying ain’t cool

Comey had not lost any trust among his senior aides or rank-and-file agents. Trump fired him because he wouldn’t pledge loyalty to the president and wouldn’t go soft on his investigation into allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russian government operatives.

It turns out, too, that Sanders’s predecessor as White House flack, Sean Spicer, also lied about Comey’s performance as FBI director. So the two of them — Spicer and Sanders — appeared to do the president’s bidding.

The press secretary is ostensibly charged with telling the media the truth about what the executive branch of government is doing on our behalf. The press adviser talks to the media. He or she speaks for the president. The media then report to the nation and the world what the press secretary says on the president’s behalf. Yes, they question the press secretary, seeking answers to key questions.

The stories emanating from the White House, the press office and the Justice Department are getting murkier by the hour as the nation starts to digest the contents of the Mueller report.

We appear to be getting a clearer picture, though, of the individual who serves as spokeswoman for the president of the United States. Sarah Huckabee Sanders lies with the best of ’em.

national news

‘No obstruction’? Not true, Mr. President

Robert Mueller’s report on “collusion” and “obstruction of justice” says the following: ” . . . if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.”

Donald Trump has declared, therefore, that the special counsel has determined “there was no collusion, no obstruction” of justice.

Yep. He said that. He also is mistaken.

Attorney General William Barr, though, agrees with the president, which I suppose isn’t surprising, given that Trump nominated him to the post.

The obstruction of justice door remains wide open, based on what I understand Mueller has determined.

It is true — and I accept his findings — that he didn’t have enough evidence to proceed with a complaint against the president or his 2016 campaign team.

Although . . .

Mueller does chronicle several instances where Trump sought to remove key individuals from investigative posts. One of them happened to Mueller himself. Go figure.

Trump fired FBI director James Comey because of “the Russia thing.” Then he bragged about getting rid of him during that infamous Oval Office meeting with Russian officials. He sought to get Justice Department officials to fire Mueller; they wouldn’t do it. Then-White House counsel Don McGahn also declined to carry out the order.

So there isn’t a case that can be prosecuted under the law, Mueller states. He doesn’t exonerate the president. He doesn’t clear him of obstruction. My reading of what he concluded simply is that he didn’t have enough solid evidence to file a formal complaint.

Ahh, but he does leave the door open for Congress to act as it sees fit.

I’m going to let the president crow about the “no collusion” matter. He won that fight. Mueller and his team have concluded that Trump and his campaign did not knowingly cooperate with Russians who hacked into our electoral system and dug up dirt on Hillary Rodham Clinton.

However, the obstruction matter is alive and kicking.

It ain’t over, Mr. President. Not by a long shot!

national news

Mueller delivered the goods, just not enough of them

I believe it is clear: Special counsel Robert Mueller did not “clear” Donald Trump of obstruction of justice. There is no “total victory” for the president.

The long-awaited report from the special counsel came before us today. Yes, Mueller concluded that Trump did not “collude” with Russians who attacked our electoral system. I accept those findings, given that I believe Mueller is a man of high integrity.

But what about this obstruction matter?

Mueller’s 448-page report tells us that Trump gasped when the special counsel was picked, declaring that his presidency is doomed. “I’m fu****,” Trump said, according to Mueller’s report.

Why would the president say such a thing if he had done not a single thing wrong?

Well, Mueller said he would have cleared Trump of obstruction had the president deserved to be cleared. He didn’t. He said Congress has the authority to take measures to ensure that a president’s “corrupt” won’t be allowed.

I agree with those who contend that the redacted report is more damaging than Attorney General William Barr let on. Indeed, there appears to be a growing gap between Mueller and Barr over whether there was at minimum an attempt at obstructing justice.

Mueller cites the refusal by several key Trump aides to carry out presidential orders to fire the special counsel, saving the president from his own impulses. Barr disagrees, saying there is no obstruction. Who do you believe? I’ll go with Mueller.

I likely won’t read the entire report. I intend to read enough of it to try to draw some more cogent conclusions.

I’m going to stand with congressional Democrats on this point, too: Robert Mueller needs to talk to Congress openly and candidly about what he found and how he arrived at his conclusions.

More to come.

business news, economic news

Will keep harping about tax returns … until we see ’em

1 Comment

It boils down to a simple proposition.

Donald Trump cannot be trusted to tell us the truth about anything. Nothing. Not a single thing he says is to be believed.

Thus, when he says that he cannot release his taxes for public examination because the Internal Revenue Service is “auditing” his returns, I do not believe him.

The president of the United States is a pathological liar. He cannot tell us the truth about any issue, at any level.

I had hoped special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into The Russia Thing might reveal the president’s tax returns. It looks as though it won’t. I continue to hope that Congress’s demands that the IRS release will enable them will force the agency’s hand.

Trump keeps telling us there’s nothing to hide. Yet he does hide them from us. He snubs political tradition dating back more than four decades. Every presidential candidate since 1976 has revealed his or her income. Trump refuses.

He is not to be believed. I suspect the audit is a ruse. This individual is deliberately keeping something from the public’s scrutiny.

Why is this important? Let’s set aside the noise about potential Russian influence on Trump’s business dealings.

Presidents are involved in helping establish tax policy for all Americans to follow. Congress enacts the laws, to be sure. Presidents, though, make them law with his signature. Therefore, Americans have every right to know whether the president of the United States is paying his fair share of taxes and doing what he and Congress demand of the rest of us.

That is notwithstanding all the other issues that continue to swirl around the president.

So when this individual tells us he has “no business dealings with Russia,” and that the IRS is “conducting a routine audit,” and that he is worth gazillions of dollars that he earned the hard way, he expects you and me to believe him.

I do not believe a single word that flies out of this guy’s mouth.

Thus, the president needs to produce the goods.

I will keep harping on it until he does.

national news

Mueller report release will produce ‘Mother of Twitter Tirades’

OK, here’s what I believe will happen when Attorney General William Barr releases the redacted version of Robert Mueller’s report on whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians and/or obstructed justice.

Barr will have his press conference in the morning as the report of the special counsel becomes known. He’ll answer questions from reporters gathered in front of him. There likely will be some sparring between the AG and media representatives. Hey, it happens. Barr is used to it; this ain’t his first slugfest.

And then . . .

The president is going to launch The Mother of Twitter Tirades. Even if what we see in the redacted version of Mueller’s findings, we’re going to read a lot of tweets from Trump. He’ll blast the “witch hunt.” He’ll repeat the “no collusion” mantra until his fingers fall off.

However, if the redacted report reveals something else, such as evidence that needs even more congressional inquiry, then we’re he will blast away on that matter.

Whatever the nation learns from the redacted report is going to result in a tirade that likely will end all tirades from the president.

Until something else happens that sets him off.

Yes, this is how Donald John Trump, the president of the United States, intends to “make America great again.”

Hold on, folks. It won’t be pretty.

national news

Hope battles fear as AG Barr preps to release report

A big day is on tap this week.

Thursday is when Attorney General William Barr is going to release what many of us hope is a healthy portion of what special counsel Robert Mueller has concluded about Donald Trump’s election as president of the United States.

It won’t be the full report. We aren’t going to see all of it. Barr is going to keep some of it secret.

I am facing a battle between my hope and my fear over what the AG is going to release.

Barr already has written that four-page summary of what Mueller concluded. The AG says Mueller found no “collusion” between Trump’s campaign and Russians who hacked into our electoral system; he also says Mueller reached no conclusion about obstruction of justice, but said Mueller didn’t have enough to file a criminal complaint.

Do you believe the AG’s version of what Mueller concluded?

I don’t either. Not entirely. That’s why I want to see the whole thing. It’s also why I believe we should demand to see all of it.

My hope would be that the AG would release as much of it as humanly possible, keeping national security secrets from public view. I get the reason to withhold that information.

Still, I believe it is imperative that the public — which paid for this 22-month-long investigation — would see the evidence that Mueller collected during that probe, that we would be allowed to determine for ourselves whether Mueller made the right call.

My fear presents another set of concerns. It revolves around how much Barr is going to redact, keep from our eyes. It also concerns me that Congress, particularly Democrats who control the House, are going to be so enraged that they will subpoena witnesses left and right to committee hearing rooms. My fear also nags me with the feeling that Barr is consciously withholding more than he should because he wants to shield the president from prying eyes, such as yours and mine.

Yep. Thursday is going to be a big day. I’m on pins and needles.

national news

Not surprised, but still disappointed in AG Barr

Attorney General William Barr’s apparent decision to release a significantly redacted version of the Robert Mueller report to the nation is not surprising. However, the attorney general is about to disappoint me greatly.

Mueller’s findings on the issue of whether Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign colluded with Russians who attacked our electoral system reportedly contain mountains of evidence showing how the special counsel reached his conclusion. He said Trump didn’t conspire to collude with the Russians.

He also said, according to Barr, that he didn’t “exonerate” the president on obstruction of justice questions.

Barr reportedly is set to release Mueller’s report, but it is likely to contained large portions that will be blocked from public view.

The disappointment is well-known to readers of this blog. I want to see as much of the Mueller report as possible. Barr, though, appears intent on keeping secret matters that go beyond issues of national security and grand jury testimony. He wants to protect individuals who were “peripheral” to the investigation. How does he make that call?

My disappointment rests in my belief that Barr would be more transparent in releasing his findings. I have expressed my belief that he is an upstanding individual. It has been shaken by what he’s reportedly about to do.

I guess I placed too much faith in the attorney general initially. When we learned of his memo criticizing Mueller’s investigation — which many have said was an “audition” for his appointment as AG — I should have snapped to the reality of what he stated.

As I have pondered what he said those many weeks ago, I can say today that it doesn’t surprise me that he might hide much of the evidence that shows how Mueller reached his conclusions about the president and his campaign.

I wanted the attorney general to prove me wrong.

Silly me.

national news

If there’s nothing there, release the report . . . now!

If there’s no evidence of “collusion” or “obstruction of justice” in that well-chronicled — but still-unknown — report from special counsel Robert Mueller, then why is Attorney General William Barr dragging his feet in releasing it to the public?

Hey, I have to ask, you know?

Mueller finished his exhaustive probe into whether the Russians colluded with Donald Trump’s presidential campaign in 2016. Barr said Mueller came up empty. No collusion. Got it! Check!

Obstruction is another matter. Barr said Mueller did not “exonerate” Trump, but found nothing on which to file a criminal complaint.

So, there you have it — according to the attorney general.

Democrats in Congress want the full report released. Barr said he intends to block some of it. Maybe much of it. The public won’t see the whole thing, if Barr gets his way.

Donald Trump keeps swaying in the breeze. He says “release it.” Then he waffles. Back and forth.

I am going to presume the president doesn’t know what Mueller found per the obstruction matter. I also am being forced to presume — at least until it’s proven otherwise — that Barr has concluded there may be more than meets the naked eye in that Mueller report.

Trump trumpets “no collusion, total exoneration, witch hunt!” If so, then what in the world is the holdup here?

Gosh, I’m inclined to believe that New York Times report that some of Mueller’s legal eagles are unhappy with the way Barr presented their findings, which likely might explain a whole lot about the delay in getting this report released to the public that deserves to see it in its entirety.

They told the NY Times that Barr soft-pedaled the findings in his four-page summary and that there’s more in there that implicates Donald Trump in something not yet explained.

Can we get it explained? Immediately?

national news

Wishing that AG Barr rises to occasion

You may choose to believe this . . . or you might choose to disbelieve it. I don’t care. I’ll offer this anyway.

I really want to believe that Attorney General William Barr takes seriously the oath to which he swore when he vowed to uphold the rule of law and to defend the U.S. Constitution.

My hope is being strained almost to the point of snapping.

The report from The New York Times from part of special counsel Robert Mueller’s legal team that Barr might have shaded the team’s work is most disturbing.

The Times reports that some of Mueller’s team have complained that Barr’s four-page summary of the 22-month investigation into whether Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russians doesn’t adequately express the team’s view of what it found. They are saying that Barr is soft-pedaling some of the more troubling aspects the conclusions drawn.

This does force me to join others in wondering whether Barr is more loyal to the president than he is to the law. The oath he took was not to pledge loyalty to Donald Trump. He put his hand on a Bible and swore in the name of God Almighty that he would be faithful to the law. Isn’t that what all our federal officials pledge?

My hope when the president nominated Barr to be AG after he fired Jeff Sessions only because Sessions did what was proper — which was to recuse himself from the Russia probe — was that Barr would emerge as a grownup, as a serious public servant.

I still want to believe that’s the case. He served as AG under a previous Republican president, George H.W. Bush. He is a known quantity. Barr possesses a first-rate legal mind.

Did he, though, “audition” for the AG’s job with that memo declaring that the president couldn’t be prosecuted for any crime because he is the president? 

I do not want to believe that.

The NY Times, though, has cast serious doubt on all of that with the report from members of Mueller’s team that the AG has, um, shaded their findings to protect the president.

Say it ain’t so, Bill. More than that, prove it ain’t so. Release the full report to the public.