Read the whole article but his main point is that to Mueller the investigation wasn't really about finding some sort of Russian collusion--Mueller knew early on that there wasn't any-- or about seeing if Trump had obstructed Justice--he knew that didn't happen either--but about creating the narrative that would help the Democrats neutralize or even impeach Trump.
You've probably heard about the Mueller letter to Barr which was fortuitously leaked to the #FakeNews media right before Barr's testimony to Congress. The headlines all blare that Mueller didn't like Barr's summary.
What the headlines don't say is that Mueller declined a request by Barr to review Barr's summary before Barr released it and that Mueller in a phone conversation with Barr about Mueller's letter agreed that nothing Barr said was incorrect--this latter gem that contradicts the spin is in the article but buried where most people will miss it.
Rather Mueller was concerned about how the media was interpreting Barr's summary; essentially Mueller appears to be concerned that the media wasn't buying into the clear intent of his report which was to smear Trump even though it didn't find a shred of evidence of anything illegal.
Mueller's report is clear; there was no collusion by Trump or by anyone on his team.
But Mueller, desperate to get Trump, decided to spend his time trying to get revenge on Trump for firing Mueller's good friend Comey and smearing the FBI's "sterling" reputation.
He did so by crafting a report that worked very hard to send the message that "we couldn't find a shred of evidence but we know Trump is guilty and you Democrats should impeach him because he's evil.".
That's what upset him about Barr's summary. The summary removed all the hyperbole and the "well we know he's guilty" from the report. As a result the people weren't being mislead the way that Mueller wanted to mislead them.
In America if a prosecutor can't find evidence of a crime he's not supposed to simply declare to the world that the target of his investigation is evil. Given that historically Mueller has not been concerned about hounding at least one, and possibly more, innocent people--one of whom received a multimillion dollar settlement from the government--so it's not unlikely that angry about Trump slighting the FBI he embarked on a vendetta.
The good news is that Mueller isn't so dishonest that he indicted Trump in the absence of any evidence. The bad news is that Mueller and his Deep State friends are doing all they can to spin Trump's innocence into guilt.
If you look at the potential obstruction claims which Mueller was supposed to decide on they are all clearly absurd.
Take the firing of Comey for example. Comey had effectively lied to we the people by refusing to confirm that he had, in fact, told Trump he wasn't under investigation. If a president can't fire the head of the FBI for effectively lying to the people about something he told the president it's unclear on what the head of the FBI would have to do to be legitimately fired; shoot someone in public?
Further Comey had massively bungled, according to both Republicans and Democrats, the investigation into Hillary Clinton's illegal use of a private e-mail server and her placing highly classified data on an unsecured network.
Just a few months before Trump fired Comey Democrats were demanding Comey should be fired.
Given that after Trump fired Comey he didn't tell the FBI/DOJ to stop investigating collusion--which as President he has the authority to do--it requires a lot of dishonesty to say that Trump was obstructing justice.
But by listing all of these bogus claims Mueller was furthering his narrative that even though there was no evidence of Trump doing anything wrong he should be impeached.
The hypocrisy is clear; we know that Obama obstructed justice since his Attorney General effectively ignored the conviction of some Black Panthers for threatening people at polling stations and the same people who are frothing at the mouth about Trump's "obstruction" were perfectly comfortable with that.
Unlike the investigation into Bill Clinton which proved that he'd lied under oath in order to reduce his chances of losing a #MeToo lawsuit brought by a government employee in Arkansas who he sexually harassed Mueller found not a jot of evidence of Trump doing anything illegal.
Tell your friends the truth; after spending $30 million, after a small army of Democrat supporting lawyers spent 2 year, after innumerable leaks Mueller found no evidence of collusion or obstruction by Trump.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment