Throwing Mueller under the bus
I suppose it had to happen. Democrats, the elitist news media and the left in general had counted on Special Counsel Robert Mueller to put flesh on the bones of their long looooong playing conspiracy theory that President Trump and his campaign were engaged in a criminal conspiracy with Russia to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. Now, even the venerated Mueller is being thrown under the bus in the anti-Trump mob hysteria afflicting the Manhattan borough of the Fourth Estate.
We can recall how House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff even went out on the limb to claim that in all those secret documents he had seen hard evidence of the alleged offense. Of course, the anti-Trump news media had spent those two years reporting the Democrats mendacious theory as though it was a proven fact – giving Schiff seemingly endless airtime and column-inches to peddle his political prevarication.
When Mueller issued his report that definitively declared that no American citizens – and especially no one associated with the Trump campaign – had participated in any criminal conspiracy with Russia. No one. That outcome was the second most trauma-inducing event for the Democrat left since the election of Trump, itself.
Mueller’s verdict was a surprise to many folks because the investigatory team of prosecutors seemed biased and hell-bent on getting the goods – any goods – on Trump.
Ironically, Trump’s enemies never gave up the claim that he had criminally conspired with Russia. They clung to Mueller’s inability to state that Trump & Co. had even obstructed justice. Mueller left that decision up to Attorney General William Barr and the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel. They determined that the instances of potential obstructions did not meet the threshold of criminality.
Despite that decision, Democrats persisted in claiming that Trump was guilty of obstruction of justice – ignoring the American standard of “innocent until proven guilty.” Of course, the vigilante court-of-public-opinion – in which the news media operates as prosecutor, judge and jury — has no such standard.
The latest attempt to prop-up that dead horse involves Attorney Andrew Weissmann, one of the more aggressive anti-Trump attorneys on the Mueller team. More than a year after the conclusion of the Mueller investigation, Weissmann has decided to go public with his own anti-Trump book, “Where Law Ends” — criticizing Mueller for not pursuing a financial investigation of the President and not attempting to force Trump to testify.
The fact that Weissmann’s accusations are made at a critical point in the presidential election should come as no surprise. He is only the latest of a rash of newly released anti-Trump books. The timing of these books alone casts a shadow over their credibility These publications are nothing less than campaign literature – something more suitably filed under the fiction section in the library.
Weissmann’s dubious interpretation of events solicited a very rare response from the normally tight-lipped Special Counsel. Mueller essentially said that Weissmann does not know what he is talking about. Okay. Mueller did not say those exact words. He is too much the oratorical lawyer to be so blunt. Mueller did not mention Weissmann by name but said that his account was wrong and “based on incomplete information” (Hmmmm. Doesn’t that sound like Mueller was saying that Weissmann does not know what he is talking about?)
Even Weissmann concurred – kind of. He admitted that he was not in a lot of meetings in which issues were discussed and decisions made. So, his account is not based on knowledge or fact, but just opinion grounded in animosity toward Trump. Of course, that has not stopped him from being invited to appear on any number of CNN and MSNBC political propaganda programs – usually without reference to Mueller’s critique.
So. there ‘tis.