Hello Everyone:
 |
| Robert Mueller economist.com |
The big shoe finally dropped: The highly anticipated final report from the Special Counsel's Office on coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia was finally submitted on Friday. Yesterday, AG Barr turned in his summary on the principal conclusions to Congress. The big news, no evidence to suggest that there was any collusion between both parties. The second item of big news, there was determination on the charge of obstruction of justice, meaning: The question of whether the president's actions rose to the level of obstruction of justice was left open ended. Whatever the president said or did regarding the investigation were out in the open and available for public consumption. In the end, AG Barr decided that the Department of Justice would not pursue an obstruction investigation. What do we make of all of this?
 |
| Attorney General William Barr en.wikipedia.org |
Let us begin with what we know which the SCO's report and AG Barr's letter to Congress makes the possibility of impeachment and removal from office less likely to happen, which is a good thing. Why, you may ask? Simple, impeaching and removing a president from office is a political, as well as a legal, process. Right now, there is absolutely, positively no political will for anyone to begin a very long and tortured process that will no doubt run into the 2020 election cycle.
In his letter to Congress, AG Barr summarized his conclusions in two parts, Russian Interference in the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election and Obstruction of Justice :
The Special Counsel's investigation determined that there were two main Russian efforts to influence the 2016 election. The first involved attempts by a Russian organization, the Internet Research Agency..., to conduct disinformation and social media operations in the United States designed to sow social discord, eventually with the aim of interfering with the election....
...The second element involved the Russian government's efforts to conduct computer hacking operations designed to gather and disseminate information to influence the election....
The report's second part addresses a number of actions by the President--most of which have been the subject public reporting--that the Special Counsel investigated as potentially raising obstruction-of-justice concerns. After making a "thorough factual investigation" into these matters, the Special Counsel considered whether to evaluate the conduct under Department standards governing prosecution and declination decisions but ultimately determined not to draw a conclusion--one way or another--as to whether the examined conduct constituted obstruction... (npr.org; Mar. 24, 2019; date accessed Mar. 25, 2019)
In short, Russians hackers did actively interfere with the 2016 Presidential Elections by conducting a widespread disinformation campaign via the social media to sow discord. Russian hackers stole Democratic National Committee and Clinton Campaign emails in an attempt to undermine their efforts. Further, Russian agents did approach members of the Trump Campaign with offers of coordination but nothing came of it. This is not new information, we knew that Russia was actively trying to undermine the 2016 Presidential Election and will, without a doubt, try it again However--this is the key statement--will the president is in the clear over collusion, he has not been exonerated of obstruction of justice accusations, despite what he may think.
 |
| Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y) en.wikipedia.org |
Regardless of what the president may think and AG Barr's decision not look into obstruction of justice allegations, the open ended question of did the president's conduct (i.e. tweets and other actions) rise to the level of obstruction. This is a tantalizing prospect for House of Representatives Judiciary Committee Rep. Jerry Nadler, who would guide the impeachment process. Rep. Nadler told reporters,
There can be crimes that are not impeachable offenses and impeachable offenses that are not crimes. (peoplesworld.org; Mar. 4, 2019; date accessed Mar. 25, 2019)
The House Democrats intend to continue their investigations and plan to subpoena the Attorney General to testify on how he reached his conclusions. They also have called for more documentation and passed a unanimous resolution calling for the release of the full report from the Special Counsel.
 |
| Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) coloradopols.com |
Politically, you have to wonder what is the point of the House Democrats' plan to keep looking into the president's life. The SCO's finding of no collusion between Russia and Trump Campaign; insufficient evidence to suggest obstruction of justice lets the air out of Democrats' sails, forcing them to have a conversation on what are their priorities. As far as congressional Republicans are concerned, the matter is settled: no collusion, no obstruction, why bother. If that is the case, then Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) should not have blocked a resolution to release the report in full. For congressional Democrats, they need to take the long view.
The first round of 2020 debates are just a few months away and the candidates need to figure out what their focus will be. Polling numbers are in favor of transparency--a December NPR/PBS News Hour/Marist survey found that three quarters of the respondents favored a message of transparency, saying they want the entire SCO report released (npr.org; Dec. 7, 2018; date accessed Mar. 25, 2019). This included two-third of Republicans surveyed (Ibid). As for Republicans who called the investigation a "witch hunt" (can we please finally retire this) and demanded its end (thehill.com; Mar. 24, 2019; date accessed Mar. 25, 2019), it might be a good thing to have more of the report released. The upside is it could unify the party to go out, rally voters to go to the ballot, and "just win."
| Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) en.wikipedia.org |
Even before his election, Mr. Donald Trump has been hypercritical of the judicial system, the intelligence community, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the media. The way Democrats have responded to the AG's letter suggests that more will have to be released if the Justice Department wants to be considered a non-partisan entity. Both Speaker Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) pointed out,
Given Mr. Barr's public record of bias against the Special Counsel's inquiry, he's not a neutral observer and is not in a position to make objective determinations about the report. (npr.org; Mar. 25, 2019)
Speaker Pelosi and Leader Schumer referenced AG Barr's 19-page memo, written nine months ago (lawfareblog.com; Dec. 20, 2018; date accessed Mar. 25, 2019), to top DOJ officials, arguing against the SCO's request to demand answers regarding the obstruction part of his investigation (npr.org; Mar. 25, 2019). This was a hot point of contention during William Barr's confirmation hearings (Ibid; Jan. 14, 2019) and it has landed right in the middle of calls for transparency. Finally, what does this all mean for the president?
 |
| The president cnbc.com |
No doubt the president and his supporters are enormously relieved that the cloud of collusion suspicion has been lifted. Really, they were not that worried about the collusion portion of the investigation as much as they were worried about the obstruction portion. Naturally, the president took to Twitter to claim total exoneration. Not true. What the president and his supporters failed to completely grasp is that AG Barr made a point of writing that on the subject of obstruction of justice,
The Special counsel state that "while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him (Ibid; Mar. 24, 2019).
This is a short-term victory for the president because it allows his govern without the cloud of suspicion hanging over him. The Trump re-election campaign has already incorporated the no collusion finding into a video meant to increase text lists. Despite laudatory comments about Robert Mueller and his team, it remains to be seen whether the president will turn vindictive. Will he use it to go after his eventual opponent? The president can breathe a sigh of relief, for now but should still be concerned with investigations by the Southern District of New York and the State of New York. Those have potential to do real damage and they will be waiting for the president once he leaves office. As for the Democratic candidates, they will not be able to ignore the matter and need to come up with a strategy. The bottom line is this, Yours Truly is actually glad there was not a finding of collusion because the thought of a president selling his country to win an election is unthinkable.
No comments:
Post a Comment