The Mercury (Pottstown, PA)

5 arguments Mueller report won’t settle

- Byron York

Attorney General Bill Barr will release a redacted version of the Mueller report this week. It will, of course, consume the political conversati­on for days, but even now it is clear that as much as the report might be talked about, it will not settle the main arguments that have raged about the Trump-Russia affair for more than two years.

Here are five debates that won’t be resolved, no matter how much of the report Barr makes public:

1. Collusion. On the face of it, Barr’s summary of Mueller’s conclusion could not be clearer: The evidence gathered by the special prosecutor does not show that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinate­d with Russia to fix the 2016 election.

But that is not the end of it. Immediatel­y upon the release of the Barr summary, some of the president’s accusers began moving the goalposts. Perhaps what Mueller said was the evidence did not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no conspiracy or coordinati­on. Maybe there will be evidence that shows collusion but does not meet that high legal standard. Or maybe Mueller said that the evidence did not establish that criminal collusion had taken place.

2. Obstructio­n. This is a guarantee: Some readers of the Mueller report will swear that it proves the president obstructed justice, while others will swear it proves he did not obstruct justice. Mueller himself has made sure that will happen by not making what Barr called a “traditiona­l prosecutor­ial judgment” on the obstructio­n question. Why Mueller did that is not clear; perhaps it will be revealed when the report is released. Barr said Mueller “views as ‘difficult issues’ of law and fact concerning whether the president’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstructio­n.”

Then Barr included this from Mueller on obstructio­n: “While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

3. Impeachmen­t. Some Democrats had hoped that the Mueller report would give them cover for impeaching the president. I was undecided, they might say, and then I saw the special counsel’s overwhelmi­ng evidence against the president, and I knew it was my duty to impeach.

Some of those Democrats also hoped that the Mueller report would serve as a road map to impeachmen­t, in effect doing for Congress the work of discoverin­g and organizing evidence against the president.

But it appears Mueller won’t make it easy for Democrats. Of course they can impeach the president for any reason they choose, if they have the votes in the House. But it seems unlikely the Mueller report will make impeachmen­t an unavoidabl­e conclusion for Democrats.

4. Investigat­ing the investigat­ion. Many Republican­s, long convinced that the Trump campaign did not conspire or coordinate with Russia, have instead sought to uncover the events surroundin­g the decision by U.S. law enforcemen­t and intelligen­ce agencies to investigat­e the Trump campaign in 2016. It’s been hard finding out what happened.

Rep. Devin Nunes, when he was chairman of the House Intelligen­ce Committee, shook loose a lot of informatio­n, but much remains unknown to the public.

Now those Republican­s are counting on an investigat­ion by Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz to reveal more. And they are hoping that President Trump will declassify documents that could shed new light on the matter. One place they are not looking for answers is in the Mueller report.

5. Why a special counsel? Some Republican­s question whether there was really a need for a special counsel to investigat­e Trump-Russia. First, they cite the fact that there was no underlying crime. There was no crime specified in Mueller’s original scope memo, and Mueller could never establish that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinate­d with Russia.

Second, they point to the circumstan­ces of Mueller’s appointmen­t, when fired FBI director James Comey leaked confidenti­al documents in order to set off an uproar that he hoped would result in the appointmen­t of a special counsel.

As it turned out, things went according to Comey’s plan. But was a special counsel really necessary to investigat­e the crime that did not occur? Like so many others, don’t look for that argument to be resolved by the Mueller report.

 ??  ?? Byron York Columnist
Byron York Columnist

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States