As the specifics of The Mueller Report kept exploding like cherry bombs all day yesterday and into this morning, my list of questions and reactions kept getting longer and longer. As a confessed Trump/Russia obsessive nerd, here’s an abbreviated list (in no particular order) of where I’m at roughly 24 hours after release:
1: Mueller decided not to subpoena Trump for an in-person interview, the most conclusive way of determining “corrupt intent” in obstruction and a host of other wildly sketchy behaviors. He didn’t want a “protracted” fight with Trump, one that almost certainly would have gone all the way to the Supreme Court. Plus, there was the high likelihood that if Trump did get in front of a grand jury, a la Bill Clinton, he probably would have pleaded The Fifth from start to finish, rendering the whole fight meaningless. That said, Donald Trump truly is “Individual #1”, everything emanates from him and revolves around him, and the case against him (or even for him) is hobbled by not getting the best possible evidence from him. The fight for his in-person testimony should have gone forward. And let’s remember, it was only a bit over four months from the time Nixon got a subpoena for his White House tapes and the Supreme Court ruled — unanimously — that he had to turn them over. After 22 months of Mueller, we could have waited until July.
2: Likewise, how do we explain Mueller calling in the hapless Sarah Huckabee Sanders for an interview but not anyone in the immediate Trump family? Not Donald Jr., the “I love it!” recipient of the Russian offer to assist the campaign? Not Ivanka, arguably her father’s key advisor (can’t make it up), and not Jared Kushner, his Swiss Army knife of a lieutenant who had clearly demonstrated influence on obstruction by advising Trump to fire Jim Comey? I really want to hear Mueller explain that one.
3. There is nothing — zero — in the redacted report about Trump’s absurdly squirrely finances. Was a full investigation of Trump’s long, long experience with Russian “investor”/oligarch/gangsters truly not part of Mueller’s mandate? A lot of people, not just me, were believing that the presence on Mueller’s team of ace money-laundering prosecutor Andrew Weismann, was proof that Mueller was looking closely at how long-term Russian “investment” in Trump not only explained a comfortable existing relationship with Russians, but a key element in the Russians’ on-going leverage over him. Did Mueller farm all that out to the Southern District of New York? If so, what is anyone doing to prevent Bill Barr from putting a fat thumb on that scale? Never mind “collusion”. Never mind “conspiracy”. “Compromise” is the issue here.
4. Also in finances — understanding that money and the pretense of fabulous, Croesus-like wealth is absolutely essential to Trump’s highly suspect “brand” — was nothing more learned about Trump’s relationship with Deutsche Bank, a.k.a. the only bank who would still do business with him? Subpoenas are now out from the House Oversight Committee. But was anything investigated regarding the credibly estimated $300-plus million Trump apparently still owed Deutsche Bank as recently as early 2018, (much of it for the construction of the Trump-branded tower in Chicago)? We have good information that many, if not all of Trump’s loans came from a bank within Deutsche Bank, a private bank with assets provided by … who, exactly? In that context it’s interesting to note the number of times in recent weeks the question has been asked whether Trump’s Deutsche Bank debt has been forgiven or dramatically restructured? Wildly speculating here, but if that bank-within-a-bank is in fact a depository for well-laundered Russian money and the Russians have agreed to “relieve” some of Trump’s debt burden … well that’d be kind of interesting, wouldn’t it?
5. It’s already understood that Muller’s obstruction section is in essence a road map for Congress, (i.e. Democrats) to begin aggressive investigation … or more. And everyone is making much of all the Trump aides who just ignored his “crazy shit” and refused to cooperate in flagrant obstruction. But, come on! Since when does it matter that the perp was too stupid or lazy to actually pull off the obstruction? The fact he — the President of the United States — tried so often (and so recklessly) to obstruct investigation(s) doesn’t make it less of a crime. And again people, this is over a matter — Russian rigging of an American presidential election — about a quadrillion and a half times more serious and relevant to you and me than Bill Clinton obstructing “justice” into sexy time with an intern.
6. Speaking of flagrant, Bill Barr’s gobsmacking defense of Trump was of course appalling, and it reaffirms a key (and politically exploitable) factor in explaining the seething in American culture today. Namely that every system that matters is gamed out in favor of the wealthy and connected — the “insiders”, the people who can leverage — via money or favors — any and all rules in their defense, no matter how naked their crimes. That said, how much do we know about Bill Barr’s private finances? Not to go all tinfoil hat here, but it’d be reassuring to take that question off the table.
7. I don’t think I’m alone in seeing the long-strategy of Barr and the White House (and Mitch McConnell and the Freedom Caucus) being basically a taunt to Democrats to press the impeachment button. Given the picture Mueller does paint and things likely to emerge out of all the other investigations into Trump’s epically sleazy business career, the rest of Trump’s term is going to be more of the same. But what turbo-charges the conflict in Trump’s favor is a full-out impeachment. Total war is where Team Trump is preparing to go anyway to win reelection (and thereby postpone an avalanche of indictments when he does leave office). But impeachment is nuclear fuel for the base. Torches, pitchforks and precious Second Amendment rights. Democrats are going to have to be especially canny in keeping the fires red-hot without setting MAGA-world aflame.
8. Finally, (for the moment), Mueller’s “no conspiracy” decision teeters on the very thin edge of the fact that he couldn’t show anyone on Team Trump with a direct, almost contractual agreement with Russians to game the election. In other words Mueller couldn’t prove that Team Trump engaged — hands-on — in the technical aspects of the hacking, the WikiLeaks dumping, the Cambridge Analytica-style social media distortion, etc. Common sense that is cutting “conspiracy” implausibly fine. Trump knew about it. Trump accepted it. Trump continues to deny the Russians had any role in the attack. What’s more, neither Trump nor Bill Barr yesterday has ever expressed any concern, much less outrage, that the attack happened.
And then there’s the fact the … Trump and everyone around him has lied about their chumminess with Russians every goddam time they’ve been asked.
Thank you, Brian! I was awaiting your thoughts.
I had similar disappointments, and can only hope that much of that evidence was passed on to other investigators in SDNY and other, folks who are not under the control of Barr, McConnell, and Trump. Unfortunately, I’m not sure how much of that SDNY stuff will play out before the election. Much of it might end up being in sealed indictments that we don’t know about while Trump is in office. Hopefully some of the documentation will come out in prosecution of Trump’s supporting actors.
As for the House, they need to use their subpoena and stage to expose key pieces of information. But they shouldn’t impeach. I agree with Pelosi on that. Congress is the least credible possible messenger to sell the public on Trump corruption. So the House should get the key documents and testimony out and let the documents and third party testimony drive the outrage, but it should be done disconnected from impeachment proceedings. (The House also needs to get lots of visibility on issues like health care, family leave, minimum wage, rolling back tax cuts on the rich and corporations, student loan forgiveness, ethics reform, etc., so it doesn’t look like Trump investigating is the only thing the Democrats are doing with control of the House.)
The Mueller Report is frustrating in that the fact-finding is incomplete and the prosecutorial decisions were so cautious. Still, the facts that are included are in the Mueller Report are plenty shocking by themselves. Because no one will read the report, my brother mused about someone making everything in the Mueller Report into a mini-series that dramatizes the sordid story of the sleaze for the masses to see. It’s one thing to see a few excerpts from a report, but quite another to watch actors depicting the real life incompetence, unpatriotic cynicism, and mob-like witness tampering.
So, how quickly can you get a screenplay done, Bri?
Hmmm. Let’s see, John Goodman as Bill Barr …
I was thinking Tom Bosley, but he is no longer with us.
I seem to recall Andrew McCabe repeatedly saying he started this whole thing off as a national security investigation. I haven’t heard much talk in the last two days about national security redactions and your questions three and four are certainly key points for the focus of a national security investigation. I guess what I’m asking, is there the possibility of a separate national security investigation happening clandestinely, or am I being delusional?
The majority of the redactions from Barr are in Volume One — the “collusion”, i.e. counter-intelligence part. The stated reason being on-going investigations. The assumptions I’m seeing think that many of the 12 redacted, delineated cases apparently handed off to other jurisdictions and listed at the end of the report have something to do with Trump finances, although no one is certain. While Mueller expresses frustration at not getting the full story on the counter-intelligence front (“collusion”) because of constant lies from the likes of Paul Manafort and destruction of evidence, via encryption and scrubbing of electronic messages, I like to believe the intelligence community isn’t going to just let it go at that. But then I’m often delusional.
Common sense says that all of these questions are actually “facts”.