“Robert Mueller’s public statement [yesterday] was,
apparently, ‘vintage Mueller’—I say apparently because I don’t know this guy at
all, and am relying on the comments of those who do. He was careful, concise,
by the book, and delivered with all the dispassion he could muster.
“Mueller essentially reiterated what has already been
clear: (1) his investigation was a professional endeavor warranted by
overwhelming evidence of Russian interference in the 2016 election, and was the
farthest thing from a ‘witch hunt’ or a ‘coup’; (2) the report which resulted
from the probe contains substantial evidence of Trump campaign cooperation with
the Russian effort, even if not ‘criminal conspiracy’; (3) the report contains
more substantial evidence of Trump’s obstruction of justice, but it did not
recommend criminal indictment for one simple reason: such a recommendation was
inconsistent with Justice Department rules, and thus with Mueller’s charge as a
Justice employee; (4) it is for Congress to decide whether and how to act on
the evidence contained in the report.
“Mueller stated that he did not wish to say anything else ‘in
this manner,’ i.e., in unprompted public testimony, and that if called to
testify before Congress, he would do little more than reiterate what he has
said here, which is that ‘the report is my testimony.’ Fair enough. Mueller is
a by-the-book ex-Marine, a professional federal prosecutor who is scrupulous
about his job and its limits.
“His very terse judiciousness puts the lie to White House
claims of ‘witch hunt.’ And in his own exceedingly legalistic way, Mueller is
now the second Republican in [three] days—and Mueller is most definitely a
registered Republican—to make plain that it is Congress that has a Constitutional
responsibility to deal with the evidence contained in his Report. The first is
Republican Congressman Justin Amash, who yesterday held a town meeting
explaining to his constituents—in language much bolder and more emphatic than
Mueller’s—that an
impeachment inquiry is necessary.
“It is both ironic and embarrassing that it is now
two Republicans who are schooling Nancy Pelosi and her
so-called Democratic ‘leadership team’ about the responsibilities of Congress. It
is now for Congressional Democrats to take the lead in moving the process
forward. And an impeachment inquiry is the only way to move it forward in a powerful,
publicly-focused way.
“And the first order of business of such an investigation
will be to invite, and if necessary subpoena, Mueller to testify. He might not
want to testify. He might truly believe that the report is his testimony. But
that is not for him to decide. And if he has clearly demonstrated the backbone
to stand by his sense of professional responsibility, it is not for House
Democratic leaders to demonstrate their backbone in the
performance of their responsibilities, by requiring Mueller to testify. Because,
here's the problem, the report does not ‘speak for itself.’
“And there are a great many procedural questions that
really need to be answered—questions that are not contained in the
report but are about the report—related to how the
investigation chose to limit itself, and how it decided who to interview and
how not to interview (Don Jr.?), and what other information relevant to
Congressional oversight was turned over to other Justice Department probes.
“Mueller must be required to speak about these things, in
a careful and serious way, by answering careful and serious questions put
before him by Congressional inquirers, in a public hearing. In order for this
to happen, House Democratic leaders must get serious about their
responsibilities and about politics: a careful, well-organized impeachment
process, designed to expose the malfeasance of the Trump administration, is
both constitutionally necessary and politically necessary to weaken this
dangerous president, so that he can be legitimately defeated in November 2020.
“This requires a very honest, transparent, and public
process, designed to inform the public at large. Without such a process, the
information contained in the Mueller report—the truth uncovered by
the Mueller investigation—will remain obscured, mute, irrelevant, and thus
null. For in order for the truth to have the power of truth, it must be
properly communicated.
“John Dewey explained this well in his 1927 classic, The
Public and its Problems, where he criticized this naivete of ‘scholastics’ who
imagine that ‘truth’ is ever self-evident: ‘The schools may suppose that a
thing is known when it is found out… [but] a thing is fully known only when it
is published, shared, socially accessible. Record and communication are
indispensable to knowledge. Knowledge cooped upon in a private consciousness is
a myth, and knowledge of social phenomena is peculiarly dependent upon
dissemination… A fact of community life which is not spread abroad so as to be
a common possession is a contradiction in terms. Dissemination is something
other than scattering at large. Seeds are sown. Not by virtue of being thrown
out at random, but by being so distributed as to take root and have a chance of
growth…’
“The knowledge contained in the Mueller Report must truly
become public knowledge. This can only happen through a public
process of communication of the report and about the report.
And this process must be more than simply a ‘scattering at large’ of
information. It must be a deliberate (and deliberative) process centered on the
sharing of a range of facts, inquiry and debate about the meaning of the facts,
and then action on the facts.
“Only impeachment can accomplish this now. Mueller must
speak in public, before Congress, as part of a broader inquiry into the many
ways that President Trump and his administration represent a clear and present
danger to constitutional democracy. Mueller all but invited this conclusion in
his very terse comments [yesterday]. It is now time for House Democrats to
follow his lead, and do what must be done. An impeachment inquiry must now be
launched.
Jeffrey C. Isaac is
James H. Rudy Professor of Political Science at Indiana University,
Bloomington. His books include: Democracy in
Dark Times (1998); The Poverty of
Progressivism: The Future of American Democracy in a Time of Liberal Decline;
and Arendt, Camus,
and Modern Rebellion.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.