There is an enormous amount of misinformation circulating about former Special Counsel Bob Mueller’s investigation into Russian attempts to influence the 2016 U.S. election and the effort to obstruct that investigation following his death. Tweets honoring Mueller’s life of service to his country are now knee-deep in trolls and MAGA comments that have no relationship to the well-documented facts.
So, let’s go back to contemporary sources and make sure we have a clear picture of what investigators found and what the Report said about Donald Trump. We’ll also look at why Mueller, nonetheless, didn’t indict Trump or even weigh in on whether he should be indicted. That decision drew a lot of criticism.
Some of the key results of the Special Counsel
investigation:
Thirty-seven indictments, including six former Trump
advisers, 26 Russian nationals, a California man, a London-based lawyer, and
three Russian companies. Seven were convicted. And perhaps most significantly,
Mueller developed compelling evidence that Trump obstructed justice. Repeatedly.
Mueller said publicly that the investigation did not exonerate Trump.
Among the specifics: Trump associates repeatedly lied to investigators about their contacts with Russians, and President Trump refused to answer questions about his efforts to impede federal proceedings and influence the testimony of witnesses.
A statement signed by over 1,000 former federal prosecutors, including me, concluded that any other person who engaged in the obstructive conduct attributed to Trump would have been indicted.
Barb McQuade and I wrote a summary of the part of the investigation that delved into obstruction. You can read it here. “Attorney General William Barr did the country a disservice,” we wrote, “when he withheld the Mueller report from public view for weeks, while claiming Mueller concluded there was ‘no collusion, no obstruction.’ That is not what the report says.”
We noted, “We start by
acknowledging Mueller’s decision that he was bound by DOJ policy that prohibits
indictment of a sitting president. Whether that policy is correct or not,
prosecutors must follow the rules. Mueller did.”
We also laid out some of Trump’s most significant obstructive conduct per the Report: Trump asked his White House counsel, Don McGahn, to arrange for Mueller to be fired in June, after he started work. Trump denied he’d done this when a reporter broke the story about the requested firing in 2018.
Trump tried to get McGahn to deny reporting about his
conduct as it surfaced and once threatened to fire McGahn if he wouldn’t.
McGahn refused. Trump summoned McGahn to the Oval Office and ordered him to
create a false record that denied that Trump ordered him to fire Mueller, which
would be a federal felony if proven.
After Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused from
overseeing the investigation, Trump repeatedly tried to compel him to
“unrecuse” (no such thing exists) and tried to get Corey Lewandowski to
threaten Sessions that he would be fired if he wouldn’t. Trump wanted Sessions
to limit the Special Counsel to investigating future elections. That would have
meant no investigation into Russian interference in 2016, an information gap
that would have left the country vulnerable to future attacks.
The president engaged in witness tampering, with one of
the worst examples being dangling the prospect of a pardon to keep Paul
Manafort from cooperating with the Special Counsel’s investigation.
Of course, the fact that Mueller was able to investigate and uncover much of this means Trump didn’t succeed with his efforts to obstruct. Some people suggested that means what Trump did wasn’t all that bad. As Barb and I wrote at the time, “Nothing could be further from the truth. To protect the integrity of our criminal justice system, prosecutors are able to hold accountable people who attempt to interfere with an investigation, not just people who have the luck to be successful.
Allowing an individual to avoid
accountability because they weren’t successful or because investigators were
unable to develop proof of underlying crimes would ensure that the most
successful obstructors avoid justice.”
It’s especially important to remember, as Trump, today, launches attack after attack against the investigation into the 2016 election and the people who conducted it, that the Mueller investigation confirmed the intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia was behind the attack on the DNC’s computers and developed important and specific information about the full nature of the attack Russia launched.
Mueller’s charges included computer hacking,
conspiracy, and financial crimes. Given that context, it’s shocking that in
order to try to protect himself, Trump was willing to put national security at
risk, attempting to derail the investigation into Russia in order to save
himself.
If you want more, there is a detailed analysis of
the Mueller investigation from Just Security, which I participated in along with some very
skillful lawyers. It’s divided out by topic, so you can dig in deeper on
anything of interest.
Barb McQuade, impeachment counsel Norm Eisen, me, and
John Dean.
In June 2019, I testified before the House Judiciary
Committee, alongside Barb and John Dean (yes, that John Dean), about the
Report. In my opening statement, I explained why Mueller had adhered to
DOJ policy when he declined to make a prosecutorial decision on whether to
indict Trump.
I asked Barb tonight what has stuck with her
all these years later, and this was her response: “Mueller indicted 38
individuals and entities, including Russian agents who hacked into computers
and stole email messages and who posed as Americans on social media to
influence voters. And far from exonerating the Trump campaign, Mueller found
that its members met with Russians at Trump Tower, shared polling data with a
Russian intelligence officer, and coordinated messaging with the WikiLeaks
release of stolen emails. This case was always less about Donald Trump and more
about Russia, but rather than report Russia’s overtures to the FBI, Trump
welcomed the help.”
It was and still is “Russia, Russia, Russia.”
Even though Mueller couldn’t get the Russians he indicted
before a court in the U.S., he managed to educate the American people about how
Russia tried to interfere in our elections. Trump pardoned five of the
Americans Mueller convicted: Paul Manafort, Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, George
Papadopoulos, and Alex van der Zwaan. Manafort and Stone were convicted by
juries. Flynn, Papadopoulos, and van der Zwaan pled guilty in court, each
acknowledging under oath—Flynn twice—that they were pleading guilty because they
were guilty, and for no other reason.
That’s Bob Mueller’s legacy. He uncovered the truth when
it was difficult to do so and held people accountable. That’s a sharp contrast
to the president who has criticized him. Bob Mueller was fair and decent, and
he played by the rules, including respecting the rule of law, which may seem
quaint in the time of Trump. Ultimately, criticism of Mueller’s report and his
work is an indictment of what Trump has done to our country. The Mueller
investigation and its results speak for themselves.
We’re in this together,
-Joyce Vance
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.