Cheap-Shot Bob Mueller Shows His Real Colors, While Democrats Grasp at Straws
May 1, 2019 (EIRNS)—The Senate Judiciary hearing with the Attorney General of the United States, on May 1, concerning the Mueller report, proved that every single Democratic Party Senator presently serving on that Committee is not qualified for office by reason of not understanding one wit about the fundamental Constitutional principles they are sworn to defend. They utterly fail to comprehend the presumption of innocence and the Article II powers of the President of the United States.
The setting for the hearing itself was created by Bob Mueller, demonstrating to all, just what a jarhead thug he is. It appears Mueller or someone working for him, deliberately leaked to the Washington Post a March 27, 2019 letter which he wrote to Attorney General William Barr, complaining that Barr had not released Mueller’s 19-page executive summary of the Mueller report, but instead, publicly outlined the report’s bottom line conclusions himself, while working to ensure that the full, almost completely unredacted, report, including the 19 pages, would be available to the public rapidly. Mueller complained in the letter that Barr’s March 24 recitation of Mueller’s verdict—that President Trump had not conspired with Russia to get elected and that he could not charge the President with obstruction of justice but could not “exonerate” him—confused public perceptions of his investigation.
According to Barr’s testimony today, Mueller clarified to him that he was concerned about press coverage of Barr’s recitation of Mueller’s bottom line, but did not disagree with Barr’s description of his conclusions. Barr had offered Mueller the opportunity to review Barr’s March 24 letter to the Congress and to the public outlining Mueller’s conclusions, but Jarhead Mueller declined. At the end of his testimony, Barr described the March 27 Mueller letter as being a little “snitty” and probably written by one of Mueller’s staffers. He described Mueller’s complaint as a little like a prosecutor coming out after a jury verdict had been delivered in a trial and protesting that his superb cross-examination and trial preparation were not going to be featured in the news.
Former prosecutor Andrew McCarthy summed up the Mueller letter accurately as “Diva Noise.” The general thrust of the RESIST attack, is that delay of the release of the full report for a little over three weeks, gave the President a PR advantage in spinning it because of the Attorney General’s spoiler report of its ultimate conclusions. Mueller lost control of the “narrative.” For that, the Democrats yelped, Barr should be forced to resign, because he had already demonstrated a predisposition to protect the President and act as his lawyer rather than acting “independently” in a Department of Justice completely unmoored from the Presidency, something the founders clearly rejected in our Constitution.
Barr, at points in the hearing, indicated that he thought Bob Mueller was a weeny, despite their years of friendship. He never spoke the word “weeny” but spoke in Washington legalese to the same effect. He indicated surprise and incomprehension that Mueller had refused to make a prosecutorial decision regarding obstruction of justice, pointing out repeatedly that that is what a prosecutor is supposed to do. He testified that when he had asked Mueller why he could not make a decision, Mueller had replied that his staff was still formulating the reason. He indicated that he had pre-discussed with Mueller getting the report out quickly and writing it in such a way that necessary Rule 6E grand jury redactions were easily segregated from text. But the report arrived with 6E material fully integrated into text, necessitating a lengthy redaction process. He criticized the obstruction segment of Mueller’s report and its reliance on a “pattern” of obstructive activity as being, in effect, a legally unmoored narrative, rather than reciting a crime to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. He repeatedly warned against the prosecutorial function being used to settle political differences as the process surrounding this investigation had become.
Barr stressed again and again that the prosecutorial weapons of the Department of Justice, such as subpoenas and grand juries, are not instruments to be used to get out information for political use. He also stressed that the claim, that Mueller was charged with exonerating the President as opposed to deciding whether or not there was sufficient evidence of a crime, represented an attack on the constitutional presumption of innocence.
Various Presidential candidates took turns at who could take the most effective shots at defaming both Trump and Barr. They were all trumped, so to speak, by Mad Mazie Hirono, she of the theory that if I say the Moon is made of green cheese, and science proves otherwise, we have, simply, a difference of equally valid opinions. As with the Kavanaugh hearing, Hirono and her antics would be a shameful embarrassment to Democrats if they did not rake in so much cash from the Party’s mad donor class based on her performances.
Barr said little today about the investigation of the investigation, and what he did say seemed to indicate that he is proceeding, as of now, in a very limited way. There continued to be bipartisan consensus on the “Russia did it” nonsense and the looming danger of China. Again, this is why our continuing intervention to demonstrate the British Empire source of the coup is an imperative for the future of the United States, and the world.