,
4 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
This is a terrific, highly skeptical NYT deconstruction of William Barr's decision to jump in and clear Trump on obstruction, when Mueller pointedly did not do so.
First, the NYT strongly suggests decision was highly irregular and driven by politics:
nytimes.com/2019/03/25/us/…
First, the NYT strongly suggests decision was highly irregular and driven by politics:
nytimes.com/2019/03/25/us/…
Second, the NYT piece notes that Barr withheld critical information that would make it possible to evaluate his decision, and also was silent on what *Mueller's* intentions were in declining to exonerate Trump:
nytimes.com/2019/03/25/us/…
nytimes.com/2019/03/25/us/…
Finally, NYT piece decisively reveals weakness of one Barr's core rationales for clearing Trump -- idea that lack of conspiracy charges calls into question whether Trump had any motive for obstructing justice.
As NYT notes, Trump did have a motive -- to avoid *other* scrutiny:
As NYT notes, Trump did have a motive -- to avoid *other* scrutiny:
Coda: It's notable that this piece has three bylines -- @charlie_savage, @MarkMazzettiNYT, and @ktbenner. The NYT is taking this very seriously, as we all should be doing.
