,
8 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
@Lawyerbobbaue convincingly argues it was inevitable Robert Mueller, like all special counsels/prosecutors before him, would fact harsh criticism from both sides. However, any suggestion that there's equivalence between attacks he faced from left and right is plainly wrong. 1/
Mueller is nearly unique among special prosecutors (w/exception of Jaworski) in that he chose to hold his fire in order to preserve the legitimacy of his work, and of the justice system it represented. 2/
He was, of course, rewarded by Barr, and others on the right echoing his arguments in various forms, with absurdly disingenuous contention that -- by not expressly stating that the president was a crook -- he breached a duty. 3/
As @neal_katyal has demonstrated, that argument is directly at odds with the prior stated views of none other than Barr himself. 4/ 'washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/0…
And as @rgoodlaw has demonstrated, Barr has also repeatedly made statements that are simply at odds with Mueller's Report and fats recited therein. 5/ justsecurity.org/64441/a-side-b…
As I have argued, while Mueller may have erred,, it was not by being insufficiently solicitous to assertions of Barr, et al., but rather, by failing effectively to anticipate their attacks on his legitimacy, and with it legitimacy of justice system. 6/6 thedailybeast.com/mueller-screwe…
Oops! meant to say @Lawyerbobbauer
@rgoodlaw . . . . meant to say "facts"
