,
5 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
1) There's something very perverse at the core of the Mueller situation, and we shouldn't let it get lost.
When Mueller is asked to say explicitly whether he concluded Trump committed criminal obstruction, he likely won't say.
Why? Out of an abundance of fairness to Trump.
When Mueller is asked to say explicitly whether he concluded Trump committed criminal obstruction, he likely won't say.
Why? Out of an abundance of fairness to Trump.
2) It's important to understand that William Barr cynically exploited this sense of fairness on Mueller's part.
Barr did this by suggesting that Mueller *could have* given his *personal* opinion on whether Trump committed criminal obstruction, even absent charges.
Barr did this by suggesting that Mueller *could have* given his *personal* opinion on whether Trump committed criminal obstruction, even absent charges.
3) But we know from Mueller's report that he would not be comfortable doing this, because as Mueller himself said, absent trial, Trump would not be able to defend himself.
This is probably why he'll continue to refuse to answer the question tomorrow.
This is probably why he'll continue to refuse to answer the question tomorrow.
4) Now DOJ is putting the cherry on top of Barr's cynicism, by trying to constrain Mueller from telling full truth about what leeway Barr did or didn't give him.
Barr is exploiting Mueller's sense of fairness, and Trump is reaping the benefits. We'll all be in the dark for it.
Barr is exploiting Mueller's sense of fairness, and Trump is reaping the benefits. We'll all be in the dark for it.
5) I laid out this full case here, along with what I think may be the best response: Get the known fact set out to the world as best as possible, because those known facts are damning enough:
washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/…
