,
7 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
I think two things were driving the negative reviews of Mueller. One is, he's 75, he seems to be understandably heard of hearing and less energetic than he was. The other is, as @renato_mariotti notes, he failed to serve anyone's political goals. politico.com/magazine/story…
@renato_mariotti Now, just because a goal is political does not mean it is invalid. People had plausible reasons to think Mueller *should* do what they wanted. But he also had a plausible understanding of what is and his not is role. Just bc something should be done doesn't mean he should do it.
I think Mueller is right that it's not his job to say whether Trump should be impeached. I am less convinced he was right not to say what charging decision he would have made, but for the OLC memo -- after all, it's not like declining to say avoided creating a cloud over Trump.
But Mueller is a formalist. He sees a difference between the obvious and the explicit. Rs were clearly annoyed when he said he didn't write his report with an eye to it being public. How could he not expect it to become public? But, formally, that was Barr's call, not his.
Similarly, Mueller does not decline to say how he would have charged -- he says he *never reached a determination* about how he would have charged. That seems implausible. We all have opinions. How does he not? But he'd have had to form his opinion through the formal process.
Without endorsing his every specific choice, there is a merit to a prosecutor taking this sort of formalistic approach.
Because there is an alternative to this sort of formalism. 
