Thread by @MuellerSheWrote

THREAD: Mueller will appear in his first interview, a two-parter, this week on The Oath with Chuck Rosenberg. Here's what I wish he would address. FIRST: why didn't you follow the money? Here's what I think we might hear: 1/

I think they DID follow SOME of the money. We recently learned about a secret fourth team headed up by Ahmad and Van Grack and they investigated a $10M payment from Egypt to trump in the waning days of the 2016 election. 1/ cnn.com/2020/10/14/pol…

This investigative reporting says that Egypt was PART of the "follow the money" team, so there could have been other aspects of that investigation. We may learn from Mueller WHY this never made it into the report. I imagine (speculative) that could be for a couple of reasons 3/

Perhaps Mueller didn't take it to Rosenstein for authorization because he knew he wouldn't get it. The follow up question would be "but that refusal to investigate would have had to be reported to congress." A possible explanation for why he didn't go that route... 4/

May be that because he couldn't indict a president due to the OLC memo, Mueller would effectively be accusing trump of a crime that trump had no way of defending himself against in court as is his constitutional right. That's the same reason he didn't call him on Obstruction. 5/

Another reason the "follow the money" findings didn't make it into the report could be (again, speculation) because Barr disallowed it. We don't know, but I would like to know the answers to those questions. NEXT: 6/

I would like to know why Mueller didn't subpoena trump or require answers to follow up questions to the original written questions he submitted (in which trump lied about foreknowledge of the Wikileaks dumps). My *understanding* is that he was avoiding being fired. 7/

Avoiding being fired could also be the reason the "follow the money" information didn't make it into the report. Had Mueller pushed these things, he risked being fired and had he been fired, he would not have been able to deliver the obstruction of justice findings. 8/

I expect that Mueller thought that HAD his Obstruction findings been reported and summarized appropriately by Barr, the public would have supported impeachment more than it did and congress could have done what Mueller expected it to do: impeach trump. 9/

Hindsight being as it is, I'm sure that even HAD Barr not mangled the findings and released the executive summaries as he assured Mueller he would, the senate still would have acquitted trump of the charges. 10/

But had Weissman and others gotten their way, and Mueller subpoenaed trump and they continued to follow the money, I believe trump would have fired Mueller and the BEAUTIFUL obstruction charges would have never seen the light of day. 11/

Further, Barr took Mueller's refusal to call trump out on obstruction as the opportunity to LIE and told us that meant the obstruction call was HIS to make, and his conclusion was that trump did not obstruct justice. 12/

In reality, Mueller had an elegant and constitutional explanation for why he didn't accuse trump of obstruction: because he couldn't indict him, trump would not be able to defend himself against the accusation in court. Additionally, he could taint future prosecution... 13/

by calling him a criminal without giving him the opportunity to defend himself, making any future obstruction indictments susceptible to appeal. These are the questions I would have for Mueller. Sadly, answering them could have the same negative effect on future prosecutions 14/

But the point remains: it may be true that Mueller didn't do everything we wish he had, but the explanations would likely lend themselves to laying the blame SQUARELY where it belongs: on the narrow shoulders of Barr and Rosenstein. END

PS: We never said Mueller would save us, so if you've never listened to the podcast, save your incorrect assumptions.