General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBenjamin Wittes: "One needs to know not merely that the investigation has concluded but WHY"
Link to tweet
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,658 posts)A declination for legal reasons is also preponderantly likely here, irrespective of the facts, at least as regards Trump himself. Indeed, we always knew that the investigation would not result in Trumps indictment while he remained in office; that was never in doubt. For all the feverish discussion of the question of whether a president can or cannot be indicted, the Justice Departments Office of Legal Counsel has a longstanding opinion on the matter that binds Mueller. There was never any chance that Mueller would defy this opinion. And there was thus never any chance either that Mueller would indict Trump while he remained in office. The result is that at least as regards the president himself, we cannot presumeas we normally would presumethat the investigations end means that the evidence is insufficient to bring charges. It might well mean that, and nobody should be surprised if it does. But it neednt mean that.
There are other possibilities too. What if Mueller developed compelling evidence of presidential misconduct but that evidence does not map cleanly onto known criminal statutes? This could be the case on the collusion prong of the investigation, because knowingly and gleefully benefiting from a foreign powers theft and disclosure of a political opponents emails isnt, without more, a crime. And it could also be the case with respect to the obstruction component of the investigation, because the president has plausible arguments with respect to many of his obstructive acts that they are within his Article II powers.
There are also prudential factors that can lead to declinationsfor example, the unwillingness to declassify material to bring a case. I have no reason to believe such factors are at work here. My point is simply that to say that Mueller is not recommending further charges does not tell you all that much unless you know why hes not recommending further charges. Yes, it is possible that Mueller has concluded that the president is innocent, that there was NO COLLUSION and that theres nothing to see here and we should all move on. But its also possible that he has concluded that the president is guilty as sin but he cant prove this without outing a particular intelligence channel that NSA senior leadership would lie down in traffic to prevent him from discussing in courtand that even if he could blow that capability, the president cant be indicted anyway and would have a good argument that his conduct was lawful. These scenarios are both consistent with Fridays news.
SWBTATTReg
(22,097 posts)writing of his 'report', is what other actions were initiated by Mueller and folks during their investigations (and not just the ones that we already know of)?
A rational thought would be perhaps there are some other activities still active, that may mute portions of the 'Mueller report' since there may be ongoing investigations/etc. (and they (Justice dept) want to keep these other activities secret). This makes sense to me.
It's possible that we may not of these 'other' actions being undertaken, being that they may be undercover, that the Mueller report may not be as comprehensive as some may think it should be, or the report will specify that xyz office were referred to regarding actions done by individual 1, 2, 3, etc.
The Velveteen Ocelot
(115,658 posts)and the Manhattan DA's office relating to Trump's and his businesses' financial dealings, which Trump has always said was the red line Mueller must not cross. Apparently Mueller didn't, but other prosecutors over which he has no control are doing it, and financial crimes are more likely to be his downfall than "collusion." Gates, Flynn and Cohen are still cooperating with prosecutors outside the OSC. Roger Stone, who is the alleged connection to Wikileaks, doesn't go on trial until next Fall and so has plenty of time to start cooperating. This isn't over by any means.
SWBTATTReg
(22,097 posts)involving his charity company which he is accused of using as his own piggy bank. Good! Thanks again and take care!
H2O Man
(73,524 posts)I have great respect for both Ben and Natasha. Thank you for this.
Pepsidog
(6,254 posts)certainly were not shy in commenting how reckless Hillary supposedly was with her emails. They gave no deference to a Secretary of State why should they give any deference to traitors.