How a legal dispute between Mueller and Barr drove the end of the special counsel's probe

[SunSeeker]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Omaha Steve (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Washington Post

The redacted Mueller report released Thursday makes clear that he and his prosecutors viewed the OLC opinion to mean they also could not come to a conclusion about whether the president had committed a crime because it would violate Justice Department standards of fairness to make such an accusation — even secretly — without giving the person a chance to fight the accusation. Barr disagreed.

Mueller’s approach to the question of whether the president tried to obstruct justice has created tension inside the Justice Department, according to current and former officials. Privately, some senior officials at the Justice Department have been unhappy that Mueller did not reach a conclusion about whether Trump’s conduct rose to the level of a crime, said the officials, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of ongoing sensitivity surrounding the probe.
...
But Ray said he suspected another reason for Mueller’s punt: He did not want to put Barr in a position of having to overrule him.

“I do think it’s a component of the special counsel’s thinking that if he had gone that direction, he was well aware of the fact that the Department of Justice’s view would be and the attorney general’s decision would be to overrule it, and that is not a desirable place for the country to be,” Ray said. “I’m sure the attorney general didn’t appreciate the fact that he was put in the position of having to resolve the matter either, but given those two choices, I think it was better to have left it unresolved and have the attorney general take it from there.”


Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/how-a-legal-dispute-between-mueller-and-barr-drove-the-end-of-the-trump-probe/2019/04/19/1781807e-623e-11e9-9ff2-abc984dc9eec_story.html

---

So looks like Mueller punted to Congress on the obstruction question so that he would not be overruled by Barr. But Barr ended up overruling him anyway by concluding on his own there was no obstruction.

The question to ask Mueller when he comes before Congress: If you were a member of Congress, would you vote to impeach on obstruction?

[Eliot Rosewater]

1. Constitution and laws are no more. Where are rumps tax returns? NO consequences

for defying the law?

Thus we are living in the definition of a constitutional crisis and the cons sit by and do nothing, and the dems dont have the power to do what has to be done because gop are traitors all of them

[Bernardo de La Paz]

2. Again, events are unfolding so it is too soon for dismal binary conclusions. Remain alert.

All is not darkness.

Mueller spoke truth to power and, as the OP makes clear, is always thinking of serving the country best.

[Thekaspervote]

3. +1000

[Traildogbob]

4. Question to my more knowledgable DUers

"When" Nadler et al start these public hearings with Mueller etc, can he call "President" Obama in to testify how McConnell would do nothing to curtail the Russian attack, actually covered the attack up, and expose the Million's McTurtle received in Russian campaign cash, and what FBI, CIA, Homeland Securuty were doing prior to the election to fight it. Or were they just too busy with Emails? They ALL knew it was being carried out in real time. Why allow it?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

5. He can. Obama very honorable & Constitutional (prof); may not play along if he's troubled by issues.

I'm not especially knowledgeable, mind you.

[SunSeeker]

6. Why wouldn't Obama "play along"? His conversations with Mitch are not privileged.

Anything Obama had to say to Mitch is no longer classified, it is now public and stated right in the Mueller report in detail about how Russia attacked us. And it certainly wouldn't be covered by executive privilege; Mitch is not part of the executive branch.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

11. I think you are right, but Obama understands the Constitutional issues better than me. . . . nt

[SunSeeker]

7. Great idea. The judiciary committee can and should call Obama about McConnell.

And expose McConnell's treason.

[Traildogbob]

10. Thanks peeps!

And why not call the Turtle in. Anyone involved in treason should HAVE to explain themselves under oath and Very publicly. And the 12+- repukes that went to Russia as a gaggle of treasoners, plus Rand Paul. Was he advised of the aluminum factory he would receive In Kentucky?
By the way, enjoying The Roger Waters documentary of the Wall this rainy AM. The kids on stage, all with "Fear Builds Walls" early in the concert was extremely moving. So much of the album reflects what we are facing right now with walls, war and hate.

[cstanleytech]

8. No, the question to ask is would he have recommended Trump be charged with obstruction had DOJ rules

not stood in the way.

[SunSeeker]

9. That would work for me! nt

[Omaha Steve]

12. After a review by forum hosts...locking.

Analysis and opinion

Statement of Purpose for Late Breaking News
Post the latest news from reputable mainstream news websites and blogs. Important news of national interest only. No analysis or opinion pieces. No duplicates. News stories must have been published within the last 12 hours. Use the published title of the story as the title of the discussion thread.