Impeachment: Mueller report revives the issue. Some Democrats wish it would go away
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Thursday, however, when Barr released a redacted version of the full report to Congress and the public, it quickly became apparent that what Mueller said was very different from Barr’s gloss. Among Democratic activists and members of the party’s left wing, impeachment talk almost immediately revived.
THE IMPEACHMENT CONUNDRUM
Renewed discussion of impeachment poses a headache for Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democratic leaders.
Pelosi made clear last month that she doesn’t want the House to spend the rest of the year in an impeachment debate.
“He’s just not worth it,” she said, referring to Trump, in an interview with the Washington Post.
Comments from House leaders Thursday showed that Mueller’s report hadn’t changed their thinking on the issue.
Asked about impeachment, Rep. Jerrold Nadler, the chair of the House Judiciary Committee, which would handle the subject, demurred.
“That’s one possibility,” he told reporters. “There are others.”
As Jennifer Haberkorn wrote, congressional Democrats see Mueller’s report as a road map for further investigation. They disagree, however, about their desired destination.
The problem as Pelosi and her allies see it: Impeachment excites partisans, but not swing voters and other, less committed sorts who want to see their elected representatives working on issues that affect them personally, such as healthcare.
The way to defeat Trump is to beat him in an election, they argue, and the way to do that is to focus on those everyday issues.
The argument from the other side: Mueller laid out a clear case of abuse of power, one incident after another in which Trump tried to interfere with a federal investigation. And the special counsel clearly left the final decision up to Congress, which he specifically referred to in his report.
What precedent would be set by allowing Trump’s conduct to go unpunished, impeachment proponents ask?
Pelosi has called a meeting of House Democrats for Monday to discuss how to move forward.
MUELLER’S KEY FINDINGS
Mueller’s 448-page report provides official confirmation, backed up by sworn testimony and subpoenaed documents, of more than two years of news reporting about the frenzied, dysfunctional and mendacious operation Trump presides over.
First, as Chris Megerian wrote, the report makes clear that Trump’s campaign “had a symbiotic, if not criminal, relationship with Moscow’s tampering.”
The evidence doesn’t show that campaign aides conspired with Russian efforts to sway the election. It does show that the campaign welcomed the Russian help and, as the report says, “expected it would benefit.”
On the second major issue — whether Trump sought to obstruct the investigation — the report shows that he surely tried, as Del Wilber and Megerian wrote.
“The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests,” the report says.
Indeed, the willingness of high-level administration officials to ignore Trump and fend off his mercurial demands forms one of the recurring themes of the report.
As Eli Stokols wrote, Trump panicked early on over the investigation and flailed around trying to block it. His aides’ insubordination likely saved him from much worse trouble.
Lying forms another key theme. Trump aides and associates lied to the public, lied to each other and, especially in the president’s case, lied to themselves.
In some cases, they also lied to investigators, leading to the false statement charges that snared several top Trump aides. Most of Trump’s aides spoke extensively to Mueller and his team and appear to have testified honestly. Some of them now fear that will get them in trouble with Trump.
As for the president, himself, his written answers to questions posed by investigators showed a remarkable lack of memory — 34 instances of “I don’t remember,” “do not recall” and “no recollection,” as Janet Hook wrote.
Trump avoided testifying in person: His lawyers feared he would commit perjury. As David Willman wrote, Mueller decided not to engage in a lengthy fight to compel his testimony . But some former prosecutors think that means he lost some key evidence he might have gotten.
For those who don’t have time to read the full report, my colleagues summarized what it had to say on all sorts of questions, including whether compromising videotapes of Trump exist and why Mueller decided against charging Donald Trump Jr. on campaign finance violations. And Megerian and Anna Phillips summarized the highlights .
NEXT BATTLEGROUND — REDACTIONS
As Sarah Wire reported, more than one-third of the pages in the public version of Mueller’s report have redactions of some sort. In some cases, only a few words are blacked out. In others, black bars cover almost the entire page.
John Schleuss produced a great visual showing the scope of what has been blocked from public view.
Barr said he would let congressional leaders see some of the redacted material — passages that were blacked out because they reveal classified material, for example. But material held back because it involves grand jury testimony will remain off limits, he said.
Democratic leaders say Congress has a right to see the grand jury testimony, too. Legal precedents are uncertain on that issue. Look for that to form a major point of contention.
Tags
Who is online
89 visitors
"Among Democratic activists and members of the party’s left wing, impeachment talk almost immediately revived."
"Activists".....the Operative word.
Would that include Shifty Schiff too ?
He does have this "Save my own Face" problem right now.
Funny thing....these "Opinions' on the Mueller report......They "Opinionate" much, but just can't find anything Actual they say Trump Accomplished.
Well..... I guess "he coulda" is something.
What did Trump actually "Accomplish" based on the Innuendos floating around now ?
Hmmmmmm ?
It is a tough call, but I think he should be impeached. The main argument against it is that it will rally Trump's base around him. I think he would have found a way to do that by Nov 2020 with or without impeachment.
We have the worst president in our nation's history in office, and now we have strong indications that he is failing to uphold his oath of office. I think it would be a significant discouraging precedent to allow him to walk away from all his obstruction scot free.
And what if they don't impeach and he wins re-election? There will be an uproar from a large group asking why he wasn't impeached.
Donald Trump is clearly unfit to hold office, any office, let alone the presidency. He cannot be permitted to run for re-election in 2020, which means either the Republicans come to their senses and inform him he has no support and must either resign or pledge not to run in 2020, or he is impeached.
Does the right wing really have no faith that Pence could do what they want? Or that a new candidate couldn't do what they want? What on earth did Trump supporters do before 2016?
I'm deathly weary of the mess. Our country is ill.
We have a President who routinely calls for the imprisonment of a former opponent... who has never been convicted of anything... while a large number of his own people have received prison sentences, and others are under investigation.
I think you are partially right here, the problem, as I see it, with impeachment at this time is the fact that there are a lot of Americans that are saying, what about my kitchen table issues, healthcare, a raise in the minimum wage, infrastructure, clean energy, there's a whole list of things that Congress should be covering. I know, every one says the same thing and, it comes down to this one thing, Democrats can chew gum and, walk at the same time but, here's the other problem, without the Republicans in the Senate behind impeachment then it won't go through and, we might end up with a situation like we had when the Republicans tried to impeach Bill Clinton.
When was the last time you heard of an incumbent president winning reelection when THEY were primaried? Weld a Republican is running for president AGAINST Trump in 2020.
Well, there is one office he is fit to hold, Mafia Don.
Not going to happen as long as we have Republicans that find nothing wrong with committing perjury and, obstruction of justice by the president.
Not going to happen until the majority of the Senate turns against Trump.
Mueller report revealed very much concerning the Trump, his style and his need for adoration. For the most part, he still stands. His attacks will continue. His base has nowhere to go, confused, unwelcome, unreticent.
As far as impeachment, he truly is unworthy of the effort, expense and wrangling the public would have to endure.
His greatest accomplishment thus far was his success to deny Americans a first hand look at his ability to answer questions concerning his perspectives and knowledge about himself, what he believes and how he arrives at those beliefs.
On the other hand though, there is much more about the Trump lurking in the shadows. His history is long, sordid, fraught with landmines. His protections are dwindling away. Pecker's AMI is going down. His personal security concerning his personal self is at the lowest ebb of his life and that will continue to decline.
The question is, "Do the American people even care that their President is a crook?"
Nixon never had less than 25% approval ratings.
That might be a base line.
That is profoundly depressing ...
My answer is this. Some don't and others can't. Russian INTEL services are very good at what they do, which is to confuse, divide, instill fear/suspicion and ultimately conquer.
That's not just depressing. It's worse than that.
I will emphasize, Russian INTEL is very good at what they do. Especially when their targets desire it.
Well... I'm sure our three-dimensional chess player has agents out there who are even more effective.
I will emphasize, Russian INTEL is very good at what they do.
Absolutely. Look at the Steele report.
There are still liberals who believe the information they fed Steele is credible.
Much of The Steel Report is credible.
By liberals, do you mean those that protect Choice, clean air and water, natural resource protections, voter rights, civil rights, honest monitoring of financial markets and banks, affordable/available healthcare and educational opportunity?
And 'those agents' would be...……………?
No its not. Not in the slightest . Even the New York Times is shredding it, now that "collusion" has been discredited by Mueller. Amazing how the Times started reporting it's falsity, now that Mueller's extinguished the collusion fantasy.
false. what are you defending?
I’m im not defending anything. I’m simply pointing out that the Clinton sponsored dossier was Russian disinformation. Even Steele admits he can’t rule that out now.
read the New York Times. No serious person defends the credibility of Steele dossier at this point, certainly not US intelligence services.
Yes you are. And you have never explained what it was nor why you are defending it.