We now know the reason for Mueller’s biggest mistake

AlterNet logo

After Special Counsel Robert Mueller concluded his investigation into ties between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, the big question still loomed: Was the president guilty of a serious crime?

Attorney General Bill Barr quickly took it upon himself to answer the question, explaining that the special counsel’s work had failed to accuse Donald Trump of criminal acts, and he personally concluded that insufficient evidence existed for any charge. This announcement stunned and perplexed many observers while cheering the president’s allies. The truth only became clear weeks later when the Mueller report was finally released: It laid out substantial evidence that Trump was guilty of many instances of obstruction of justice, but the report was written so as to avoid making this conclusion explicit. (Mueller also sent a letter to Barr arguing that his initial statements about the resolution of the case had been misleading.)

Now, new revelations from one of Mueller’s top deputies, Andrew Weissmann, reveal the context of Mueller’s peculiar choice — one that I’ve argued was a colossal mistake. Continue reading.

Why we still don’t know if Trump is a Russian asset

AlterNet logo

As chair of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam Schiff is attempting to meet the Supreme Court’s guidelines for gaining access to Donald Trump’s financial records. In a memorandum to committee members on counterintelligence risks posed by the president’s financial ties, he included this footnote:

Based on the Committee’s review, it does not appear that Special Counsel Mueller issued any grand jury subpoenas to obtain the President’s financial records. The Committee also has reason to believe, based on its oversight work, that the FBI Counterintelligence Division has not investigated counterintelligence risks arising from President Trump’s foreign financial ties.

That points to a question Schiff has been asking since the Mueller probe was completed in March, 2019.  Here’s how he explained it to the Washington Post‘s Philip Bump a few weeks after Mueller wrapped up his work : Continue reading.

Sen. Graham says Mueller may be invited to testify in wake of op-ed on Trump’s commutation of Stone sentence

Washington Post logoSenate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) suggested Sunday that former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III may be invited to testify before his panel, although Graham did not give any details on the timing of any potential invitation.

Graham’s statement came one day after Mueller defended his office’s prosecution of Roger Stone, President Trump’s longtime friend and political adviser, in a Washington Post op-ed.

Trump commuted Stone’s 40-month prison sentence on Friday, using his presidential authority to undermine the unanimous finding by a jury that Stone broke the law multiple times by lying to Congress and obstructing justice. Continue reading.

Robert Mueller: Roger Stone remains a convicted felon, and rightly so

Washington Post logoRobert S. Mueller III served as special counsel for the Justice Department from 2017 to 2019.

The work of the special counsel’s office — its report, indictments, guilty pleas and convictions — should speak for itself. But I feel compelled to respond both to broad claims that our investigation was illegitimate and our motives were improper, and to specific claims that Roger Stone was a victim of our office. The Russia investigation was of paramount importance. Stone was prosecuted and convicted because he committed federal crimes. He remains a convicted felon, and rightly so.

Russia’s actions were a threat to America’s democracy. It was critical that they be investigated and understood. By late 2016, the FBI had evidence that the Russians had signaled to a Trump campaign adviser that they could assist the campaign through the anonymous release of information damaging to the Democratic candidate. And the FBI knew that the Russians had done just that: Beginning in July 2016, WikiLeaks released emails stolen by Russian military intelligence officers from the Clinton campaign. Other online personas using false names — fronts for Russian military intelligence — also released Clinton campaign emails.

Following FBI Director James B. Comey’s termination in May 2017, the acting attorney general named me as special counsel and directed the special counsel’s office to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The order specified lines of investigation for us to pursue, including any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign. One of our cases involved Stone, an official on the campaign until mid-2015 and a supporter of the campaign throughout 2016. Stone became a central figure in our investigation for two key reasons: He communicated in 2016 with individuals known to us to be Russian intelligence officers, and he claimed advance knowledge of WikiLeaks’ release of emails stolen by those Russian intelligence officers. Continue reading.

Rick Gates was offered cash to stonewall Mueller probe: prosecutors

AlterNet logoProsecutors recommended no prison time for former Trump deputy campaign chief Rick Gates after he resisted pressure and even a cash offer to stonewall investigators and provided “extraordinary assistance” in former special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation.

Prosecutors said in a court filing that they will not oppose Gates’ request to be sentenced to probation after he pleaded guilty in 2018 to conspiracy, lying to federal investigators and other charges.

Gates cooperated with Mueller’s team after the plea and testified at the trials of former Trump campaign chief Paul Manafort and longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone, who were both convicted of numerous charges, as well as attorney Greg Craig, who was acquitted. Prosecutors said this week that Gates is still assisting with “a number of different ongoing matters.”

Continue reading

Roger Stone joins the remarkable universe of criminality surrounding President Trump

Washington Post logoOn Friday, President Trump’s longtime political adviser Roger Stone was found guilty on seven criminal charges related to testimony he gave to Congress as part of investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election. Those charges included five counts of offering false statements, one of obstruction and one of witness tampering. Stone is scheduled to be sentenced early next year.

Stone was with Trump at the very beginning of the president’s time in politics. In fact, Stone long pushed Trump to enter into the political world, encouraging him repeatedly to announce presidential bids in previous cycles. He was sidelined during Trump’s 2016 run after either quitting or being fired; as with many things related to Stone, details are murky.

Friday’s convictions seem to bring to an end the high-profile criminal probes stemming from special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. The convictions also contribute to a truly remarkable universe of admitted, proved or alleged criminal behavior involving people linked to Trump.

View the complete November 15 article by Philip Bump on The Washington Post website here.

Judge questions keeping Mueller grand jury materials from House

During the hearing the judge voiced skepticism about the Justice Department’s reasons for opposing the release of materials

A federal judge in Washington on Tuesday appeared ready to give the House Judiciary Committee access to at least some of the secret grand jury materials from the Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation.

Chief Judge Beryl A. Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, throughout a two-hour hearing, voiced skepticism about the Justice Department’s reasons for opposing the release of materials to the committee as part of an impeachment investigation into President Donald Trump.

That was most clear when Justice Department lawyer Elizabeth Shapiro told Howell that a federal judge in 1974 — who sent a sealed grand jury report and evidence to the committee for use in the Watergate impeachment investigation of President Richard Nixon — would rule differently if the issue arose today.

View the complete October 8 article by Todd Ruger on The Roll Call website here.

Maybe it’s time to untie the hands of special counsels

The way Mueller interpreted the special counsel’s limits to make a ‘prosecutorial judgment’ about a sitting president needs to be explored

ANALYSIS — Former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III made clear he wouldn’t discuss “deliberations within our office” when he took questions from two House committees July 24 about his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and what Donald Trump’s presidential campaign knew and did about it.

That’s unfortunate. Even if you put aside the argument that Mueller writing that his report “does not exonerate” Trump really means he is “guilty” or “should be impeached,” the way Mueller interpreted the special counsel’s limits to make what he called a “prosecutorial judgment” about a sitting president needs to be explored further.

The current state of politics means this won’t be the last time law enforcement is called upon to investigate a president or people close to the president, regardless who wins in 2020. And if a Democrat is inaugurated in 2021 and investigated after that, people may be surprised if investigators don’t take the hands-off approach Mueller did with Trump.

View the complete August 1 article by Herb Jackson on The Roll Call website here.

‘That isn’t what he said!’ Fox News host laughs in Mick Mulvaney’s face as he brazenly lies about Mueller’s testimony

AlterNet logoWhen former Special Counsel Robert Mueller testified before Congress on Wednesday, Democrats had him thoroughly debunk President Donald Trump’s lies about his investigation. The president wasn’t exonerated, the special counsel didn’t conclude there was “no obstruction,” it wasn’t “witch hunt,” and Russia interference in the 2016 election wasn’t a “hoax,” Mueller confirmed.

So when White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney appeared on Fox News Sunday morning in an interview with Chris Wallace, he decided to invent new lies to tell about Mueller.

“Mueller answered the single, one oustanding question,” Mulvaney said. “They asked him: Would you have indicted the president if he were not the president, and Mueller said, ‘absolutely not.’ He would not do that.”

View the complete July 28 article by Cody Fenwick on the AlterNet website here.

Trump just snapped at reporters for asking about Mueller’s comments about criminally charging him

Robert Mueller inflicted serious damage to the Trump administration during his testimony earlier today before the House Judiciary Committee. The former Special Counsel shredded once and for all the president’s claim that the Mueller Report exonerated him of any obstruction of justice.

Instead, Mueller made it abundantly clear that the report did not exonerate Trump.  He explained that even if he had wanted to bring charges against Trump for any of the ten occasions on which it appears Trumped sought to obstruct justice, the Special Counsel would not have been able to do so because existing Office of Legal Counsel protocol dictates that a sitting president can not be indicted.

The real bombshell came when Mueller said that he believes a president can be criminally charged once he leaves office, effectively opening up the possibility that Donald Trump may yet face justice for obstructing justice.

View the complete July 24 article by Natalie Dickinson on The Washington Post website here.