For more than two years the Dems and most of the media have told us that the Mueller Report would, once and for all, demonstrate conclusively that President Trump and members of his campaign staff colluded with the Russians to “steal” the 2016 presidential election. President Trump was a traitor, a Russian spy, and/or a dupe of Vladimir Putin. Members of his campaign, his family, or, perhaps, President Trump, himself, would be indicted and go to prison. Mr. Trump would likely be impeached and maybe removed from office. Furthermore, we were told Mueller was doing a thorough, excellent job. Just wait, they said.
Let’s not forget the infamous statements of many of our elected officials, who were relentless in their criticisms of Mr. Trump. A sampling:
1. Adam Schiff promised us he was in possession of a “stream of evidence.”
2. Tom Perez claimed there was a “mountain of evidence” against Mr. Trump.
3. Jerry Nadler assured us “we know there was collusion.”
4. Richard Blumenthal pontificated that “the evidence is pretty clear.”
These comments and those of many others were misleading, irresponsible and, perhaps, even seditious. Their sole purpose was to destroy the Trump presidency. All they succeeded in doing, however, was to divide the country and distract the government from dealing with real issues, such as healthcare, border security and infrastructure.
Last month AG William Barr and his assistant, Rod Rosenstein, issued a summary report that did not indict anyone or demonstrate any collusion. This failed to satisfy the aforementioned critics. They demanded Barr release the full report. Now, the full report has been released, and, guess what, it, too, did not reveal what the Dems and media had expected and virtually assured the American people it would. The 448 page report, which few people will bother to read in its entirety, can be boiled down succinctly to the following conclusion:
1. Russia did, indeed, interfere with the 2016 presidential election, but there was no indication that it managed to alter a single vote, let alone affect the outcome.
2. The investigation did not establish that Mr. Trump or members of his campaign had colluded with the Russians.
3. The Report enumerated “multiple acts,” however, that were possibly capable of “exerting undue influence” over the investigation, but the evidence was not sufficient to make a case for obstruction.
So, it can be concluded that the report (a) cleared Mr. Trump and his campaign of collusion, but, (b) regarding obstruction, it was inconclusive. It did not find the president guilty, but, on the other hand, it did not fully exonerate him either. To me, that is “lawyer-speak” for saying the president was “not guilty.” Not “innocent,” but “not guilty,” similar to a jury verdict in a trial. After spending two years, $400 million, issuing 2,800 subpoenas, reviewing thousands of pages of testimony, and interviewing 500 witnesses a crack team of lawyers, most of whom had a strong political bias against Mr. Trump and had no reason to go easy on him, and had carte blanche to do whatever they saw fit, was unable to find enough evidence to charge Mr. Trump or any member of his campaign with any crime.
Unfortunately, the vague language cited above has provided critics with an opening to claim that further investigation could/should/would find the elusive conclusive evidence of a crime.
It should be noted that, according to a recent Reuters Poll, an astonishing 70% said the report had not changed their mind, and 50% still believe that Mr. Trump or a member of his campaign coordinated with Russia to influence the 2016 election. Honestly, I don’t know what to make of those numbers. I believe they fly in the face of reality.
Trump’s critics have refused to accept the conclusions of the report. In their eyes, Mueller has failed to deliver the goods, i.e. evidence of treason, or, at least, collusion. In their eyes, he has transformed from a “hero” to a “zero.”
The issuance of the Mueller Report should have been the end of the investigation. Instead, it appears to be merely another step on a road to nowhere. Staunch Trump-haters, such as Nadler and Schiff, are not satisfied and have stated their intention to commence their own investigations. The conclusions of the Report did not conform to their preconceived narrative. They have already issued dozens of subpoenas. It is within their constitutional purview to do so, but I don’t know what they expect to uncover that a comprehensive two-year special council investigation did not. It looks like these investigations will continue up until the 2020 election or even beyond. What a waste of time, money and resources.
Personally, I fail to see how Mr. Trump can be guilty of obstruction when he freely turned over millions of pages of documents upon request, and he did not invoke “executive privilege” even once. Contrast that with the Obama Administration, which invoked EP many times, and whose Attorney General, Eric Holder, refused to hand over documents relating to “Fast and Furious” and refused to appear before Congress when subpoenaed (for which he was cited for contempt). Contrast that with Bill Clinton’s mysterious meeting with Loretta Lynch on the tarmac when the Justice Department was in the midst of investigating Hillary. Contrast that with Hillary destroying some 35,000 emails and the accompanying hard drive. I am not an attorney, but common sense tells me that those actions constitute obstruction.
Media outlets, such as CNN and MSNBC, have, for the most part, expressed a uniformly negative opinion of Mr. Trump regarding the special counsel investigation. Often, when I watched news reports on those stations I have observed panels of several commentators all of whom think alike and express the same opinions. No diversity, no fair and balanced commentary. They just reinforce their own preconceived opinions by associating only with others who think as they do. Once, I observed a nine-person panel on CNN arranged in a semi-circle all parroting similar views. Talk about a “circular firing squad! No wonder the Mueller Report freaked them out.
Additionally, many Dems and their supporters in the media have commenced attacking AG William Barr. They are accusing him of bias toward the president. Some of the kinder characterizations of him are “toady and “lackey.” Some other examples by our media’s “crack” reporters and commentators:
1. Chris Matthews (MSNBC)- [This was] “an inside job.”
2. Chris Cuomo (CNN) – “Barr is the president’s ‘fixer.'”
3. Michele Goldberg (NYT) – “The US is being ruled by a military junta.”
This is totally inappropriate, irresponsible and dangerous. Let’s not forget that Rod Rosenstein, no friend of Mr. Trump’s, assisted Barr in reviewing and releasing the report.
CONCLUSION
For two years most of the media has vilified Mr. Trump. It has repeatedly told the American people he was a spy, a Nazi, a racist a tool of the Russians. He “stole” the election. Etc. They have lied to and misled the American people. They have assumed guilt without due process (similar to their treatment of Justice Kavanaugh and the Covington kids). Now, that they have been proven wrong, they should offer an apology or, at the very least, acknowledge their misdeeds. But, don’t count on it. Instead, they are doubling down, in effect, by encouraging the Dems to conduct their own investigations and talking of impeachment.
Time to let it go, people, and get to the business of governing the country. That was what you were elected to do. As stated above, the Mueller Report did not put forth any evidence that Russia’s interference changed one vote. Mr. Trump won fair and square. He is the legitimate president. Cease trying to overthrow the will of the people. Stop this nonsense of impeachment. It’s a loser, politically. You hate Mr. Trump. I get it. So, do it the right way. Nominate a better candidate in 2020, and win the next election.
We Built It Blog by Larry Jacob 