in the vicinity ofthe video Howard Kurtz: What was the point of the Mueller-probe, could not free the President?
‘MediaBuzz’ host Howard Kurtz weighs in at a Special Council Robert Müller works in the television statement addressing the Russia probe and his resignation.
Robert Müller is trying, ever so carefully, as if weighing his words on a scale to give a neutral summary of his report, and then disappear from public life.
Good luck with that.
If you boil down to five words, the approach of the outgoing special counsel, it was this: “The report is my testimony.”
Still, prognosticators, and politicians of all stripes stormed to analyze every syllable, in the light most favorable to their views. About the only thing that everyone can agree, is not that Müller want to testify, and is not planning to say much to show if he is forced up on the hill.
Robert Müller: the Charging of the President with a crime was not an option we could consider
Speaking publicly for the first time since the release of Russia report, special counsel Robert Mueller says there were ‘multiple, systematic effort” with the presidential elections that his team found there is not enough evidence to charge a larger conspiracy, and that, if it was the confidence that the President does not commit a crime, the report would have said so.
The head is to take that Müller would have it, he would not be President trump, makes his report relieve, but that was the truncated TV version.
JUDGE NAPOLITANO: MÜLLER-STATEMENT ‘NO GOOD NEWS’ FOR TROMBONE
The key phrase: “If we had confidence that the President did not commit obvious crime, we would have told us so. We have not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime.”
The reason is that Müller decided that he was bound by an old memo from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel concluded that a seat can not be charged at the end of President.
“Charging the President with a crime, therefore, was not an option we could consider,” he said.
BRET BAIER: MÜLLER-STATEMENT ON RUSSIA PROBE IS ‘NO COLLUSION, NO DISABILITY’
It is worth noting that this is much different from what William Barr said, as he offered his famous four-page summary. The attorney General said then, to say that Müller”, but for the OLC opinion, he would have been a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that it was a crime.”
But, according to Muller yesterday, he could not make the decision, because the DOJ memo.
The Miller’s statement, that many commentators (view to the left and to the right), as a handover to the Congress cited that the same note: “says The opinion, that the Constitution requires, to accuse a process other than the criminal justice system officially, a sitting President of misconduct.” The I-word would be, of course. And Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and other Democrats now say Müller gave the house a green light for the start of the hearings, although Jerry Nadler said only that all options are on the table.
DEMS RAMP-UP CALLS FOR TRUMP CHARGES, ACCORDING TO MÜLLER, IS TALKING ABOUT RUSSIA-PROBE
Trump, tweeted that “nothing changes” (true); that it is “closed, not enough evidence” (unclear); and that “the case is!” (true).
I believe that Mueller, a former FBI Director, is trying once commanded respect from both sides, has been, remains independent. But these troubling questions remain.
HOWIE MEDIA BUZZMETER SUBSCRIBE to the PODCAST, A REEF OF TODAY’s hottest STORIES
When Müller took the view early on that he was not up against an Oval Office why an expensive two-year investigation in the first place?
By this logic, as Brit Hume pointed out, if Müller had found evidence of collusion between the trump campaign, and Russia, he would not have said it. He could report, if he found there was no consultation, as he did in the end.
Brit Hume: There is something defective in Müller’s argument that he was not impeachment of the President
If the Department of Justice-preventing guidelines, special counsel Robert Müller from the store sits a President, then he was a fool’s errand from the beginning, says Fox News senior political analyst Brit Hume.
The same restriction leads to the widespread media interpretation, the Miller’s have wanted to bring a charge against Trump, because he felt he could not clear him, but that his hands were tied.
Note that Müller could have chosen not to vote with the DOJ memo, and to pursue criminal charges anyway, if he thought they were justified.
Note also that Barr expected to Müller’s view, a recommendation on penalty, but Müller came back to the AG.
I’ve had people ask, why Müller not only say in the report that his judgment Trump obstructed justice, but we are blocked from action.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
As an old justice Department reporter, I can tell you, it is a very strong prosecutorial practice — known to be disregarded by James Comey in the Hillary case, that you are charged with either or shut up. In other words, the Prosecutor with the task to secure, or has a poverty certificate fall, not trash someone’s reputation without charge.
Of course, the Miller was obliged to submit a report, but he tried not yesterday its thumb on the scales of justice.
Nevertheless, the media have together found out that Müller wants the house to do what he could not be, if he by these words or not.