“Because they do not belong to our criminal justice vocabulary, the [special counsel’s office’s] inverted-proof-standard and ‘exoneration’ statements can be understood only aspoliticalstatements, issuing from persons (federal prosecutors) who in our system of government are rightly expectedneverto be political in the performance of their duties,” Flood wrote to Barr. “The inverted burden of proof knowingly embedded in the SCO’s conclusion shows that the special counsel and his staff failed in their duty to act as prosecutorsand only as prosecutors.”
Ok. There you have it, people. Mueller didn’t indict the president (but probably wishes he had at this point) because the OLC ruling is that it is improper to indict a sitting president, presumably because he has less of a presumption of innocence than a private citizen. Pretty sketchy but that’s the foundation of Mueller’s decision.
But according to Flood, any alternative to indictment is political. And as PROSECUTORS, they can only indict or not indict, which goes counter to the OLC ruling.
Too cute by half.
If no man is above the law, then one of the two statements above can not be true. I’m going with Flood’s assertion. A remedy is baked into the constitution and as far as I know, the writers didn’t say anything about it being political.
So, you know, nice try Emmet.
Besides, Mueller is a Republican.
Has anyone scheduled an appt with Mueller yet? There’s a cancellation. Maybe we can move him up.
I hope we can all keep a sense of humor in the days to come because when the former head of the FBI sends a scathing letter to the US AG accusing him of misleading the public it’s really not funny.
Plus, if Trump lays a hand on Hillary Clinton over some mythical email cache that never existed, there will be a bigger backlash than the the one that toppled Victor Yanukovych in Ukraine. There will be no replay of the Yulia Tymoshenko trials and prosecution no matter what Lindsay Graham wants. Don’t tempt us, Lindsay.
It just occurred to me that the reason why Nancy doesn’t want an impeachment is because what is going to come out is going to make the USA look like some second world developing country with a succession of corrupt dictators, instability and a shaky economic foundation. Too much of the world relies on a stable dollar. It could be the beginning of a catastrophe.
********************************
Bill Barr says he’s not coming to the House Judiciary hearing because he objects to being questioned by an experienced trial lawyer that Nadler has hired for the occasion. Just a reminder that it’s not a rarity for committees to hire outside counsel to do their questioning. It cuts down on the grandstanding and from what I’ve heard, it was done during the Watergate hearings.
In fact, it was done to Christine Blasey Ford last fall. That was notable in that the Senate chose to put the victim on trial, not the defendant. It was sort of an inversion if the more legitimate process but that’s the Republican Senate for you. They have power and they intend to abuse it.
Back to Barr.
Since Barr isn’t going to show up, why not see if Mueller can come? Oh, sure, he’s not scheduled until May 15. But I think it could be a real Perry Mason moment. Yeah, have Mueller clear up ambiguities and explain why the OLC ruling prevented him from charging Trump but how it didn’t stop him from accusing Trump of corruption that should be followed up by Congressional investigations and impeachment. (Mueller really wrote that. Incredible but true.)
So, get Mueller on the hot seat today. The surprise switch in witnesses will be riveting.
THEN dare Trump and Barr to fire the only honest Republican in Washington. Trump is counting on delays and stonewalling to prevent the sanitizing effect of sunshine from illuminating what this whole investigation has been about. I see no reason why the House has to cooperate with that when it the integrity of our elections and justice system are on the line.
Just do it.
**********************************
Mueller Q&A:
Please explain what the OLC ruling is and how that affected your decision to not indict Donald Trump.
Is Donald Trump Jr. indictable?
Were you in the process of inducting Don Jr. when Barr asked you to deliver your report?
If we could see what’s under the black redaction bars, would we feel alarmed about the safety and integrity of our elections next year?
Is our national security threatened by Donald Trump’s actions?
Add your own questions in the comments.
**********************************
I’ve gained some weight over the past 12 weeks. Most of it is water. My face is rounder. Looks like I just drank a 6 pack. I hate that especially because I haven’t had a drink since the first week of January. It’s mainly due to the steroids. But I have my last round 1 chemo infusion tomorrow. It seems to have done most of the job. Yay. I’ll have a two week break then another round of something else. So two weeks of some serious Austin Powers’ Elimination Complete pees.
The good news is I can still fit into the wide leg tan chinos I bought back in 1995. Apparently, they are back in style. Good thing I saved them. Saves money and all that.
Desperately need a vacation. (Like you have no idea) Taking suggestions for a weekender.
The Confluence 