Of all the coverage I’ve read on soon to be/now retired Mueller, this article from the Heisenberg Report resounded the most. Thanks to my buddy Pyrognosis for sharing.
Although Mueller’s remarks speak for themselves, America would be remiss not to note that the special counsel clearly wanted the public to understand that the “No Obstruction” catchphrase is not consistent with the investigation’s conclusions. “Obstruction”, Mueller said, “strikes at the core of the ability to get at the truth.” He repeated (almost verbatim) a key line from the report:
If we had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.
By many accounts, every intonation and turn of phrase is intentional when Mueller speaks. If there’s any truth to that, Mueller’s emphasis on the words “not” and “could” when he said his office was constrained by regulations in their ability to indict Trump, is key. Nothing in Mueller’s description of the obstruction probe suggests the special counsel’s office agrees with attorney general William Barr about Trump’s innocence with regard to obstruction.
I’d recommend checking out the article in full at the link above and listen to the clips.[Read more…]