- Mueller’s recent acquisition from the General Services Administration of emails from the Trump transition team before his inauguration; and
- congressional discovery of texts that disparaged the President between two members of Mueller’s investigative teams.
Before I get to that, here’s the background. In May of this year, President Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey, thus decapitating the criminal investigation of the collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government. Trump later acknowledged that he fired Comey “because of this Russia thing.” In doing so, he opened himself to charges of obstruction of justice.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein quickly appointed Mueller, a former head of the FBI, who was deeply respected by Democrats and Republicans alike, as a special counsel in order to continue the investigation. The appointment specifically authorized Mueller to bring criminal charges if appropriate.
Witch Hunt?
Since the discovery of the Russian involvement, President Trump has steadfastly dismissed any serious Russian meddling in the election despite the high confidence of the CIA, FBI, NSA and the Director of National Intelligence to the contrary. He soon began criticizing Mueller’s handling of the investigation as a “witch hunt.”
Late last week, the President’s attorneys renewed the attack on Mueller for his “illegal” acquisition of Trump campaign emails. Jennifer Rubin has thoroughly discredited the notion that emails on official government networks (“.gov”) have any expectation of privacy.
Even without reasonable basis, Fox News commentators piled on, calling the investigation “illegitimate” and “corrupt,” charging that Mueller had put the country “on the brink of becoming a banana republic.” They compared the FBI to the Soviet KGB, suggesting that the FBI has become America’s secret police and should be shut down.
Coup d'État?
The drumbeat has grown louder with recent accusations of partisanship within Mueller’s investigation. Here’s the story there:
In July, the FBI discovered text messages between one of Mueller’s lead investigators, Peter Strzok, and Lisa Page, an FBI lawyer no longer involved in the investigation. Strzok and Page were in the midst of an extra-marital affair and (mistakenly) believed the texts personal and private. Once Mueller discovered the texts, he immediately removed Strzok from the case.
Several weeks ago, however, in response to a congressional request, Mueller handed over to Congress text messages from the investigation, including those between Strzok and Page.
Republicans pounced, saying that Mueller’s investigation was tainted with “partisanship.” Some suggested the need for a second special counsel. Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn said that Mueller “needs to clean house of partisans.” “This bias is like an infection,” tweeted Republican representative, Matt Gaetz. “It’s an incurable cancer that’s inoperable, and we’ve got to end this Mueller probe once and for all.” “We are at risk of a coup d'état in this country if we allow an unaccountable person with no oversight to undermine the duly-elected President of the United States,” said Gaetz. Fox News commentators agreed.
A Few Facts
Regarding Mueller’s acquisition of the campaign emails, the most important thing to realize is that absolutely no evidence has been presented for wrongdoing; and independent experts have corroborated that Mueller acquired the emails properly.
Regarding Mueller’s acquisition of the campaign emails, the most important thing to realize is that absolutely no evidence has been presented for wrongdoing; and independent experts have corroborated that Mueller acquired the emails properly.
In the Strzok case, there no evidence of bias in his professional work; the texts themselves do express strong personal political opinions, but they were personal, intended only for his lover, expressing only his private opinions. Political opinions, however, do not usually disqualify one from unbiased legal investigation.
It’s important to note again that, once Mueller became aware of the texts, he dismissed Strzok immediately. This prompt, unequivocal action should dispel any suspicions of partisanship in the investigation.
Possible Republican Intentions
Since they have no reasonable basis, the attacks on Mueller are presumably preparatory, attempting to undermine in advance public perception of the investigation’s reliability.
What might the attacks be preparing for?
First, since Trump believes he has the power to fire Mueller, it’s possible that the Republican attacks are preparing to justify just that. I think this unlikely, however, for it would open the President to further charges of obstruction of justice and would and further compromise his dwindling public support. In addition, several Republican senators have openly warned Trump against this option. And Trump himself has been unusually consistent in denying his intention of fire Mueller, despite recurrent hints from his circle of advisors that it is in the works.
A second, more likely possibility is that these attacks are preparing to provide cover for congressional dismissal of the investigation. Having paved the way for the public’s mistrust of Mueller and what he finds, Republicans would have greater freedom simply to ignore his findings and recommendations.
A third purpose of these attacks is simply to distract from the entire issue. Since this kind of distraction has been a recurring theme during the Trump presidency, I’ll examine it at greater length in a future post.
Danger to Democracy
Fundamental to a democracy is equality before the law. Although frequently ignored in practice, the principle remains a basic public commitment. Whether Trump has violated the law or not, the raw political power transparently engaged in preventing a legal determination seriously undermines confidence in our democracy.
If our powerful elected officials are immune from wrongdoing, our democracy hangs by a thread.
