Harris also caused Barr to stammer and stumble when she asked whether Trump or anyone else in the White House had ever asked him to investigate anyone; Barr didn’t say yes but didn’t say no. And questioning by other committee members revealed that Barr’s cavalier dismissal of one of the clearest acts of obstruction by the president — telling Donald McGahn, then White House counsel, to have Mueller fired — rests on a laughable, made-up distinction Barr pretends to draw between “firing” and “removing” someone.
Given how he has misled the public and Congress, Barr should be, um, removed. But, of course, Trump won’t do that. In Barr, he has the attorney general of his dreams, a personal advocate who puts loyalty above duty and honor. If Barr had nothing to hide, he would be delighted to face extended questioning by staff lawyers for the House Judiciary Committee. Instead, when Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) convened the committee Thursday, he sat across from an empty chair.
You don’t have to take my word that Barr was dishonest about the Mueller report. Take Mueller’s word, in the letter of complaint he sent to Barr on March 27: “The summary letter the Department sent to Congress and released to the public late in the afternoon of March 24 did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions.”
The full report, minus redactions, was eventually released — but only after Barr had preemptively decided to ignore its substantial evidence of an effective partnership between the Trump campaign and the Russians, as well as its overwhelming evidence that Trump committed multiple acts of obstruction after taking office.
“It was my baby,” Barr said, referring to the Mueller report, not our infantile president. But the report actually belongs to the American people, and while some Republican members of Congress refuse to read the whole thing, I hope their constituents do. It shows that Trump and those around him are chronic, venal liars who disgrace the White House and dishonor the nation.
Mueller’s letter of quiet outrage, which Barr described as “snitty,” suggests that the special counsel’s view of the import of his findings differs substantially from Barr’s. And that is why the nation needs to hear directly from Mueller.
Barr said his reaction to Mueller’s letter was to protest, “Bob, what’s with the letter? Why don’t you just pick up the phone and call me if there’s an issue?”
Mueller and Barr are both experienced bureaucrats. Both knew that by putting his concerns in writing — as opposed to a chummy phone call between old colleagues — Mueller was creating a record that would inevitably become public. I see why Barr considered that a “snitty” thing to do, because he knew it would put him on the spot.
Barr’s rationale for clearing Trump of obstruction is so shaky it is considered risible by many legal experts, including Fox News’s senior judicial analyst, former judge Andrew Napolitano, who wrote, “This sophistry would make the Jesuits proud.”
When one reads the Mueller report, the evidence for obstruction seems a slam dunk. The evidence for collusion, if not conspiracy, is also quite strong and has largely been overlooked. When Mueller does testify, I don’t expect fire and brimstone — that’s not who he is. But I do expect an honest, forthright, thorough tour through the evidence, led by an honorable public servant with respect for the Constitution and the interests of the nation at heart. In other words, what we should have gotten Wednesday, but didn’t.
Congress has a decision to make about impeachment, and voters have a decision to make about Trump. Hearing from Mueller will inform those choices.