Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
A Tale of Two Obstructions
Every Republican remembers with disgust the video of Bill Clinton glowering into the camera and declaring “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie. Never. These allegations are false.”
It’s worth revisiting why that statement was so infuriating. It wasn’t because we — well, let me speak for myself, I — was outraged at the idea of a president having an affair with a young intern (though that was part of it). No, it was the lying. Bill Clinton lied and lied and lied. He even lied under oath. Lying is cheating. Lying displays contempt for other people.
Today, the Attorney General of the United States asserts, in terms that should make Bill Clinton smile, that because the president of the United States was “frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks” he could not be considered guilty of obstruction of justice.
Other Republicans echo this line, arguing that the nature of the false allegations against President Trump bruited in the press and among some Democrats — that he was a Russian sleeper agent; that the Russians had “kompromat” on him; that some accusations arose from Clinton surrogates — tainted the entire investigation and justified his flamboyant attempts to obstruct it. But the fact that some allegations are outlandish doesn’t mean all allegations are false. Bill Clinton was accused of running illegal drugs through the Mena Airport in Arkansas and being complicit in the death of Vince Foster. By Mr. Barr’s logic, it was therefore ok that he lied under oath about Monica Lewinsky.
“No underlying crime, therefore no obstruction,” they say. But Bill Clinton encouraged his secretary to lie about Monica Lewinsky to avoid embarrassment, not to hide a crime. Many Democrats, but zero Republicans said that that excused it.
Not only do Republicans utterly reverse themselves about the importance of truth telling, they also lean in. William Barr told the world that the president, “fully cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation.” This is laughable. Yes, he turned over some documents, and permitted aides to be interviewed, but he fired the Director of the FBI and told Russian visitors that this relieved great “pressure due to the Russia thing.” He ordered Robert Mueller to be fired for risible “conflicts” (such as asking for his old FBI job back, which was itself a lie). He lied about the meeting in Trump Tower; tasked Corey Lewandowski with ordering Attorney General Jeff Sessions to unrecuse himself and instruct the special counsel to limit his inquires only to future election interference. He asked his White House counsel to lie about whether he had ordered Mueller fired. He claimed he could not recall events 30 times in response to written questions. He repeatedly refused requests to sit for an in-person interview, and dangled pardons to those facing criminal trials to discourage cooperation with law enforcement. “Stay strong,” our don-in-chief told his felonious former lawyer — “hang in there.” And throughout it all, he kept up a steady campaign of delegitimization of the Mueller inquiry as a “witch hunt” and a “hoax.”
Anyone would have been upset, Trump’s defenders explain, at being falsely accused. It was his consciousness of innocence, not guilt, that caused him to lash out.
Really? Does that seem logical? An innocent man would have thrown open his files, freely testified, left the investigator unmolested (verbally and with regard to firing), and kept his mouth shut about former associates under indictment.
Besides, Trump’s motive may have been concern that the investigation would uncover other wrongdoing — such as tax evasion or paying off porn stars in the midst of a presidential campaign. Or it’s possible that hiding more contacts with agents of the Kremlin was the true motive — and that it worked. Mueller’s report says that, in addition to Trump’s failure to testify and faulty memory, many witnesses lied, destroyed evidence, and successfully encrypted communications. Given these clear acts of obstruction, Mueller’s report noted, “the Office cannot rule out the possibility that the unavailable information would shed additional light on (or cast in a new light) the events described in the report.” That is what Mr. Trump and his minions call “total exoneration.”
None of this is to suggest that the Congress should impeach Trump. There are prudential reasons to avoid that course. The president would relish the mud fight, voters are already exhausted, and an election is only 18 months away. But the Mueller Report provides abundant evidence that the president attempted to obstruct justice and abused his power. The past few weeks have seen the Attorney General and most of the Republican party distort those findings and attempt to hoodwink the Republican rank and file.
Is lying wrong? Depends upon the meaning of the word “is.”
Depends on the meaning of the word “Mona.”
Got to love it! Yet again, we have a post that attacks Trump Supporters. Minion? Really?
So, every lawyer I know says that sitting for an in-person interview was a bad idea because it was a perjery Trap. Two years of investigation and all Muller has is crimes from the past or process crimes.
I guess Mona thinks Scooter Libby had it coming.
What a horrible, disgusting article, on Trump, yet again from Mona Charen.
Got to love being insulted on the Main Page and being paying for it.
HAHAHAHAHA.
Sure, No innocent was ever railroaded in a massive purely political investigation by a prosecutor with a stable of partisan hacks and unlimited funds. Unpossible.
Mueller also can’t rule out the existence of Unicorns and Space aliens.
What a weird standard of proof lives in Mona’s head.
So now we are to imagine lies as we accuse people of lying.
Bill Clinton did lie, as was proven. He was disbarred as an attorney. The facts were clear and open to all.
Trump made no lies that we know of, but Mona would have us imagine them to maintain her desperate and baseless belief that Trump should not be president.
I have no idea who Mona is or her background, but this desperation reeks of an attempt to protect a political machine rather than to safeguard some precious sense of propriety. In other words, she doth protest too much.
Moderator Note:
Personal attackIn the words of DJT: [redacted], especially considering all Trump has done for Israel and the fact that Mona is Jewish which should give her pause before badmouthing Trump.
An innocent man would have thrown open his files, freely testified, left the investigator unmolested (verbally and with regard to firing), and kept his mouth shut about former associates under indictment
IDK. For 2 full years? When desperate prosecutors are looking for any little thing to nail you on? And bloodthirsty media is stoking them? Sorry, I can’t really blame him for his mini-obstructions of this circus. Telling people getting squeezed to “stay strong”? Sorry, impeaching over that will only lead to future presidents getting harassed for years.
Luckily, your podcasts have generally been pretty Mueller free, at least.
It’s hard to author a responsible post when one can no longer read the material. So I’ll go “what about.” Rhetorically. Has Ms. Charen ever written a column about the hijinx in the FBI and Obama Justice Dept. during the campaign? Then again, I might have missed one. We’re talking years here.
Yeah, if you have ever seen Dateline or 48 Hours you know that it is not uncommon for innocent people to have their words twisted in order to make them look guilty . . . and that is by prosecutors and police who are looking for the truth (and to close out their cases). If it happens in those situations, how much worse will it be in an investigation that is 100% political with no real concern for justice?
There must be a math theorem, or a term in physics, that stipulates a lengthy list of the trivial, inconsequential, and non-events does not become substantial no matter how long the list.
In politics, the term is TDS.
-“fully cooperated with the Special Counsel’s investigation.” This is laughable. Yes, he turned over some documents, and permitted aides to be interviewed.
First non-event : this is not laughable. Two years of SC interrogations proceeded uninterrupted, with resources that exceeded $20 million.
-He ordered Robert Mueller to be fired
Second non-event : Mueller was not fired.
-He lied about the meeting in Trump Tower.
Third non-event : “the meeting” had no importance.
-tasked Corey Lewandowski with ordering Attorney General Jeff Sessions to unrecuse himself.
Fourth non-event : Attorney General Jeff Sessions did not unrecuse himself.
This is becoming tedious.
-“Stay strong,” our don-in-chief told his felonious former lawyer — “hang in there.”
OMG !
-And throughout it all, he kept up a steady campaign of delegitimization of the Mueller inquiry as a “witch hunt” and a “hoax.”
It was a witch-hunt and a hoax—just wait for AG Barr to announce the results of his investigations.
-Does that seem logical? An innocent man would have thrown open his files, freely testified, left the investigator unmolested
(This is now, just tedious repetition of the “non-cooperation” non-event) Maybe, Mona, you would have; an innocent man does not drop his pants and take abuse.
-other wrongdoing — such as tax evasion
This is just ignorant : His taxes are under audit.
-Trump’s motive may have been concern that the investigation would uncover other wrongdoing — such as paying off porn stars
This is certified TDS : the payoff was revealed to the public prior to November 4, and is not against the law.
My good friend Mona, contrary to Clinton, here, there is no cigar in the Oval Office.
Thousands and thousands of pages of documents released to the Mueller team. Zero claims of executive privilege. Zero. And, yet, he must be hiding something!!
Mona should listen to more Byron York podcasts.
Sad.
Yeah, since when is it illegal to pay off a blackmailer?
Ugly.
Given the time and resources put into this, along with complete access to documents and people with no claim of executive privilege. There are only two reasons Mueller could not find obstruction.
1. There is no “there there”
2. Mueller and his whole team are historically bad at their jobs.
Putting aside petty name calling like “minions” , some of this article verges on Conspiracy Theory.
I understand people not liking Trump but could we at least get someone with a strong argument and a better grasp of the documented facts to represent this side?
It seems perfectly logical to lash out angrily when you’re accused of something so ridiculous. And no, you do not get to use the “If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear from the FBI” method. Especially with Mueller running the show.
This reminds me of the Kavanaugh hearings.
“Judge Kavanaugh ran a rape gang!”
(Kavanaugh lashes out at the sheer audacity of such a lie.)
“Oh my goodness, he’s so angry! He’s clearly unfit!”
Just the other day someone here used the phrase “persistently insincere obtuseness in the face of the obvious” to describe exactly this kind of intellectually dishonest pap from a similar buffoon. What a joke.
I don’t really blame Mueller(although he took too long). I think this whole thing is on the media. So, Trump gets the “the media made me do bad things” exemption. Its truly difficult for an innocent person to trust justice will win out in the end when media is spinning largely false speculation/rumors 24/7 for 2 years. Yep, same applies to Kavanaugh.
It’s not TDS. It’s a coordinated attack from vested interests. It’s not about truth or justice, morality or ethics. This is a feeble rationale. It’s become obvious she is a mouthpiece for the corrupt elements in the IC
Mona has no credibility with me anymore.
This Donald Trump is the most brilliant, idiot, narcissistic, machiavellian, oafish, treasonous, genius, undetectable secret Russian spy ever … he just may be a Russian spy bot disguised as Donald Trump!
Moderator Note:
Rude[redacted]
I never thought the impeachment of Bill Clinton was merited, much less strategic or smart. I agree that it was based on his lying under oath and not because of sex, as his cronies asserted. But unfortunately for the Republic, it was a lie about sex, something our judicial procedures are not very well equipped, much less able, to address.
I also think it’s possible to obstruct an investigation even though no actual crime has been committed (or even, as in this case,
chargedalleged).But, with regard to obstruction, my question is simply this: if the evidence is as clear as you (Mona) assert, why oh why oh why oh why oh why did Mueller not report that the evidence gathered formed the basis for a potential prosecution? Or dispute Rosenstein and Barr’s determination that it did not?
The Director of the FBI was undermining his administration, also clearly either a hack or bad at his job given the Clinton email investigation
Mueller should have never been hired due to being Comey’s friend. That was a conflict. Rosenstein should have fired him for staffing his team with nothing but partisans out to get Trump instead of a bipartisan staff to look at all angles.
Rosenstein probably should have been fired for not clearly defining parameters of the investigation once it was obvious there were issues with Mueller’s team re: Strzok and Page.
Mueller should have been fired for not doing due diligence on his team re: Strzok and Page.
Let’s see an innocent man would not have asserted executive privilege for the Mueller Team to interview anyone in his circle, and an innocent man would not have asserted executive privilege to redact those portions of the report that reflected the information gleaned by the Team in the course of those interviews. Oh, whoops, Trump didn’t assert executive privilege. He did throw open his files. The only thing he didn’t do was to enter a perjury trap.
Mona, I used to listen to you, but my heart weeps at you making common cause with the enemies of liberty. We used to talk about all the “useful idiots” who supported the soviet states, and now we have “useful idiots” who are aiding the ones overturning our constitution and seeking to reverse a democratic election. (sigh)
“Here is a theory for which no evidence exists whatsoever, and therefore it must be true!”
Conspiracy Theory 101 Grade: C-.
The best part is that is was “a lie about sex” that was wrapped up in a larger effort of perjury and subornation of perjury as the defense strategy by the highest law enforcement officer in the land in a civil rights lawsuit…clarifying for all that civil rights laws aren’t really all that important and civil right courts / judges aren’t really to be taken seriously. All good to know going forward.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JRLCBb7qK8
Having watched a ton of those shows the conclusion my wife and have come to is never ever talk to the police or a prosecutor especially if you are innocent.