Tag: Mueller

Join Jim and Greg for a special 9/11 anniversary edition of the podcast. They both share their indelible memories of that horrific day and why it is vital for us to remember the evil perpetrated against us and how the very best of America rose to the occasion. Then they dive into the three martinis of the day, starting with a GOP voter registration surge in Pennsylvania. They also fume as 31 phones connected to the Mueller special counsel team were wiped clean before the Justice Department could examine them. And they react to the Biden campaign spokesman who was outraged that he would be asked if Joe Biden uses a teleprompter during interviews and other events – but never answered the question.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and guest host Gregory Knapp discuss growing concerns in the Democratic Party over Joe Biden’s age with the second round of debates incoming. They analyze Rahm Emanuel’s editorial piece warning Democratic presidential candidates to unite the party in the primary or risk losing the general election. And they share a laugh over Adam Schiff’s sudden criticism of Robert Mueller’s recent testimony lacking an adequate ‘narrative.’

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America recap the Mueller hearings, including Democrat Hakeem Jeffries’ embarrassing exchange with the former special counsel. They react to the resignation of Puerto Rican Governor Ricardo Rossello. And they discuss Kamala Harris declining in the polls after her post-debate bounce last month.

After sharing some initial thoughts on the Mueller hearings, Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America applaud Ruth Bader Ginsburg for criticizing Democratic calls to pack the Supreme Court with more justices. They share a chuckle over the growing angst among Democrats over progressive donor Tom Steyer’s presidential bid. And they roll their eyes as hardly any members of Congress ignore the main point of the Mueller report – that Russia is intent on meddling with our elections.

The Unraveling of the Russian Collusion Hoax


Am I the only one who senses something downright Maoist in Mueller’s innovative “not exonerated” standard? Can one be indicted for non-exoneration? Whatever happened to guilty/not guilty? Or prosecutable/not prosecutable?

I guess that’s what Joe Biden would dismiss as “white man’s jurisprudence.” “Too binary,” as the kids would say.

I can hear Mueller’s defenders read directly from his hagiography: “But he’s a Republican!” Spare me. At the highest echelons of Washington’s political class, the difference between Republican and Democrat is about as meaningful as the Yankees’ pinstripes and road grays: the entire dugout is still on the same team. (That is to say: lawyers.) Mueller’s well-practiced mien of excruciating probity notwithstanding, his impeach-signaling to Democrats is about as subtle as when my tax guy kicks me in the shin beneath the table when I go on too long in answering questions from the IRS.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America discuss how the private sector is picking up the slack for the bureaucrats when it comes to border security. They also discuss the New York Times revealing their economic models predict President Trump winning re-election next year. And they laugh as Michael Wolff’s new book on the Trump White House already has it’s most salacious claim shot down by Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

The President’s Privilege


The political winds are howling in Washington. The Democrats in the House of Representatives led by Representative Jerrold Nadler, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, are forging forward with a contempt citation against President Trump’s Attorney General William Barr. The charge: the failure to turn over to the House Committee a full and unredacted version of the Mueller report, along with the evidentiary record that Mueller compiled. The objective: to breathe new life into the obstruction charge on which Mueller declined to exonerate the President.

In a previous column, I argued that that the obstruction charge against Trump was relatively weak. Following the Nadler offensive, President Trump claimed that executive privilege covered all documents and witness testimony that formed the basis of the Mueller report. This broad claim of executive privilege has brought forth a torrent of protest from the president’s many detractors. For example, Michael Conway, former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the impeachment of Richard Nixon in 1974, proclaimed that “Trump’s executive privilege claims over the Mueller report are as preposterous as Nixon’s claims during Watergate.”

It is of course difficult to predict whether Trump’s claim of executive privilege will prevail in whole or in part. Attorney General Barr surely seems on strong ground, wholly without any appeal to executive privilege, in insisting that he cannot release material contained in the redacted reports that he is legally required to keep confidential. In addition, as Professor Jack Goldsmith of Harvard has pointed out, the Clinton Justice Department’s regulations governing all independent special counsels, Mueller included, give to Barr, as Attorney General, “ultimate responsibility for the matter and how it is handled.” Barr’s basic obligation under the law was to “notify” Congress of the receipt of the Mueller report, and to release to Congress those portions of it that he “may determine” would be consistent with the public interest, so long as he complied “with applicable legal restrictions.” All of Mueller’s investigatory work ended with the submission of his report on March 22, and his public criticism of Barr in his letter of March 27, insisting that his summary of the report “did not fully capture the context, nature, and substance of this Office’s work and conclusions,” were outside the scope of his original charge, as White House Counsel Emmet Flood pointed out in his powerful rebuttal letter of April 19.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America pour three crazy martinis.  They marvel at the pathetic attacks on Attorney General Bill Barr from Senate Democrats – from ad hominem attacks to slamming legal positions they held strongly until the past few weeks.  They also groan as Hillary Clinton continues to insist the Russians actually changed votes to cost her the 2016 election.  And they scratch their heads as Joe Biden insists China is not really a competitor to the U.S.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are exasperated as Democrats and the media breathlessly report that Robert Mueller disagrees with Attorney General Bill Barr’s summary of the report since the very same story confirms that Mueller did not find the summary inaccurate.  They’re also disappointed as Juan Guaido’s effort to remove Nicholas Maduro from power in Venezuela appears to be a failure.  And they applaud MSNBC for inadvertently explaining the purpose of our second amendment while watching Venezuela’s military crush protesters in the streets.

Using Mueller’s Standard, Did Obama Obstruct Justice?


Andrew McCarthy said Thursday night that, using Mueller’s standard, almost any action by a president could be obstruction of justice. In 2016, the DOJ was investigating HRC’s illegal server. We know that the investigation was a bit of a joke. HRC was not put under oath. A person of interest was allowed to serve as her lawyer; many members of her team were given immunity. Obama in April said that she hadn’t done anything wrong. Certainly she did not intend to do harm (in his opinion).

The statute does not require intent. Comey was writing his exculpatory memo before the investigation was completed. The AG secretly met with Bill Clinton. Comey then let her off in his press conference. It sounds like obstruction of justice to me.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America welcome Deputy Attorney Rod Rosenstein confirming that Attorney General Bill Barr is conducting due diligence in redacting classified information and grand jury information before releasing the Mueller report and that Barr’s letter to Congress accurately captured the conclusions in the report.  They also scold Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for letting his personal animosity against former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli obstruct President Trump from possibly making a great choice to lead the Department of Homeland Security.  And they react to former FBI Director Jim Comey’s pathetic claim that conducting electronic surveillance isn’t really spying.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America try to keep up as 21 Democrats are now either running for president or seriously thinking about it.  They also break down Joe Biden’s apology for making several women feel uncomfortable over the years and discuss how both Republicans and Democrats are approaching this controversy with respect to 2020.  And they get a kick out of anonymous sources breathlessly telling the New York Times and Washington Post that Attorney General Bill Barr badly distorted the findings of the Mueller report.

Member Post


If you believe, as I do, that a significant component of President Trump’s generally low approval rating has always been the unprecedented barrage of sustained negative coverage from a blatantly left-leaning press, then it’s reasonable to assume that events which diminish the press in the public’s eye will have the effect of elevating Trump. With […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Truth Cries Out


Walking through downtown Mesa, AZ, the Monday after the Mueller report news broke, one of the public art statues leaped out at me. A newsboy stands astride his stack of newspapers, waving a copy over his head and shouting out the news. The front page has a one-word headline, all caps and bold: “TRUTH.” What a contrast to the sordid state of our current “journalism.”

The background is littered with paint cans and construction barriers. This is part of a facade renovation for downtown Main Street. How much more does our news business need renovation?

Walking by the same spot a few hours later, the facade work was done. Yet, there was no change in the businesses behind the facade. This was no reality television business makeover, with retrained staffs and refreshed concepts.

Mueller: This Should Not Be The End


Mueller has concluded that there was no collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. After two years of concerted attacks by a biased press and a corrupt bureaucracy, the collusion fantasy has been laid to rest.

Now let’s talk about collusion.

‘Either You Did It on Purpose or…’


Ann Althouse is writing this morning about the media reaction to the Barr statement on the Mueller report. She quotes the WaPo:

“Russiagate” has been a news media obsession since Trump’s victory in November 2016…. The cable news networks, particularly CNN and MSNBC, have added hundreds of hours of discussion about the topic, too. The story undoubtedly was an important factor in shaping voters’ perceptions before the 2018 midterm election, in which Democrats won control of the House. But the conclusion of the inquiry has put a question once hazily debated into sharp focus: Did the mainstream news media mislead?..

Member Post


It will be interesting to see if Corsi can breach sovereign immunity and make Mueller pay. It would be entertaining to see Mueller cross examined and discovery could reveal much about Mueller and his questionable team. Maybe he could serve time in Massachusetts where four men were incarcerated who the FIB knew were innocent (it’s […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

The Mueller Report: A Damning Indictment… of Something


As we wait more or less breathlessly for the release of the Mueller Report, the assumption appears to be growing that it will be, in the eloquent words of Secretary Clinton, a nothing-burger.

But it will not be a nothing-burger, even if it reports no evidence of collusion. Because we’ve spent more than two years obsessing over this, driven by a press that pronounced almost daily the beginning of the end for the Trump administration. If there was no there there, then someone has some explaining to do. Because many of us thought this was pretty obviously cooked up from the start, to hide either Clinton campaign embarrassment or, worse, Clinton/Obama collusion to undermine the 2016 Trump campaign.

Member Post


All over the net today are references to an ABC podcast  with former Trump attorney John Dowd. The link is here. Since he was there at the very beginning of the investigations and is a long-time and highly-respected Washington D.C. insider, it’s definitely worth listening to. Amazingly, he claims it would be against Justice Department […]

Join Ricochet!

This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

Quote of the Day: “Not Law but Fraud”


In Mark Helprin’s 2012 novel In Sunlight and in Shadow*, we meet a returning WWII veteran, Harry Copeland, who inherits the family business from his deceased father. When the business is threatened by a mafia boss, resulting in the death of one employee, and Harry himself nearly beaten to death, Harry learns that he will find no help from law enforcement or any other authority because all of them are being paid off. Harry must decide whether he will take matters into his own hands — eliminating the mafia boss himself.

“My enemy is not the law,” he found himself saying under his breath as he walked — talking to himself was not a good sign — “but the enemy of the law, against which the law is too weak to defend itself. If the law is complicit in crime, is it the law? If, when not complicit, it not only fails to protect but proscribes self-protection, then it is not law but fraud. Anarchy arises not from those who defend themselves by natural right, but from officials who fail in their calling, look the other way, succumb to threats and blackmail, or who are themselves criminal. If without defending me the law says I can’t defend myself, it is no longer the law, and I have to defy it.”

As you might guess, I could not read this passage without immediately thinking of the last two years of the Mueller investigation. Given all we have learned about the involvement of the DOJ and the FBI (et al) in inventing the Russia Collusion narrative out of whole cloth, convicting people on process crimes — crimes that didn’t exist apart from the investigation themselves, we must ask whether what we are seeing in Washington is law . . . or fraud? If the law is complicit in ca rime, is it the law?