Tag: obstruction of justice

A Question for Historians: Robert Mueller’s Incapacity


To say that Robert S. Mueller III did not distinguish himself in his Congressional testimony Wednesday would be an understatement. His answers were halting, when not evasive, and he repeatedly had to ask that a question be repeated. Long before his appearance before the Judiciary and Intelligence committees, there had been rumors that he was senile.

His testimony today suggests two possibilities: that he really is senile, or that he is pretending to be so in order to avoid having to explain his conduct as Special Prosecutor. If the latter is true, it had to do with his reluctance to discuss his decision to hire a host of hyper-partisan Democrats, such as Andrew Weissman, to do the footwork on the case and with his failure to investigate the origins of the Fusion GPS report and to consider the possibility that the Russians made clever use of the Clinton campaign.

I am, however, inclined to suppose that the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation is senile and that he was already suffering from dementia when he was named Special Prosecutor. This would explain a great deal. If, in effect, the hyper-partisan Andrew Weissman was in charge, it would explain why, though by then they knew that he was innocent, the Special Prosecutor and his team did not exonerate Donald Trump of collusion with the Russians prior to the 2018 midterms. It would also explain the absence of any curiosity concerning Christopher Steele and the Fusion GPS report. And, of course, it would explain all the malarkey about obstruction of justice.

Member Post


Trump was completely vindicated on the charges of Russian collusion which had been the point of the whole counter-intelligence investigation, to begin with. Because the Mueller report completely terminated that counter-intelligence investigation, how dare anyone quibble over how Barr announced that end? That’s like blaming the garbage man because he hauled the trash away too […]

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.

Richard Epstein considers what Michael Flynn’s recent guilty plea means for President Trump and his administration, rebutting many of the misleading claims that have emerged in recent press coverage.

“Lying to the FBI” and Other Meta-Crimes


I’m a bit concerned about Michael’s Flynn’s guilty plea. Not because Michael Flynn doesn’t belong in jail. From all I can tell, he’d sell his country or his mother for a dollar, so I rather imagine that he probably belongs in jail for something. But I’m concerned about it, and about George Papadopoulos’ plea too, for that matter.

No, it’s not because I fear they’re going to turn state’s evidence on the Donald either. While I’ve been pleased with some of his actions as president, I’ve never had any confidence in Donald Trump’s character and won’t be surprised if it turns out there’s an actual fire under this smoke. Nor will I lose any sleep if he’s replaced with Mike Pence. (On the contrary, I’ll sleep better.)

Richard Epstein analyzes the latest developments surrounding the Trump Administration and the investigation into its potential ties to Russia.

Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America start the day reacting to reports that former FBI director James Comey will not accuse President Trump of trying to obstruct justice. They also sigh as tensions mount between President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions after Sessions recused himself from the Russia investigation. And they are a bit surprised to see ISIS attacking Iran, but also see some benefit in two detestable entities focused on each other rather than targets in the West.