The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewAndrew Napolitano Archive
Are Trump's Legal Woes Over or Just Beginning?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Last Sunday afternoon, U.S. Attorney General William Barr released a letter, which he said summarized the report he had received from special counsel Robert Mueller about alleged crimes committed by President Donald Trump. Barr wrote that the president’s exoneration is complete with respect to any conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence to affect the outcome of the 2016 presidential election. He also wrote that though Trump will not be prosecuted by the Department of Justice for obstruction of justice, the special counsel did not exonerate him.

This is a head-scratcher.

The head-scratcher is why Barr revealed any ambivalence on the part of anyone in the DOJ on the issue of obstruction of justice when he needn’t have. As well, under the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, he shouldn’t have. Those rules, which prohibit the revelation of evidence for and against prosecution of people not actually prosecuted, also prohibit the revelation of the existence of such evidence, as well as any disagreements among prosecutors over the legal significance of the evidence.

The Barr revelation constitutes the same violation of federal rules and DOJ policy that FBI Director James Comey committed when he announced in the summer of 2016 that Hillary Clinton would not be prosecuted for using private email servers to communicate about classified materials and then revealed that the FBI had convincing evidence against her and then revealed what that evidence was.

When the president learned of the Barr summary of the Mueller report, he naturally rejoiced, and then he thoughtlessly asked for the full Mueller report to be made public. That was a mistake.

Here is the back story.

Barr’s four-page summary of Mueller’s 700-page report claims to have characterized fairly Mueller’s principal conclusions. Yet a careful reading between the lines of those four pages reveals lawyerly language that the president does not want to hear analyzed. Though the president will not be charged with conspiracy to receive something of value from the Russians in order to affect the outcome of a political campaign (a felony), Mueller clearly found some evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence (probably the 100-plus communications, some in person, between them), but not enough evidence “to establish” the conspiracy — that is, not enough evidence to prove the existence of the conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.

We know Mueller found some evidence of such a conspiracy because if he failed to find any evidence, Barr would have said so. He didn’t.

The second conclusion related by Barr is that Mueller found the evidence against Trump of obstruction of justice (interfering, or attempting to interfere, with an FBI investigation for a self-serving purpose) to be equivocal. That means Mueller found there is evidence that the president obstructed or attempted to obstruct justice and there is equally as strong exculpatory evidence or public policy or credibility reasons for not prosecuting, as well.

Both of these conclusions were made known to Barr three weeks ago, but he revealed them last Sunday.

ORDER IT NOW

Why would Mueller punt on the obstruction charge? It is not uncommon for prosecutors to view the same facts and the same law and come to different conclusions about whether a crime can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In the conspiracy charge, Mueller concluded he could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. On the obstruction charge, he allowed his boss, Barr, to make the decision about whether to prosecute the president. Such a “kicking the case upstairs” is not uncommon in high-profile cases.

Why Barr revealed all this is a mystery, as it will beat the drum for the release of Mueller’s full report and perhaps the evidence on which that report is based so that members of Congress who want to second-guess Mueller or examine for themselves what evidence of conspiracy and obstruction he found may do so.

What’s next? The Barr letter is a summary of the Mueller report. The Mueller report is itself a summary of the millions of pages of raw evidence Mueller and his team accumulated. That raw evidence consists of grand jury transcripts; FBI notes of interrogations of witnesses; transcripts of wiretaps, emails and text messages; prosecutors’ impressions of the quality of their evidence; and more than 1 million pages of campaign and White House documents voluntarily surrendered to Mueller.

If the 700-page summary of the evidence or the trove of raw evidence on which the summary is based are revealed, there will be much in there for Trump’s adversaries to feast upon. It’s a mistake for the president to call for the revelation of anything that he or his lawyers have not seen.

While the political focus shifts to the House Democrats, the legal focus shifts to Manhattan, where federal prosecutors have an ongoing investigation of the president for election finance fraud. And they have a finding by a federal judge that the criminal conspiracy to evade election finance reporting — to which Michael Cohen pleaded guilty and for which the owner of the National Enquirer received a deal — was orchestrated by the president himself.

Also in Manhattan labors Cy Vance, the Manhattan district attorney. He is investigating allegations of pre-presidential bank and tax fraud against Trump. He can go back to behavior that occurred 10 years ago. He also has a state statute that makes New York the easiest state in the union in which to prosecute financial crimes.

And the Senate Republicans now want to investigate who in the FBI or the CIA abused their legal authority and started all this. But the intelligence community will do its best to stifle them, just as that community stifled Trump from revealing what materials were seen by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. That is another can of worms the contents of which Trump should not want to be seen.

Copyright 2019 Andrew P. Napolitano. Distributed by Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Donald Trump, Robert Mueller 
Hide 10 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Barr and Mueller are best of friends in real life. They have made a deal. Mueller ends his investigation freeing Trump to go on offense. Mueller submits a report that will not give the Democrats what they need. The Democrats will have to find another way to bring down the President. Maybe they will. The lawfare will continue. Why would Mueller make such a deal? He didn’t want to end it by losing it in court. So he negotiated his terms of surrender with Barr. Trump has been unable to fight back because defending himself would be seen as obstruction of Mueller’s probe. So he has been keeping his powder dry. Now Nuns is submitting criminal referrals and Trump is talking about declassifying the FISA application files. If anybody on the Democrat side gets hurt it won’t be Mueller, Rosenstein or Sessions.

    Yeah. I just pulled this out of my ass. But it’s as good as you will get from Judge Andy.

  2. That is another can of worms the contents of which Trump should not want to be seen.

    Is that a threat? What are they holding over you, Andy?

  3. anonymous[340] • Disclaimer says:

    Mr. Napolitano has shown since November 2017 that he’s not to be trusted on RussiaGate. He still wears a robe: that of an altar boy for his St. Mueller. But when this is kept in mind, reading his columns cynically can still be informative.

    I have grown less sympathetic to President Trump as this entire exercise looks more like a Red v Puppet show that allows the entire Establishment to harmonize the song that Russia remains an adversary, justifying an imperial Exceptionalia. But today’s column reminds me of how the President was yanked back into line after talking peace with Mr. Putin last summer.

    ———–

    “When the president learned of the Barr summary of the Mueller report, he naturally rejoiced, and then he thoughtlessly asked for the full Mueller report to be made public. That was a mistake.
    ****
    If the 700-page summary of the evidence or the trove of raw evidence on which the summary is based are revealed, there will be much in there for Trump’s adversaries to feast upon. It’s a mistake for the president to call for the revelation of anything that he or his lawyers have not seen.
    ****
    That is another can of worms the contents of which Trump should not want to be seen.”

    ———-

    OK, cue the redactions to protect sources & methods, etc., and go find a robe if necessary to slow things down. In the meantime, it seems pretty clear that our so-called Freedom Watcher doesn’t want the American people to see for themselves how Washington operates.

    Should you listen to the cockroach that tells you it would be a mistake to turn on the kitchen lights?

    • Agree: Bubba
  4. Judge,

    Thank you for your incisive analysis. But you appear to have missed the point, as have many other commenters before you.

    So, please allow me to emphasize the point………A SUBSTANTIAL PORTION OF THE AMERICAN POPULATION BELIEVES THAT THE INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY PERPETRATED A SOFT COUP AGAINST A DULY ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

    AND, THAT’S THE ONLY MESSAGE THAT WILL STICK IN THE MINDS OF THOSE VOTERS, YOU DOPE.

  5. Just more Trump Derangement Syndrome from another victim in denial.

  6. Priss Factor [AKA "Asagirian"] says: • Website

    With a media and deep state like this, it will never end.

    They want to set an example that populism is bad, and so, they will go after Trump even though he has caved on just about everything.

  7. buckwheat says:

    Will this dumb asshole give it a rest? Napolitano you suck………….When Fox finally tires of your tedious bulllshit maybe the cucks at CNN will give you a go.

  8. Question for America’s CIA:…
    .
    Have you sought to ensure that the 750 bureaucrats who were mysteriously let go by Putin afterupon a call to investigate potential collusion between Putin/ Russia and Trump during the 2016 U.S. Election (and who could have provided HARD EVIDENCE regarding potential Putin/ Russian and Trump collusion) HAVEN’T SINCE BECOME VULNERABLE PUTIN TARGETS? Thanks!
    .
    Question for Mueller’s team:…
    .
    Have you examined the backgrounds of the said 750 bureaucrats that Putin mysteriously let go afterupon a call for an investigation into potential Putin/ Russian Trump collusion in the 2016 U.S. Election?… and, have any of these said 750 Russian bureaucrats fired by Putin, shown up missing, or dead? And does your team have any CIA documentation that suggests suspicious findings with regard to the said 750 bureaucrats that Putin fired? Thanks!
    .
    Please!… no emails!

  9. renfro says:

    ”Mueller clearly found some evidence of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russian intelligence (probably the 100-plus communications, some in person, between them), but not enough evidence “to establish” the conspiracy — that is, not enough evidence to prove the existence of the conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt.”

    I agree partly. I think some individuals in the campaign did try to receive or solicit help from Russia, mainly Trump jr and Kushner. But I think for others it came about as aperk because most of them were really concentrating on self dealing financial deals with Russia and other countries.
    Did Trump know? No one has squealed on him so who knows. IMO Trump was more interested in doing bizness with Russia than getting their help with his campaign.
    However Trump should be very, very afraid of the SDNY….his business dealings by all accounts were as shady as they come. The money laundering thur his condo buildings is as obvious as the nose on his face …but proving he knew all his Russian clients were laundering dirty money requires more evidence.

  10. NYMOM says:

    “However Trump should be very, very afraid of the SDNY….his business dealings by all accounts were as shady as they come. The money laundering thur his condo buildings is as obvious as the nose on his face …but proving he knew all his Russian clients were laundering dirty money requires more evidence.”

    I actually think Trump might be okay after the NY investigations are completed. If that ever happens…

    You see NYS and NYC have been very anti-business success for a very very long time. Anyone who has done business with this State and City must know this; so, I believe Trump might have had a very good team of advisors, accountants, etc., helping him with business advice and taxes…

    Not to say they won’t get anybody, probably the same as this Mueller probe, everybody who HELPED Trump in anyway who wasn’t as careful as he was will probably go down for various offenses…

    Actually that Amazon guy dodged the bullet by pulling out of that business deal just in time…

    Just my opinion.

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Andrew Napolitano Comments via RSS
PastClassics
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?