![\"\"](\"https:\/\/worldcampaign.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/merlin_152501559_7629051a-9cb5-4e49-a624-3ff29876c1a7-jumbo-300x258.jpeg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The U.S. Capital, March 24, 2019, The New York Times<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n <\/p>\n After indicting the former national security advisor, campaign manager, campaign officials and other\u00a0associates of President Donald Trump for various crimes\u2013and getting convictions or guilty pleas on five so far\u2013on Friday, special counsel\u00a0Robert S. Mueller III delivered his report to US Attorney General\u00a0William P. Barr, finding that the president did not participate in a conspiracy with the Russian government\u2019s 2016 election interference, but was not exonerated from obstruction of justice.<\/p>\n Twenty-eight others, including 26 Russians, also face criminal charges. Russian cyber warfare and other interference against US democracy and other western democracies in 2016 and since is well-founded.<\/p>\n Barr, today, delivered his summary to the US Congress, which included his opinion there was insufficient evidence to establish that the president committed obstruction, although Mueller had specifically excluded this conclusion. A decision to indict is a different matter as the Justice Department guidelines exclude this.<\/p>\n Barr\u2019s communication appears to acknowledge that not all the information provided by Mueller was included in his opinion.<\/p>\n In addition to other investigations in other venues, the next stop is Congress, which it always would be constitutionally if any action was going to be taken regarding the president, and if not, regarding being fully informed of the details of the Mueller report in investigating Russian or other attacks, past, present or future on democratic processes and actions to prevent or counter them. The House already voted unanimously, Democrats and Republicans, that it should receive the full report.<\/p>\n Polls have shown that approximately 70% of the American people want the Mueller report to be made fully public.<\/p>\n We post, without further comment, two extensive news reports and two different editorial perspectives from two of the most widely-read newspapers in the US.<\/p>\n Following are the headline and most read articles in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, as well as editorials from both, online today, in print tomorrow:<\/p>\n \u201cMueller Finds No Trump-Russia Conspiracy, but Stops Short of Exonerating President on Obstruction\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n By Mark Mazzetti and Katie Benner, March 24, 2019, The New York Times<\/p>\n WASHINGTON \u2014 The investigation led by Robert S. Mueller III found no evidence that President Trump or any of his aides coordinated with the Russian government\u2019s 2016 election interference, according to a summary of the special counsel\u2019s key findings<\/a> made public on Sunday by Attorney General William P. Barr.<\/p>\n Mr. Mueller, who spent nearly two years investigating Moscow\u2019s determined effort to sabotage the last presidential election, found no conspiracy \u201cdespite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign,\u201d Mr. Barr wrote in a letter to lawmakers<\/a>.<\/p>\n Mr. Mueller\u2019s team drew no conclusions about whether Mr. Trump illegally obstructed justice, Mr. Barr said, so he made his own decision. The attorney general and his deputy, Rod J. Rosenstein, determined that the special counsel\u2019s investigators had insufficient evidence to establish that the president committed that offense.<\/p>\n He cautioned, however, that Mr. Mueller\u2019s report states that \u201cwhile this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him\u201d on the obstruction of justice issue.<\/p>\n Still, the release of the findings was a significant political victory for Mr. Trump and lifted a cloud that has hung over his presidency since before he took the oath of office. It is also likely to alter discussion in Congress about the fate of the Trump presidency; some Democrats had pledged to wait until the special counsel finished his work before deciding whether to initiate impeachment proceedings.<\/p>\n [Read Attorney General William Barr\u2019s Summary of the Mueller Report<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n The letter, by Attorney General William P. Barr, details the main findings of the special counsel\u2019s two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n [Read <\/em>the key Mueller findings<\/em><\/a>.]<\/em><\/p>\n The president trumpeted the news almost immediately, even as he mischaracterized the special counsel\u2019s findings. \u201cIt was a complete and total exoneration,\u201d Mr. Trump told reporters in Florida before boarding Air Force One. \u201cIt\u2019s a shame that our country had to go through this. To be honest, it\u2019s a shame that your president has had to go through this.\u201d<\/p>\n He added, \u201cThis was an illegal takedown that failed.\u201d<\/p>\n Mr. Barr\u2019s letter was the culmination of a tense two days since Mr. Mueller delivered his report to the Justice Department. Mr. Barr spent the weekend poring over the special counsel\u2019s work, as Mr. Trump strategized with lawyers and political aides at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.<\/p>\n Mr. Mueller, who has been a spectral presence in the capital for nearly two years \u2014 so often discussed, but so rarely seen \u2014 was photographed leaving a church on Sunday morning just across Lafayette Square from the White House.<\/p>\n Hours later, Mr. Barr delivered his letter describing the special counsel\u2019s findings to Congress. But congressional Democrats have demanded more, and the letter could be just the beginning of a lengthy constitutional battle<\/a> between Congress and the Justice Department about whether Mr. Mueller\u2019s full report will be made public. Democrats have also called for the attorney general to turn over all of the special counsel\u2019s investigative files.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Mr. Barr\u2019s letter said that his \u201cgoal and intent\u201d was to release as much of the Mueller report as possible, but warned that some of the report was based on grand jury material that \u201cby law cannot be made public.\u201d Mr. Barr planned at a later date to send lawmakers the detailed summary of Mr. Mueller\u2019s full report that the attorney general is required under law to deliver to Capitol Hill.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Lawmakers on Sunday also criticized Mr. Barr\u2019s conclusion that the president had not obstructed justice \u2014 which requires making a determination about whether Mr. Trump had \u201ccorrupt intent\u201d when he took steps to impede the investigation at different turns \u2014 when the special counsel\u2019s team never questioned the president in person. After months of debate over a potential interview, Mr. Mueller\u2019s investigators agreed to accept written answers from the president.<\/p>\n Mr. Barr\u2019s letter said that the Mueller report identified no actions that, in his and Mr. Rosenstein\u2019s minds, \u201cconstitute obstructive conduct, had a nexus to a pending or contemplated proceeding, and were done with corrupt intent.\u201d Mr. Barr did not consult Mr. Mueller in writing his letter to leaders of the congressional judiciary committees, a Justice Department official said on Sunday.<\/p>\n Shortly after the release of the Mueller findings, Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said on Twitter<\/a> that he planned to call Mr. Barr to testify about what he said were \u201cvery concerning discrepancies and final decision making at the Justice Department.\u201d<\/p>\n The Russia investigation has buffeted the White House from the earliest days of the Trump administration, with many current and former aides to Mr. Trump brought for questioning to the special counsel\u2019s warren of offices in a plain office building in downtown Washington. F.B.I. agents fanned out across the nation and traveled to numerous foreign countries. Members of Mr. Mueller\u2019s team questioned some witnesses at airports after they landed in the United States.<\/p>\n Ultimately, a half-dozen former Trump aides were indicted or convicted of crimes<\/a>, most for conspiracy or lying to investigators. Twenty-five Russian intelligence operatives<\/a> and experts in social media manipulation<\/a> were charged last year in two extraordinarily detailed indictments released by the special counsel. The inquiry concluded without charging any Americans for conspiring with the Russian campaign.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n [Read Mueller Has Delivered His Report. Here\u2019s What We Already Know<\/a>.]<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n More than two years of criminal indictments and steady revelations about Trump campaign contacts with Russians reveal the scope of the special counsel investigation.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n The findings could bring closure for some who have obsessed over the myriad threads of a byzantine investigation. A cottage industry of Mueller watchers has spent months on social media and cable news debating thorny constitutional issues, spinning conspiracy theories and amassing encyclopedic details about once obscure figures \u2014 Carter Page, Konstantin V. Kilimnik, George Papadopoulos and others.<\/p>\n How many minds it changes is another matter. Opinions have hardened over time, with many Americans already convinced they knew the answers before Mr. Mueller submitted his conclusions. Some believe that the special counsel\u2019s previous indictments, twinned with voluminous news reporting, have already shown a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin. Some believe that the investigation is, as Mr. Trump has long described it, a \u201cwitch hunt.\u201d<\/p>\n To prove a conspiracy, former prosecutors said, Mr. Mueller\u2019s team would have had to show that Mr. Trump or one or more of his associates agreed that Russia should interfere in the election through computer espionage, illegal use of social media or other criminal means.<\/p>\n Campaign officials at times were eager to accept benefits from Russia\u2019s covert operation. \u201cI love it,\u201d Donald Trump Jr., the president\u2019s eldest son, responded when an intermediary said a Russian emissary wanted to give the campaign damaging information on Hillary Clinton at a Trump Tower meeting in June 2016.<\/p>\n Mr. Trump himself urged Russia to try to unearth deleted emails from a private server Mrs. Clinton had used when she was secretary of state.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n And Roger J. Stone, Jr., the president\u2019s longtime friend, tried to enlist intermediaries to connect with WikiLeaks, Russia\u2019s chosen depository for Democratic emails stolen by Russian hackers.<\/p>\n But absent an agreement with the Russian government to break the law, former Justice Department officials said, none of that made Mr. Trump or his associates into co-conspirators with the Kremlin.<\/p>\n \u201cThere is a big difference between saying, \u2018Gosh, I think WikiLeaks has the ability to hack into the Democratic National Committee computers\u2019 and saying \u2018We would like them to dump those out in the public, so let\u2019s call them up and ask them to do that,\u2019\u201d said Mary McCord, a former top-ranking national security official at the Justice Department.<\/p>\n The release of Mr. Mueller\u2019s findings could force a decision by Democrats on a simmering issue they have said would wait until the investigation\u2019s end: whether to begin impeachment proceedings against the president. Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California has said it would not be \u201cworth it\u201d to try to impeach Mr. Trump, but suggested she could change her mind if an overwhelming bipartisan consensus emerged.<\/p>\n For months, the president and his lawyers have waged as much of a public relations campaign as a legal one \u2014 trying to discredit the Mueller investigation<\/a> to keep public opinion from swaying lawmakers to move against Mr. Trump.<\/p>\n [Read\u00a0Glimpses of the Mystery That Is the Mueller Investigation<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n He was given a wide mandate<\/a> \u2014 to investigate not only Russian election interference but also \u201cany matters that may arise directly from that investigation.\u201d Mr. Mueller has farmed out multiple aspects of his inquiry to several United States attorneys\u2019 offices, and those investigations continue.<\/p>\n Mr. Barr\u2019s letter said that the special counsel\u2019s office employed 19 lawyers and was assisted by about 40 F.B.I. agents, intelligence analysts, forensic accountants and other staff. About 500 witnesses were interviewed, and 13 foreign governments were asked to turn over evidence.<\/p>\n Over all, the special counsel\u2019s office issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants and obtained more than 230 orders for communications records.<\/p>\n The Justice Department regulations governing the Mueller inquiry only required the special counsel to give a succinct, confidential report to the attorney general explaining his decisions to either seek \u2014 or decline to seek \u2014 further criminal charges. Mr. Mueller operated under tighter restrictions than similar past inquiries, notably the investigation of President Bill Clinton by Ken Starr, who ended up delivering a 445-page report in 1998 that contained lascivious details about an affair the president had with a White House intern.<\/p>\n Mr. Mueller will not recommend new indictments, ending speculation that he might charge some of Mr. Trump\u2019s aides in the future. The Justice Department\u2019s general practice is not to identify the targets of its investigations if prosecutors decide not to bring charges, so as not to tarnish their reputations. Mr. Rosenstein emphasized this point in a speech last month.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s important,\u201d Mr. Rosenstein said, \u201cfor government officials to refrain from making allegations of wrongdoing when they\u2019re not backed by charges that we are prepared to prove in court.\u201d<\/p>\n Sharon LaFraniere contributed reporting.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n \u201cMueller Doesn\u2019t Find Trump Campaign Conspired With Russia\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n By Sadie Gurman, Aruna Viswanatha and Byron Tau, March 24, 2019, The Wall Street Journal<\/p>\n Special counsel report leaves open questions about obstruction of justice, according to William Barr\u2019s summary<\/em><\/p>\n WASHINGTON\u2014Special counsel Robert Mueller concluded that President Trump and his campaign didn\u2019t conspire or coordinate with Russia to interfere in the 2016 election, according to a letter <\/a>Attorney General William Barr sent to Congress on Sunday that summarized the final report on Mr. Mueller\u2019s investigation.<\/p>\n But Mr. Mueller didn\u2019t draw a conclusion on whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice, according to Mr. Barr\u2019s letter, noting the report neither finds that the president committed a crime nor exonerated him. In the absence of a determination from Mr. Mueller, Mr. Barr wrote, he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded that Mr. Trump\u2019s actions didn\u2019t reach the bar of a crime.<\/p>\n The announcement brings to an end an investigation that has roiled the administration since 2017 when Mr. Trump fired James Comey, his Federal Bureau of Investigation director<\/a>. But a new political drama over the report was set to begin, with congressional Democrats promising to investigate the report\u2019s conclusions and seek access to the full document.<\/p>\n Mr. Trump\u2014who has issued repeated attacks on the investigation and the lawyers and FBI agents involved\u2014embraced the report\u2019s findings<\/a>. Speaking to reporters in Florida, Mr. Trump called the findings a \u201ccomplete and total exoneration.\u201d One of Mr. Trump\u2019s attorneys, Rudy Giuliani, described the report as \u201cbetter than I expected.\u201d<\/p>\n Mr. Barr provided the details in a four-page letter summarizing the findings of the22-month investigation<\/a>. The special counsel \u201cdid not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,\u201d Mr. Barr told Congress, quoting the report.<\/p>\n On whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice, Mr. Barr quoted Mr. Mueller saying that \u201cwhile this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.\u201d<\/p>\n Read the Attorney General\u2019s Letter About the Mueller Investigation<\/a><\/p>\n The report on the investigation removes a legal threat and presents a political win for Mr. Trump and his allies after several people in Mr. Trump\u2019s orbit admitted communicating with Russian officials <\/a>while Moscow was engaged in an operation that U.S. intelligence has said <\/a>was aimed at boosting him, denigrating his Democratic rival and sowing discord in U.S. society.<\/p>\n But it is also figured to invigorate congressional investigations into Mr. Trump\u2019s interactions with law enforcement. Mr. Barr told Congress he sought to release as much of the report as possible but also noted it contains secret grand jury information that, in the absence of a criminal finding, generally can\u2019t be shared with the public. Those rules are designed to give prosecutors broad powers to obtain sensitive information about subjects under criminal investigation, but they limit disclosure of that information to protect the privacy of those people if no charges result.<\/p>\n The conclusion of the Mueller probe also leaves in its wake about a dozen other probes into Mr. Trump and his associates by an array of federal, state and congressional investigators. Mr. Trump\u2019s inaugural is under investigation <\/a>by federal prosecutors in New York, and Mr. Trump\u2019s longtime informal political adviser is scheduled to face trial later this year <\/a>on charges brought by Mr. Mueller\u2019s office.<\/p>\n Mr. Mueller examined multiple actions by Mr. Trump, including his firing of Mr. Comey and his efforts to pressure his former attorney general <\/a>to curtail the Russia investigation. Mr. Barr wrote that Justice Department leadership determined that the evidence Mr. Mueller assembled on that question was \u201cnot sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction-of-justice offense.\u201d<\/p>\n What Happened, According to Mueller<\/a><\/p>\n The attorney general wrote that the Justice Department\u2019s longstanding opinion that a sitting president can\u2019t be indicted had no bearing on his legal conclusion that Mr. Trump\u2019s actions didn\u2019t rise to the level of a crime. Mr. Barr noted that the department\u2019s bar for bringing criminal obstruction-of-justice charges requires \u201ccorrupt intent\u201d to obstruct a proceeding.<\/p>\n In June 2018, Mr. Barr\u2014well before becoming attorney general\u2014sent an unsolicited memo<\/a> to the Justice Department criticizing Mr. Mueller\u2019s obstruction theory as \u201cfatally misconceived\u201d and damaging to the presidency. In that memo, he wrote the president was lawfully exercising his authority by firing Mr. Comey.<\/p>\n Democrats in Congress were quick to launch a fierce challenge to Mr. Barr\u2019s conclusions, given that earlier criticism of the probe. Lawmakers are likely to reach their own determination about whether any of Mr. Trump\u2019s actions might warrant censure or impeachment<\/a>, and they have demanded access to the evidence Mr. Mueller obtained.<\/p>\n In a statement, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California and Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leaders in Congress, said: \u201cGiven Mr. Barr\u2019s public record of bias against the special counsel\u2019s inquiry, he is not a neutral observer and is not in a position to make objective determinations about the report.\u201d<\/p>\n Democratic presidential hopefuls also called for the release of the full report over the weekend.<\/p>\n Mr. Mueller delivered his report to the Justice Department on Friday<\/a>, ending a sprawling investigation that involved issuing more than 2,800 subpoenas; executing more than 500 search warrants; obtaining more than 230 orders for records of private communications; making requests of 13 foreign governments for evidence and interviewing about 500 witnesses, according to the Justice Department.<\/p>\n The investigation is the most thorough accounting of Russian activity during the 2016 presidential election. U.S. intelligence concluded shortly before Mr. Trump took office that Moscow conducted a campaign of hacking, leaking and disinformation aimed at boosting him over Democrat Hillary Clinton. The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee affirmed those conclusions on Russian involvement<\/a> in May 2018. Moscow has denied interfering in the election.<\/p>\n A separate investigation last year in the House, which was controlled by Republicans at the time, disputed the premise that the Russian campaign was aimed at boosting Mr. Trump.<\/p>\n Mr. Mueller\u2019s inquiry ultimately led to the convictions <\/a>of five Trump advisers, several of whom admitted to misleading investigators about their contacts with Russian officials or intermediaries, and the indictment of two dozen Russian citizens, including Russian intelligence officers.<\/p>\n Mr. Barr\u2019s chief of staff called White House lawyer Emmet Flood and read him the letter about 3 p.m, a senior Justice Department official said, adding that had been the department\u2019s only communication with the White House as of late Sunday afternoon. Mr. Barr hadn\u2019t spoken with Mr. Trump, and the White House didn\u2019t have the report, the official said.<\/p>\n Democratic lawmakers held a conference call to decide on next steps, which could largely play out on Capitol Hill. Democrats remain united in demanding that the report and much of the investigative material be released to the public.<\/p>\n \u201cSeems like the Department of Justice is putting matters squarely in Congress\u2019 court,\u201d House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler (D., N.Y.) wrote on Twitter.<\/p>\n In particular, House Democrats seized on language saying Mr. Trump hadn\u2019t been exonerated in an obstruction-of-justice probe, even if the president hadn\u2019t been found conclusively at fault either.<\/p>\n Mr. Nadler said the public needed to know what Mr. Mueller had found in stopping short of clearing the president, saying the Justice Department \u201cowes the public more than just a brief synopsis and decision not to go any further in their work.\u201d<\/p>\n Earlier this month, the House approved, 420-0<\/a>, a resolution calling for the public release of Mr. Mueller\u2019s report, but a Democratic effort to pass the measure in the Senate was blocked by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.).<\/p>\n For many Republicans, the end of the investigation represents an opportunity to shift the narrative from the probe to focus on the economy and what they said are the benefits of Republican tax cuts. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) said in a statement that Democrats \u201cacted irresponsibly and threw caution to the wind to damage and distract from the work the Trump administration is doing.\u201d<\/p>\n Mr. Barr over the weekend worked closely with Mr. Rosenstein and their top advisers to determine what top-line summary of the report they could quickly deliver to lawmakers.<\/p>\n The special counsel\u2019s office wasn\u2019t consulted about their summary, and the office didn\u2019t respond to requests for comment about Mr. Barr\u2019s summary.<\/p>\n The attorney general said he has asked for Mr. Mueller\u2019s counsel in deciding what other information the law and longstanding Justice Department protocol will allow him to release.<\/p>\n Mr. Barr gave no time frame for how long such a review would take.<\/p>\n . . .<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cThe Mueller Conclusions\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n By The Editorial Board, The Wall Street Journal, March 24, 2019<\/p>\n All Americans should be pleased with the end of the collusion illusion.<\/em><\/p>\n Well, so much for the claim that Donald Trump or his campaign conspired with Russians to steal the American Presidency. That conspiracy theory, which has distorted American politics for more than two years, expired in an instant Sunday when Attorney General William Barr delivered Special Counsel Robert Mueller\u2019s \u201cprincipal conclusions\u201d to Congress.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Special Counsel\u2019s investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election,\u201d Mr. Barr wrote in a four-page letter to the Judiciary Committees of the House and Senate.<\/p>\n Mr. Barr\u2019s letter also said that Mr. Mueller investigated the evidence of whether Mr. Trump obstructed justice but made no \u201cprosecutorial judgment.\u201d Mr. Barr said that he and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein examined that evidence and concluded there is nothing sufficient to prove that the President \u201cengaged in obstructive conduct.\u201d Mr. Trump called all this an \u201cexoneration,\u201d and it certainly looks to be, but it\u2019s worth stepping back from the partisan claims for some larger political context.<\/p>\n * * *<\/p>\n The Russia conclusion in particular ought to be good news to all Americans. Mr. Mueller spent two years and the vast resources of the FBI and Justice Department to search for \u201ccollusion.\u201d He found ample evidence that Russia did try to influence the election. But he found that no one in the Trump campaign \u201ccoordinated with the Russian government in these efforts, despite multiple offers from Russian-affiliated individuals to assist the Trump campaign,\u201d Mr. Barr wrote.<\/p>\n This lifts the cloud over the 2016 election that authoritarians like Vladimir Putin hope to promote with their meddling in democracies. It means no Trump officials abetted the hack into Democratic emails, and no Trump officials conspired with WikiLeaks (Roger Stone\u2019s fantasies aside). The conclusion should restore a measure of public confidence in our political system and the integrity of U.S. elections. Imagine the political crisis had Mr. Mueller found the opposite?<\/p>\n The end of the collusion illusion should also cause the media to do some soul-searching about rushes to judgment. For two years, with the help of ex-Obama officials, they spun anecdotes of contacts between Russians and Trump campaign advisers into a conspiracy. With few exceptions they went well beyond First Amendment oversight into anti-Trump advocacy. But it was always odd that those individual Russia-Trump contacts never added up to anything or went anywhere, which is why we warned about waiting for the facts.<\/p>\n Many in the press also took Mr. Trump\u2019s denunciations against the investigation and his odd solicitousness for Mr. Putin as an admission of guilt. But Mr. Trump is often his own worst enemy, and bursts of ego and anger aren\u2019t evidence of anything but predictable Trump behavior.<\/p>\n The question has always been whether Mr. Mueller would be able to connect those anecdotes into a larger conspiracy, but now we know he could not. By the way, Mr. Mueller\u2019s probe is the third to find no Russia-Trump collusion, following the House and Senate Intelligence Committee findings. Perhaps the press corps will finally take no conspiracy for an answer.<\/p>\n As for obstruction of justice, some Democrats will assert that Mr. Mueller\u2019s failure to reach a conclusion justifies more<\/em> investigation. They will demand to see the evidence Mr. Mueller compiled, though most of this is already in the public domain since it concerned the firing of James Comey as FBI director. And they will claim that Messrs. Barr and Rosenstein are politically conflicted.<\/p>\n But note that Mr. Barr says that he and Mr. Rosenstein took into account that Mr. Mueller found that \u201cthe evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,\u201d which bears on motive. Without an underlying crime, what was Mr. Trump trying to cover up?<\/p>\n Mr. Barr says he and Mr. Rosenstein reached their judgment about obstruction without getting to the constitutional issue of whether a sitting President can be indicted. But in our view Mr. Trump had every right as President to fire Mr. Comey for whatever reason he saw fit. The Constitution gives the President the power to hire and fire at will, and it cannot be illegal to perform an act that the Constitution says is legal, no matter the motive.<\/p>\n House Democrats will have to decide what to do with all this, and their first resort will be a demand to see the entire report. Mr. Barr in his letter again promised to disclose as much as he can subject to grand-jury secrecy and other Justice rules. But we also hope he includes in his disclosures the documents that explain how this entire Russia conspiracy story began at the FBI and inside the Obama Administration. With Mr. Mueller\u2019s conclusions, we now know that someone may have conned the FBI into one of the great dirty tricks in American political history.<\/p>\n The Mueller report won\u2019t end this rancorous period in American politics, but at least it should put the Russia conspiracy file to bed. And for that we can all be grateful.<\/p>\n . . .<\/strong><\/p>\n \u201cNo Collusion, No \u2018Exoneration\u2019\u201d<\/a><\/p>\n By The Editorial Board, The New York Times, March 24, 2019<\/p>\n A Trump-friendly attorney general\u2019s letter doesn\u2019t do justice to the special counsel\u2019s investigation. Release his whole report.<\/em><\/p>\n On its face, the letter that Attorney General William Barr sent to Congress on Sunday afternoon<\/a>, summarizing the key findings of the special counsel Robert Mueller\u2019s Russia investigation, is good news, not just for President Trump.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nMr. Mueller\u2019s work has proceeded in the face of blistering attacks by Mr. Trump and his allies, who painted the investigation as part of a relentless campaign by the \u201cdeep state\u201d to reverse the results of the 2016 election.<\/div>\n\n\n\n. . .<\/strong><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nMORE<\/h4>\n
\n
\n\n\n