Barr’s Coverup

Nadin Brzezinski
6 min readApr 4, 2019

Analysis (April 4, 2019) Attorney General William Barr released his conclusions on the Mueller report two weeks ago. According to the AG it exonerated president Donald Trump on conspiracy charges. Collusion does not exist in American law, so that would never be proven, or disproven. However, Robert Mueller III did not come to a conclusion on the obstruction of Justice. Barr’s letter was an attempt to set the narrative and move on. It increasingly looks like a coverup. Why? His conclusions were not in line with the report. How do we know? As expected, somebody talked to the New York Times, and other media.

According to the Times story:

The officials and others interviewed declined to flesh out why some of the special counsel’s investigators viewed their findings as potentially more damaging for the president than Mr. Barr explained, although the report is believed to examine Mr. Trump’s efforts to thwart the investigation. It was unclear how much discussion Mr. Mueller and his investigators had with senior Justice Department officials about how their findings would be made public. It was also unclear how widespread the vexation is among the special counsel team, which included 19 lawyers, about 40 F.B.I. agents and other personnel.

The Washington Post went further with the reporting on this discomfort. They follow with this:

Summaries were prepared for different sections of the report, with a view that they could made public, the official said.

With the term whirling around Washington, a former federal prosecutor explains what to know about the criminal charge of obstruction of justice. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post) The report was prepared “so that the front matter from each section could have been released immediately — or very quickly,” the official said. “It was done in a way that minimum redactions, if any, would have been necessary, and the work would have spoken for itself.”

Mueller’s team assumed the information was going to be made available to the public, the official said, “and so they prepared their summaries to be shared in their own words — and not in the attorney general’s summary of their work, as turned out to be the case.”

There is a suspicion that some of the Mueller report was designed to present the evidence to Congress, not unlike both Special Counsel reports during Watergate and the Lewinsky scandal. Both were turned over to Congress and both where the midway point in both scandals. The…

--

--

Nadin Brzezinski

Historian by training. Former day to day reporter. Sometimes a geek who enjoys a good miniatures game. You can find me at CounterSocial, Mastodon and rarely FB