The Daily Why Didn’t Mueller Decide on Obstruction?
Mar 26, 2019
Michael S. Schmidt, a reporter for The New York Times specializing in the special counsel investigation, delves into the implications of Robert Mueller's choices surrounding obstruction of justice. He discusses the complexities of passing such decisions to Attorney General Barr and the political influences at play. Schmidt explores the legal ambiguities in Mueller’s report and how they opened doors for further inquiry by lawmakers. His insights reveal the intricate balance between legal accountability and political maneuvering following the investigation.
AI Snips
Chapters
Transcript
Episode notes
Special Counsel Regulations Failure
- The special counsel regulations, designed to ensure an apolitical investigation, seem to have failed.
- This is due to the perception of political influence in the final decision-making process.
Mueller's Punt Creates Perception Problem
- Mueller's inability to reach a decision on obstruction created a perception problem.
- It left the decision to political appointees, Attorney General Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein.
Barr's 2018 Memo
- Bill Barr wrote a memo in 2018 arguing for a high bar to charge a president with obstruction.
- He argued that proving obstruction requires proving an underlying crime.