To take my mind from the UK's present predicament

[johnny9fingers]

And to go back to a long-running series of posts about the Mueller investigation.

Mr Mueller recently testified before Congress:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-49100778

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jul/24/mueller-testimony-republican-response-trump

And there appears to be more than one narrative at work here. Mr Mueller's testimony seemed to indicate actual wrongdoing on Trump's part; but, as the Graun's article mentioned, the Republicans are claiming it as a victory. From the outside it appears confusing, even for those of us reasonably well-versed in US politics and the Constitution. So I have to ask the US experts on the panel, even with all the other lunacies going on at the moment: Brexit, Iran, N & S Korea/Japan/China, China and Russia joint military actions etc - despite all of these, do our experts have an opinion on Mueller's testimony? Or have we already moved so far beyond the point where it is relevant at all in any way? And is it the case that, as the Dems aren't going to do anything about any of it, President Trump is effectively exonerated?

If so, at least we know where we are now.

Comments

[dewline]

Something to listen to later, perhaps?

The Questions Mueller Didn’t Ask
The “Trump, Inc.” team listened to all of special counsel Robert Mueller’s testimony. We talk about what wasn’t said.

https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-inc-podcast-robert-mueller-testimony

[oportet]

He answered questions related to the President being charged after he leaves office - I wouldn't mind if the left traded in their current fantasy for that one.

It seemed obvious he didn't want to be there - distant and irritated the talking heads have said. I don't blame him - on one side he has Trump being an asshole to him, and on the other - the left, whose undying love will die pretty fucking quick if he's the one who gives them the bad news.

[edelsont]

I really don't like the phrase "effectively exonerated." Or maybe I should just say, no: assuming that Trump isn't impeached, that doesn't mean that he has been effectively exonerated. The evidence is still there: evidence that he did things that could have been (and quite likely would have been) prosecuted, if not for the standing Justice Department policy that a sitting president cannot be indicted.

And I think that enough of the American people know at least some of this, and understand it, to materially reduce the chances of his being re-elected.

I suppose it's hard to understand, even more so from outside the US, why we have to wait for that. Isn't this precisely the sort of situation for which the impeachment process was designed?

I think it is, yes. I think he should be impeached, and removed from office. But the top Congressional leaders of my own (the Democratic) party apparently don't agree with me. This seems to be based on a political calculation, consisting of two points: (1) the chances of actually removing him are small (some would say zero), given the reality in the Senate; and (2) the failed attempt to do so would actually increase the chances of his re-election.

I'm not entirely sure about the first of those points, and I am extremely doubtful about the second. But what can I do? It looks like he probably won't be impeached. Which is a disappointment to me, but it's not the end of the world.

It probably won't even lead, by itself, to the end of human civilization.