The finding that Donald Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign didn’t conspire with the Russian government is somewhat mystifying. Not because it cannot be accepted…
The finding that Donald Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign didn’t conspire with the Russian government is somewhat mystifying.
Not because it cannot be accepted as true. Special counsel Robert Mueller’s reputation for excellence, diligence and thoroughness underscores how the finding is credible and ought to be welcomed.
No, it mystifies because Trump could have sat quietly waiting for the truth to emerge. The president’s underlings could have honestly answered questions by the FBI and lawmakers. But this didn’t happen.
The president spent nearly two years trashing an inquiry that ultimately cleared him and his campaign of criminally conspiring with Russia, and several former aides are now convicted felons for lying under oath — apparently about something that didn’t warrant concealment. Some evidently lied out of a misbegotten, twisted sense of loyalty that only made matters worse.
Mueller’s conclusions, as characterized in a four-page summary released Sunday afternoon by Attorney General William Barr, are deeply disappointing to partisans who saw the inquiry as a prelude to impeachment. But that was never the intent of Mueller’s investigation, which provides needed clarity after nearly two years of rumors and speculation that swirled about Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Trump quickly and inaccurately called the report a “complete and total exoneration.” Actually, the special counsel stated that “while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him” on obstruction of justice.
So how do Mueller’s findings, as described by Barr, stack up against Trump’s repeated characterizations of the investigation? Let’s take them one by one:
“There is no collusion.
