,
19 tweets,
11 min read
Read on Twitter
I realized late last night that a dominant narrative we are hearing about the #MuellerInvestigation from media is flat-out wrong. #Mueller did NOT have a very narrow mandate. His mandate was extremely broad. Let's look at it piece by piece. /1
@BarbMcQuade's excellent article in @thedailybeast made it clear that we are so deeply mired in 'analysis' (& spin) that the obvious easily evades us. If the President cannot be indicted then what was the PURPOSE of the #MuellerInvestigation? /2 thedailybeast.com/barr-sounds-mo…
I went back to #Rosenstein's original letter appointing #Mueller. A simple reading makes it obvious that Mueller's mandate was the farthest thing from restrictive (as we have constantly been told.) It was actually remarkably BROAD. /3 nytimes.com/interactive/20… 
It is certainly not restricted to 'collusion' or obstruction. Since it was so open-ended what DID the #MuellerReport find? We need to know. /4
The next obvious question: what specifically are the parameters of the 'investigation confirmed by #Comey before the House on 3/20/17' referred to by #Rosenstein in his letter? Below are #Comey's words. /5 washingtonpost.com/news/post-poli…
For one thing, the investigation is NOT restricted to coordination with the Russian 'government' as we have at times been told, but more widely includes coordination w Russia's 'efforts'. /6
Most importantly: the investigation is characterized as a counterintelligence one, the question of whether crimes were committed being SUBSIDIARY. The counterintelligence investigation is not separate as it has been characterized by some, it's at the CORE of Mueller's mandate. /7
In fact, and again as pointed out by @BarbMcQuade: #DOJ's policy that POTUS cannot be #indicted would mean the entire #MuellerInvestigation would be pointless UNLESS: /9
it had a wider purpose: to inform Congress & the American people if there are grounds for IMPEACHMENT. It certainly makes ZERO sense for the House Intelligence Committee to have to launch its own separate, far less robust investigation w/o the benefit of Mueller's findings. /10
Now, on that point it is VERY important to understand that grounds for impeachment are not limited to CRIMES. The Constitution very clearly also includes high MISDEMEANORS as impeachable offenses /11
How would we KNOW if any conduct rising to a high MISDEMEANOR occurred UNLESS we see the results of Mueller's investigation? That is critical information for Congress. Barr cannot block it from the American people simply b/c he asserts the bar of a high CRIME was not reached. /12
Again, for emphasis, the assessment of whether any CRIMES were committed is PERIPHERAL & very clearly not what the investigation was solely tasked to assess. cc: all in media writing on this topic /13
And for that matter what did #Mueller have to say about civil officers #Rosenstein & #Barr in the context of obstruction? If neither is mentioned, why not? If it DOES mention Barr/Rosenstein, can they be in the position of redacting the #MuellerReport for Congress? /15
In all these cases, the highest standard of criminal proof is specifically NOT required. That's why we MUST see the #MuellerReport. Congress/the American people need to make a fully informed assessment of whether any impeachable offenses were committed INCLUDING misdemeanors /16
All to say, quite clearly #Barr is obstructing justice by refusing to release the #Mueller report unredacted by his own heavy hand (or by Mueller's team under HIS instructions). We need to understand the findings of the report. It is critical for our #NationalSECURITY. /17
Oh and major PS: there is NO REASON why any third party who participated in a high misdemeanor that put our nation at risk should have any relevant information redacted in order to protect their 'reputations'. /18
If their reputations suffer because they acted in unethical, corrupt and unpatriotic ways, so be it. For our national security, we NEED TO KNOW. #Barr must show #Congress the full report. @HouseDemocrats @SenateDems /END
