Mueller investigation

The Papadopoulos Case Needs a Closer Look

Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

Are there grounds to believe an alternative version of events? That a very low-level, inexperienced Trump-campaign adviser was interacting with a Maltese academic who had no real Kremlin ties and no inside information about whether Russia actually possessed damaging information about Clinton, in the form of emails or otherwise; this young campaign adviser then made a vague claim to an Australian diplomat, who did not hear him say anything about emails, and did not report the conversation to his government through regular channels.

Steve Bannon Reminds Us What Trumpism Is All About

Steve Bannon to CNN's Fareed Zakaria: Economic nationalism doesn't care about race, ethnicity, religion. It doesn't care about gender, doesn't care about religion, it doesn't care what your sexual preference is. It cares about if you're a United States citizen.

The Carnivores of Civil Liberties

Victor Davis Hanson, Investor's Business Daily

Public opinion has radically changed. A majority of Americans believe the Muller investigation is politically motivated, according to a CBS News poll. Already, a few liberals and former Clinton supporters are warning the left that it is on the wrong side of history and about to reverse the entire post-Watergate liberal tradition. There is a reckoning on the horizon. It has nothing to do with Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton. Instead, the traditional, self-appointed watchdogs of government overreach have turned into the carnivores of civil liberties.

It’s time for Mueller to put up or call it quits

Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing, USA Today

Two Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinions hold that a sitting president is constitutionally immune from indictment. Mueller, appointed under executive authority, is obliged to follow them. Why, then, does he seek the president’s testimony? It can only be to provide it to Congress for impeachment proceedings. If Mueller does not have evidence of collusion after 22 months, he should not be fired. He should call it quits.

Is the Trump Tower meeting really proof of collusion?

Byron York, Washington Examiner

So far, special counsel Robert Mueller has not charged anyone with anything involving the June 9 meeting. One participant, Manafort, has been charged, but not with any alleged crimes involving collusion or relating to the meeting. Perhaps Mueller has some charges related to the meeting up his sleeve, but for the moment, after the release of the Senate Judiciary Committee transcripts, the meeting seems more like a clumsy attempt at lobbying than a conspiracy to interfere with a presidential election.

The Double Standards of the Mueller Investigation

Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

The more Mueller searches for hypothetical lawbreaking, the more he is inadvertently underscoring that actual lawbreakers must be subject to the same standard of justice. Ironically, Mueller’s investigation has reminded America that it is past time to call Comey, McCabe, and a host of Obama-era DOJ and FBI officials to account. For over a year, we have had two standards of legality when there can only be one. A reckoning is near.

Still waiting for the garlic bullet

Wesley Pruden, Washington Times

Donald Trump called James Comey a “slimeball,” which is not a very presidential way to talk. But just this time we might have to forgive the president. James Comey really is a slimeball. Just about everybody says so. The critics of his book, finally out Monday after the weekend news accounts had already begun squeezing the juice out of it, joined in a rare unanimous appraisal of the man who wrote the book. He’s a windbag, a hack, a blowhard, a swaggering pretender, a churl and the hindquarters of a horse.

Mueller at the Crossroads

Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

If the special counsel’s investigation has turned into a political cause, Mueller will no doubt prefer the third option. That is, Mueller’s report (and possibly more indictments of minor campaign aides) would probably appear shortly before the midterm elections. If Democrats win the House, then they will probably shut down all congressional investigations of the FBI and the DOJ — and perhaps all reviews of the actions of Mueller himself.

It Would Still Be Foolish for Trump to Talk to Mueller

Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review

Impeachment is a political process, not a legal one. Were Trump to convince enough people that Mueller’s investigation is a politicized witch hunt, there would not be enough votes in the Senate to remove him, even if a Democratic-controlled House impeached him. And impeachment is unpopular, so Democratic agitation for it might ironically help him politically. The president may calculate that he can control the damage if agreeing to an interview by the special counsel turns out to be a bad bet. I still don’t see what’s in it for him.

This trap was set well before Trump won

Charles Hurt, Washington Times

At the height of the presidential election, the administration of the outgoing president of the United States — Mr. Trump’s most powerful political enemy — handed over the controls of America’s spy apparatus to begin moving against Mr. Trump and his campaign. So special counsel Robert Mueller’s endless investigation in search of a crime should have been no surprise. It was cooked up long before Mr. Trump even won the election. Of course, these people were going to do this.

The Paradoxes of the Mueller Investigation

Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

Investigating any possible crimes committed by members of the Clinton campaign or the Obama administration apparently is taboo, given the exalted status of both. But every time Mueller seeks to find incidental wrongdoing by those around Trump, he only makes the case stronger that behavior by those involved in the Clinton campaign and the Obama administration should be investigated.