We begin today’s roundup with Michael Stern at USA Today who says Russia is a habit Trump won’t break, and that we need to see the full Mueller report:
“Beyond a reasonable doubt” is the standard the Justice Department uses to indict. It is the law’s highest burden of proof. If Mueller used the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard to conclude that his investigation “did not establish” a Trump-Russia conspiracy, there could still be evidence of a conspiracy that simply does not rise to the level needed to indict in a criminal case.
Mueller’s report should reveal the standard he used and the evidence he found.That is why it is imperative that Attorney General William Barr release the full Mueller report. Only then can Congress and the public assess the true nature of the Trump-Russia connection.
As for obstruction of justice, Mueller offered this: “While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” Mueller left the obstruction question to Barr, who was appointed by Trump.
More from Peter Zeidenberg at The Daily Beast:
[I]t is almost impossible to view Barr as an impartial arbiter. After all, before becoming attorney general, he drafted a 19-page memo that laid out his conclusion that the president cannot obstruct justice by firing executive branch subordinates, such as the FBI director. Given that these were and presumably still are Barr’s views, it can hardly be surprising that Barr has concluded that the evidence that Mueller has gathered does not satisfy Barr’s rather peculiar standards for obstructive conduct. That Barr has interceded with his own judgment of culpability directly contradicts the very purpose for appointing an independent special counsel to conduct this investigation.