Family obligations kept me from watching most of the Mueller testimony [which contiuies even now], but I saw enough of it to make me so furious that I am having trouble containing myself. Who the hell does this "straight arrow honorable decorated war hero" think he is haughtily choosing which questions to answer and which not to answer when called as a wtitness by a standing committee of the House of Representatives?
I think he shoud be cited for contempt by the House.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
As usual, the always insightful, always smart, never-one-to-pull-a-punch Glenn Greenwald recalls a relevant historical circumstance involving Mueller: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1154022466345476097
For those disinclined to read the tweet, it says, "It's also bizarre to watch House Democrats constantly herald Mueller's career as one of great 'moral rectitude.' Does this little episode just not count at all?" The "little episode" to which he refers is CSPAN coverage of then FBI Director Mueller's testimony expressing concern about Saddam Hussein's control of WMD, which testimony provided support for invasion of Iraq.
Cynical bastards.
Remember HUAC (House Un-American Activities Committee) and it "demand" that witnesses answer questions and threatened jail if they refused? You sound like you are calling for that same kind of power to compel witnesses to answer questions.
I confess I didn't watch the Mueller testimony. I've got more important things to do.
I see Mueller as fairly honest. He found things which are likely indictable as criminal but since he willingly goes along with "the president can't be indicted", that means he is leaving it to Congress to impeach. Mueller is saying that after Trump's presidency is over, he can be indicted for his crimes.
That all strikes me as reasonable even if "liberals" see it as hair-on-fire unacceptable.
I don't live in the US, so I'm only a bystander, but it seems to me that if you want to "fix" the problems, you need to get people (1) educated and (2) politically engaged. Screaming at people that they are "deplorable" is counter-productive. Understanding why they are into a "populist revolt" and offering them progressive alternatives strikes me as a useful way to spend your time.
I see you blog as your personal attempt to "educate". That is a noble act.
I think your time would be better spend not raging at a TV set.
Maybe you should read this new book by Michael O'Sullivan, The Levelling: What's Next After Globalization. I find his discussion of the 17th century Levellers and the push for democracy and how that is now being threatened by "leviathans" in a multi-polar world well worth reading and pondering. Far more than watching Mueller.
There can be overriding legal barriers: e.g. classified information, privileged information, on-going investigations that would be compromised by public disclosure.
I too was disappointed, but probably should have expected it I was expecting a replay of the Senate Watergate hearings. But there were only seven members of the Senate committee. There are 41 members on the House Committee. The Senate committee also left a great deal of question to its counsel, Sam Dash, before members chimed in. That meant that there could be extended discussion of lines of inquiry. With the large House Committee, each member gets 5 minutes, alternating between the parties, so there's no continuity.
Additonally, Gerald Nadler is no Sam Ervin, the ranking Republican (whose name I forgot) is no Howard Baker, of "What did the President know, and when did he know it?" fame. Can you imagine that kind of question coming from a Republican today?
It is *entirely natural* to be so angry that you cannot see straight. Not being able to express it effectively, to elicit sympathy, empathy, and understanding, is the "not healthy" part.
Now the NYT is going on about "Russian meddling." Oh, for crying out loud. Now *I'm* so angry that I can't see straight.
This is my queue to mutter something unhelpful about Nash equilibria...
Make that 'cue' instead of 'queue' [sic]. (I helpfully supplied my own [sic].)
That the former director of the FBI is evasive and surreptitious should be no surprise to anyone...
I am not so angry at Mueller as I am at the Democratic Party. Mueller was constrained by the regulations that now govern special counsels. He was an employee of the DoJ and took things as far as he could. I am pissed at the Democrats for wasting time for 5 months and failing to play political hardball with the opposition. They act like timid, shellshocked, nebishes. They are scared and don't know what to do.
No one in the party can stand up and made the obvious case that Trump has committed high crimes and misdemeanors independent of
those detailed in the Mueller Report. These crimes involve the emoluments clause, failing to protect and defend the nation against certain cyber attacks by multiple adversaries in the 2018 election and the 2020 contest, failing to see that laws are faithfully executed, and crimes against humanity in his fascistic war against immigrants. There are more examples but that's enough for now.
There are three crises in play right now: constitutional, legitimation, and performance. At the same time there is a probable/possible party realignment happening, and the Democrat's do not recognize the importance of it. My first political experience was working on the McGovern campaign. The lesson I took from that experience was the the Democratic party organization would happily walk away from their own candidate. Then they reformed the party rules to ensure "leftist" insurgencies could never hijack the nomination again. After that it was the Clinton/DLC move to the center and compromising (caving) on welfare reform and other issues.
Here we are, it's still the neo-liberal Clinton party and it's still making bad decisions.
This is totally off-topic for this post, but because the subject of the comment was discussed some time ago on the blog, I thought it was worth noting that Bryan Magee, the "dork" who interviewed Chomsky and many other thinkers for British TV, has died. There is a nice remembrance by Henry Hardy, posted on the web page of Jo Wolf, (author of a very nice, in my opinion, short book on Marx) here: https://jonathanwolff.wordpress.com/2019/07/26/bryan-magee-by-henry-hardy/
'Who the hell does this "straight arrow honorable decorated war hero" think he is haughtily choosing which questions to answer ..?'
They were asking about things he couldn’t, under Justice Department restrictions, discuss.
I figure, as well, that all the little details of the case that members were trying to ferret out pale in comparison to the verdict of history depending most of all, in the long view, on Mueller being seen as nonpartisan, measured and above the fray. He appeared above the fray, cautious, and fair in the face of bitter partisan rancor. That is what you should expect from prosecutors.
Post a Comment