The Mueller report spin machine continues to operate with the various characters implicated in the array of Trump “investigations” hitting the media circuit. Sally Yates, Logan Act expert, signer of a dubious FISA warrant and contentious objector of a presidential order, appeared on a NBC tabloid show to speak some truth to power.
“I’ve been a prosecutor for nearly 30 years, and I can tell you I’ve personally prosecuted obstruction cases on far, far less evidence than this,” Yates, whom Trump fired, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
Well Sally, that speaks much more to your ineptitude as prosecutor than it does to Trump’s “guilt” doesn’t it?
“I believe if he were not the president of the United States, he would likely be indicted on obstruction,” she added. Mr. Mueller’s team disagreed. The report didn’t say the Department of Justice regulations prohibit the indictment of a sitting president, they punted on the the question “whether there were legal grounds and sufficient evidence to warrant obstruction of justice charges against the president.”
At a press conference, Attorney General William Barr was asked specifically by one of the media harpies if the failure to reach a decision on obstruction had anything to do with the DoJ’s guidance not to indict a sitting president. Here is Barr’s response:
“I would leave it to his description in the report, the special counsel’s own articulation of why he did not want to make a determination as to whether or not there was an obstruction offense. But I will say that when we met with him, Deputy Attorney General Rosenstein and I met with him, along with Ed o’Callaghan, who is the principal associate deputy, on March 5th. We specifically asked him about the OLC opinion and whether or not he was taking a position that he would have found a crime but for the existence of the OLC opinion. And he made it very clear several times that that was not his position. He was not saying that but for the OLC opinion, he would have found a crime. He made it clear that he had not made the determination that there was a crime.“
Perhaps Yates missed the press conference? NBC “journalist” Andrea Mitchell must have missed it too, because she didn’t counter Yates’ spin.
Yates continued, “I think, really, the bigger issue is not just whether or not this establishes a crime that can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, but is this the kind of conduct that we should expect from the president of the United States?”
Yates and her resistance ilk wanted to impeach Trump before he even took the oath of office, her judgement about what kind of conducts merits impeachment seems to be “someone I don’t like.” Hard pass, Sally.
Image from Getty Images.