Barr and “other Department attorneys” probably didn’t even fully UNDERSTAND the legal argumentation in Vol II of Mueller’s Report
Barr would never agree to it, but Michael Dreeben should also testify before the Congressional committees. 1/15
When Barr defended his decisions and conclusions on Mueller’s Report at his press conference, he said that he and Rosenstein had consulted “with the Office of Legal Counsel and other Department lawyers.” 2/15
One of the “other Department lawyers” they certainly DIDN’T consult with was Michael Dreeben, the lead counsel for Mueller. 3/15
The legal parts of the Mueller Report, especially on obstruction, were undoubtedly written by Mueller with the concurrence of Dreeben. In fact, Dreeben might have been the PRINCIPAL author. 4/15
I do not say this to disparage in any way Mueller’s own legal expertise, but rather to point out that Mueller had a very good reason to appoint Dreeben as his principal legal counsel. 5/15
Dreeben is arguably the most brilliant and formidable criminal and appellate attorney in the country. He has argued over 100 cases as Deputy Solicitor General before the Supreme Court. 6/15 http://tinyurl.com/y44r9zjx
Keeping that in mind, consider this from Politico’s article today (Natasha Bertrand et al.): 7/15
The real shock, though, is that BARR AND HIS SENIOR STAFF WERE SHOCKED THAT THERE WAS A PROBLEM! 8/15
Anyone with any sense who reads the Report and compares it with Barr’s public statements and letters will see at once that there was a HUGE problem. 9/15
Yes, I am suggesting that Barr has been vastly overrated, and that he and his senior staff REALLY DON’T HAVE ANY SENSE. They must be mediocrities. 10/15
If you don’t believe me, read the legal theory set out in the Introduction and the “Analysis” sections of Vol II of the Report and see if I’m not right.
The stuff is simply brilliant. 11/15
Barr, who appears to be WAY out of his depth, must have concluded that, because the argumentation is subtle, it must be weak, and that Vol II must therefore be interpreted as showing that Mueller simply failed to show obstruction. 12/15
Anybody who could reach this conclusion must be pretty witless — and yes, I definitely include Barr in that judgment. 13/15
Because it is subtle, the Dreeben/Mueller analysis is airtight, and it’s very subtlety makes it powerful, not weak — 14/15
as Barr and the OLC and the “other Department lawyers” to which Barr referred are going to find to their surprise and dismay, when Blumenthal, Schiff, Nadler and others eviscerate Barr in the hearings tomorrow and on Thursday. 15/15
