Michael Wolff’s book Siege and Andrew Weissmann’s upcoming testimony before Congress (which presumably is going to happen sometime this week)
Read @MichaelWolffNYC’s book Siege yesterday. Don’t let reviewers and online pundits mislead you. This is a great and important book — and reliable (more about this below). It’s even better than his earlier Fire and Fury, and Woodward’s FEAR can’t hold a candle to it. 1/28
The most important single piece of reporting in the book is of great interest because it throws some light on predictions Rs like Devin Nunes and Joe diGenova have made about the Mueller testimony on Wednesday. 2/28
What these Rs are most worried about is the closed door testimony of Andrew Weissmann. (He was originally scheduled for July 18, one day after the original date of July 17 for Mueller’s testimony; presumably a similar arrangement has been made for this week’s hearings.) 3/28
Mueller is a button-down, “play it by the book” Marine and institutionalist, and even Ds predict that it will take some work to get Mueller to go where they want him to go in his testimony. 4/28
But Andrew Weissmann, who friends and foes have described as a “junk yard dog” is a different personality altogether, and isn’t as likely to be as grudging or tight-lipped in his testimony as Mueller. 5/28
The biggest flashpoint of Wolff’s book Siege has been his claim that he has a document that for the first time reveals goings-on within the Office of Special Counsel, to wit a 56-page document arguing that a sitting president *can* be indicted. 6/28
When I read the book yesterday, I was convinced that Wolff had a bona fide document, and that he had obtained it either from Weissmann or (for purposes of plausible deniability) from an associate of Weissmann’s. 7/28
Today I learned that on May 28 (the book was released on June 4), the UK paper The Guardian, which had received an advance review copy of the book, published an article that reported on this memo in considerable detail, 8/28
as well as the fact that Peter Carr, the spox for the OSC, had said (in response to a query from The Guardian): “The documents that you’ve described do not exist.” 9/28
But the Guardian in its opening paragraph had described the memo (which the Guardian had seen) this way: “Michael Wolff *says special counsel Robert Mueller* drew up a three-count obstruction of justice indictment against Donald Trump before deciding to shelve it.” 10/28
And the headliner read: “Mueller drew up obstruction indictment against Trump, Michael Wolff book says.” 11/28
This is a very inaccurate description of what the book says about the memo, and gave Carr the opportunity to do what he does best: Either say “No comment” or find something in how X was described to deny the existence of X under any description. (Think about Michael Cohen.) 12/28
Wolff’s book never claims that *Mueller* or even his *office* drew up the memo. In fact, the book expressly says that the memo was drawn up at Andrew Weissmann’s *initiative.* 13/28
Legal teams draw up back-and-forth, what-if legal memos as a matter of course. That is clearly what happened here. The memo explored one of the possible options that needed to be considered: nothing more. 14/28
In fact, it is quite implausible that Mueller himself ever considered jettisoning the OLC opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted: he is too much of an institutionalist for that, and Preet Bharara predicted that Mueller wouldn’t do it. 15/28
The above scenario (mine) is corroborated by two further considerations.
First, Ari Melber reports that “DOJ declined to comment on or dispute the accuracy of internal Mueller memos that @MichaelWolffNYC says he obtained.” 16/28
Melber’s reference to memos (plural) important, because Siege gives *more* coverage to memos going to show that Trump had plenary power to simply fire anyone and everyone forthwith, and even to argue that he could proceed to destroy all the evidence the OSC had collected. 17/28
These memos clearly show that the OSC never accepted the view that a sitting president can be indicted (certainly Mueller never did), b/c if in fact the POTUS has plenary power to fire anyone, then he has the power to fire any and all prosecutors bringing an indictment! 18/28
When I read the book, I was sure that Wolff had a bona fide internal memo from the OSC, that Weissmann wrote it, and that Weissmann probably had arranged to get the memos to Wolff either directly, or (for purposes of plausible deniability) indirectly through an associate. 19/28
(I am also convinced that the memos countering the internal “indictment memo” were the handiwork of Michael Dreeben, who probably wrote most of the stuff on legal and constitutional theory that got included in the Report.) 20/28
But one thing is for sure: when the Office closed down, Weissmann was sorely aggrieved that Mueller had not been more aggressive. 21/28
And that gives Wednesday’s hearing (or whenever Weissmann ends up testifying) an added interest. Weissmann’s testimony will be closed door, but we should get a transcript sooner or later.
Expect fireworks. 22/28
That said, I must take issue with @MichaelWolffNYC and the two panelists on the Ari Melber show (and perhaps Melber himself), who believe that Mueller pulled his punches.
I don’t see that the evidence supports this view. 23/28
When he closed up shop, Mueller already had enough evidence to show that the president obstructed justice. Mueller also reported (in Vol I) a ton of evidence showing that the campaign team had colluded — in any non-legal, ordinary language sense of the word — with Russia. 24/28
Mueller has been criticized for not subpoenaing Trump for an in person interview (either inside or outside the grand jury room), but he gives his reasons in the Report for that decision, and they are persuasive. (Vol II:13) 25/28
But Mueller also respected the OLC opinion that a sitting president cannot be indicted. He not only respected it and stayed within it: he also ACCEPTED it himself — which is why he told Barr that it was not the case that he would have indicted Trump “but for” that opinion. 26/28
So Mueller didn’t close shop before he had the goods on Trump. He did so after he had more than enough, either for Congress to impeach and remove, or for indictment after he leaves office.
(See my “Reader’s Guide to the Mueller Report,” 124 pp.) 27/28
And finally, for a great read, get Siege — a detailed and harrowing portrait of a batshit crazy, Looney Toons character who for 2–1/2 years has held the most powerful office in the world. 28/28
