To the editor: “In other words, there was no evidence of Trump campaign collusion with the Russian government’s hacking.” Was this summary finding of special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s report by Atty. Gen. William Barr his own personal spin or a White House directive? (“Mueller’s report makes a mockery of Trump’s claim to ‘total exoneration,’” editorial, April 18)
Mueller’s mandate provided for investigation into conspiracy, a criminal act, between individuals involved in the Trump presidential campaign and Russia. Collusion, “not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the U.S. code,” according to Mueller, was not part of the investigation. Any attempt by Barr to conflate collusion with conspiracy is disingenuous and politically motivated.
Obstruction of justice is an entirely different matter. Given the report’s damning revelations that President Trump’s attempts to obstruct were designed to impede the investigation, and in light of prosecutorial constraints involving a sitting president, it is now up to Congress to remediate. With Republicans controlling the Senate, impeachment by the Democrat majority in the House of Representatives would likely be an exercise in futility.
It seems this all ends where it started: in the voting booth.
Jane Paladino, Tampa, Fla.
To the editor: This is from the Mueller report, Pages 53 and 54:
“Michael Cohen … recalled an incident in which he was in candidate Trump’s office in Trump Tower REDACTED. Cohen further told the Office that, after WikiLeaks’s subsequent release of stolen [Democratic National Committee] emails in July 2016, candidate Trump said to Cohen something to the effect of, REDACTED.
Later, the report continues:
“According to [Richard] Gates, by the late summer of 2016, the Trump Campaign was planning a press strategy, a communications campaign, and messaging based on the possible release of Clinton emails by WikiLeaks.” REDACTED while Trump and Gates were driving to LaGuardia. REDACTED, shortly after the call Trump told Gates more releases of damaging information would be coming.”
I’m so relieved to know my president is above suspicion.
Jeff Vaughn, Encino
To the editor: With Mueller’s investigation finally completed, will the Democrats stop this witch hunt against Trump?
Will they report to the people how much time they are spending on this witch hunt versus time spent on projects they promised to their constituents?
Stewart Rixson, Yorba Linda
To the editor: Two things jumped out at me after a quick reading of the Mueller report.
One, it seems that the president cannot be criminally charged with obstruction of justice because his aides refused to carry out his orders. Two, the president surrounded himself with unethical individuals willing to break laws and buddy up with Russia for monetary gain.
I don’t care about technicalities; I have not a shred of respect for this administration.
Linda Pulliam, Williams, Calif.
To the editor: With 39 years of law enforcement experience, including dealing with thousands of suspects, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that when the subject of an investigation declares to someone, “I’m [expletive],” prefaced with “this is the end of my presidency,” it’s a good indication that the person probably did something illegal.
Carlos A. Mestas, Simi Valley
To the editor: I’m relieved to see our attorney general, in justifying the president’s conduct during the Mueller investigation, take on the role of psychologist general of the United States.
This Cabinet-level position is sorely needed so we can understand why our poor, frustrated and misunderstood president constantly feels the need to lash out and lie.
Martin Wauson, Westminster