Deep meaning of the Mueller probe (2)

I think that Andrew McCarthy may be the only reliable guide to the witch hunt conducted by Robert Mueller in the guise of a counterintelligence investigation. He is an experienced former federal prosecutor. He knows what he is talking about.

The excitement conveyed by the leaks and reports related to it verges on hysteria; the press is excited by the prospect of Trump’s removal from office. For them, it is the consummation devoutly to be wished. I took a look at McCarthy’s weekly NRO column this past Saturday in “The deep meaning of the Mueller probe.” In Saturday’s column he concluded: “Mueller’s investigation is a semblance of law-enforcement disguising the brute reality that Trump is being punished for winning the election and defying Obama policy.”

Today McCarthy returns to the scene of the noncrime (or nonprime, as the autocorrect is telling me). He expands on Saturday’s column, itemizing three points in ascending order of importance:

1.) There is a great deal of misinformation in the commentariat about how prosecutors build cases.

2.) For all practical purposes, the collusion probe is over. While the “counterintelligence” cover will continue to be exploited so that no jurisdictional limits are placed on Special Counsel Robert Mueller, this is now an obstruction investigation.

3.) That means it is, as it has always been, an impeachment investigation.

McCarthy then explains the usual course of major criminal investigations involving multiple actors. He points out the departures from the usual course in this case. In terms of the protection of an underlying substantive crime, there is less here than meets the eye.

We should all understand what is happening here and where we are headed. McCarthy’s column gives the help we need to understand. I urge interested readers to take in the whole thing.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line