What a surprise....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...al-exoneration-team-mueller-nope-not-so-much/
The new revelations in
the New York Times and
The Post about anger among Mueller investigators at Barr will make this spin — and that media framing — a lot harder to sustain.
The Times
reports that some of Mueller’s investigators “have told associates” that Barr “failed to adequately portray the findings of their inquiry,” and that they were “more troubling” for Trump than Barr’s letter indicated. Those Mueller investigators believe Barr “should have included more of their material.” It’s not clear from the Times report how exactly these investigators thought Barr’s letter oversimplified their findings.
But
The Post’s account adds substantially to this portion of the story. Barr’s
letter stated that Mueller’s report details evidence on “both sides” of the question of whether Trump committed criminal obstruction of justice, and said Barr stepped in to conclude that Mueller’s findings were “not sufficient” to establish that criminality. The Post report, however, says this:
Members of Mueller’s team have complained to close associates that the evidence they gathered on obstruction was alarming and significant.
“It was much more acute than Barr suggested,” said one person, who, like others, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the subject’s sensitivity.
Meanwhile, The Post also reports that Mueller’s team had prepared summaries of their conclusions. Critically, one official says this was done
so these summaries could be shared with the public, as
opposed to the public being informed by "the attorney general’s summary of their work, as turned out to be the case.”
