Schrödinger’s Report

Everyone sure has strong opinions on a report that only about three people have read. Until we see the Mueller report, it’s more Schrödinger’s report than anything—we don’t know why they didn’t pursue charges against the administration, and we also don’t know why the report didn’t charge or exonerate the president from obstruction of justice charges. Was there not enough evidence? Until we see the full report, we don’t know if that cat is alive or dead.

I was initially surprised when I heard about the attorney general concluding there was “no collusion” since it seemed anticlimactic after almost two years. But if it’s unambiguously true that the president did not conspire with a foreign power to sway the results of an election, that’s a good thing (if there’s any sort of shenanigans or cover-up with the report, that’s when I’d be angry). It’s not like if they found conspiracy that Democrats should be thrilled that the commander in chief did something so horrifying. On the other hand, Republicans should find that the investigation was worthwhile, since it did establish that Russia had a hand in the election results and it did charge quite a few people with crimes that may not otherwise have been uncovered.

The White House is taking a victory lap. Fine, but what they really need to understand is they’re celebrating the fact that the president of the United States did not conspire with a foreign power to steal an election, and that’s about the lowest bar there is for public service.

Plus, no matter the final results, the president’s national security advisor, attorney, and campaign manager are all headed to jail. What does that say about the president’s judgment? What did the Russians see in the president that they wanted to ensure his election? Why does our president side with Russia over our own intelligence agencies? Why has the president tried to undermine our traditional alliances? These are questions that Congress and the public have to ask, and the answers are something Robert Mueller can’t give us.

There are also many points that the report may not have covered. There are the president’s business dealings in Russia, foreign donations to the inaugural fund, questions about sanctions, etc. Many of these questions have been farmed out to other investigators. There is also the counterintelligence investigation into the president, and I don’t think that is covered here (from what I understand, counterintelligence evidence may not necessarily rise to the level of criminal charges, and Mueller was concerned with criminality). There are also questions about obstruction of justice that we cannot answer without the report, and that Bill Barr’s summary doesn’t help with.

I think we’ll see something much more nuanced when we can read the final report. We need to see the actual investigative language in the document, since investigators do not legally talk in terms of clearing or exonerating people; they find sufficient evidence to charge or they don’t. The absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. Without seeing the report itself, it’s ridiculous for Republicans to be dancing in the street or for Democrats to be putting their heads in the oven. All this over a four-page summary written by someone hired by the target of the investigation?

I did get caught up in the intrigue of Mueller Time and Indictment Fridays, since I enjoy political stuff like this. But in the last few months, I started realizing that the report would probably not be as black or white as either side might hope. There are many, many important things to focus on beyond all this Russia stuff. If you’re dissatisfied with the administration, there is plenty the president and his advisors have done in the open to focus on. We should look at those things but also seek the final, full report so we can learn and do a postmortem.

I never believed Robert Mueller was going to come riding in on a white horse and save us all. If we’re unhappy with the president, we need to change the government the old-fashioned way: Vote.