Law & the Courts

Did Mueller Sit on His No-Collusion Conclusion?

Special counsel Robert Mueller delivers a statement on his investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election at the Justice Department in Washington, D.C., May 29, 2019. (Jim Bourg/Reuters)
If so, why did he do it?

What did Robert Mueller know, and when did he know it?

This was among the questions that the Russiagate special counsel dodged at Wednesday’s Justice Department photo opportunity. More concretely, did Mueller promptly report his no-collusion conclusion, or did he cover it up for months, to enervate President Donald J. Trump and energize Democrats? Meanwhile, America tore itself in two.

Mueller’s 22-month-long inquiry was like chemotherapy — an invasive, all-consuming nightmare, though seemingly necessary to excise a malignancy. Serious suspicions existed that the Republican party’s standard-bearer conspired with the Kremlin to capture the White House.

The chemo eventually worked. It confirmed that there was no collusion. The Oval Office is not occupied by a Russian asset. If Dr. Mueller determined this in, say, mid-February and informed Attorney General William Barr on March 22, then Americans should applaud this fair timeline.

But what if Dr. Mueller last year deemed Team Trump cancer-free but, nonetheless, continued this exhausting, divisive, demoralizing chemotherapy — for at least eight extra months?

Why such cruelty? Did Mueller intend to keep Trump off balance and unable to focus completely on his agenda? Did Mueller mean to rejuvenate Democrats, so that they would resist the “Russian agent” who denied Hillary her “birthright?” And did Mueller (or his angry-Democrat staff) leave this smear against Trump uncorrected so that information-deprived voters would hand Democrats the House?

Under-covered passages of Mueller’s report strongly suggest that he engaged in malpractice rather than good medicine.

“As soon as news broke that Trump had been elected President, Russian government officials and prominent Russian businessmen began trying to make inroads into the new Administration,” the report states on page 144. “They appeared not to have preexisting contacts and struggled to connect with senior officials around the President-Elect.”

“At approximately 3 a.m. on election night, Trump Campaign press secretary Hope Hicks received a telephone call,” Mueller’s report continues. Through this person’s thick foreign accent, Hicks deciphered the words “Putin call.” The next morning, Nov. 9, 2016, Hicks received the email she requested from the caller.

Russian Embassy official Sergey Kuznetsov contacted Hicks via Gmail. Subject line: “Message from Putin.” In an English/Russian attachment, according to Mueller, “Putin offered his congratulations to Trump for his electoral victory, stating he ‘look[ed] forward to working with [Trump] on leading Russian-American relations out of crisis.’”

Hicks and Trump’s son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner, according to his congressional testimony, then spent time authenticating this email by identifying, locating, and contacting Russian ambassador Sergey Kislyak. After Moscow’s man in Washington validated the email, Mueller’s report states, “Hicks conveyed Putin’s letter to transition officials. Five days later, on November 14, 2016, Trump and Putin spoke by phone in the presence of Transition Team members. …”

These delays frustrated Putin. Mueller cites Petr Aven, chief of Alfa-Bank, Russia’s largest commercial lender: Mueller states that Aven had a “one-on-one meeting with Putin” in the fourth quarter of 2016. “Aven also testified that Putin spoke of the difficulty faced by the Russian government in getting in touch with the incoming Trump Administration,” Mueller writes. “According to Aven, Putin indicated that he did not know with whom formally to speak and generally did not know the people around the President-Elect.”

If Trump and Putin had been in cahoots, they would have speed-dialed each other and toasted Trump’s triumph on Election Night. Instead, Putin’s greeting crawled toward the president-elect for five days.

What did Mueller know? “Trump-Russia collusion” was a Red Square-sized lie.

When did he know it? Kushner testified on July 24, 2017. Hicks spoke to the FBI on Dec. 8, 2017. Aven sang on Aug. 2, 2018.

So, Mueller knew this at least 95 days before the November 6 midterm elections. Mueller could have removed the “Trump is a KGB agent” albatross that hobbled the president and his party. But he didn’t. In essence, Mueller hid this exculpatory evidence from the 328 million jurors in America’s court of public opinion before they rendered their verdict on Trump and the GOP last November.

The House and Senate Judiciary Committees should subpoena Robert “No Questions” Mueller and make him explain publicly why he covered up this game-changing conclusion from at least August 2 through March 22 — with a national election wedged in between.

Deroy Murdock is a Manhattan-based Fox News contributor and a contributing editor of National Review Online.

Most Popular

Politics & Policy

Hillary Ruins the Plan

Editor’s note: Andrew C. McCarthy’s new book is Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. This is the first in a series of excerpts.  There really was a collusion plot. It really did target our election system. It absolutely sought to usurp our capacity for ... Read More

Another Pop-Culture Christian Loses His Faith

It’s happened again. For the second time in three weeks, a prominent (at least in Evangelical circles) Christian has renounced his faith. In July, it was Josh Harris, a pastor and author of the mega-best-selling purity-culture book I Kissed Dating Goodbye. This month, it’s Hillsong United songwriter and ... Read More

A Brief History of Election Meddling

Editor’s note: Andrew C. McCarthy’s new book is Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. This is the second in a series of excerpts. ‘The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back.” Thus spoke President Barack Obama just a couple of weeks before ... Read More

The End of Hong Kong as We Know It

The protests in Hong Kong have been going on for more than four months now, and no matter how the current crisis concludes in the coming days or weeks, it will mark the end of Hong Kong as we know it. The protests started in response to an extradition bill that was proposed by the city’s Beijing-backed ... Read More

Max Boot’s Dishonesty

Before yesterday, my primary criticism of the Washington Post’s Max Boot was political in nature. As I wrote in a recent book review, I found it regrettable that Boot’s opposition to the president had not prevented him from “succumbing reactively to Trump’s cult of personality, or from making Trump the ... Read More