Post by Deleted on Jan 19, 2019 14:52:57 GMT -5
For sure, the Buzzfeed article got something wrong. That happens. Journalists get stuff wrong. And to be sure, I want them to be careful and get things right. But the disappointment from some quarters and Team Maga's gloating is, IMO, not justified -- at best, it's premature. It is by no means clear exactly what about the story is wrong, and the carefully crafted statement from the Special Counsel's office leaves it wide open. It will be very interesting indeed to see what the story is when the Mueller investigations and SDNY investigations findings come out. We're gonna find out eventually.
A couple things about this:
1. As a lawyer, I found the statement from Mueller's office interesting. I know a very carefully crafted lawyer's statement when I see one. In any case, you can be sure Team Mueller, who so rarely issue a statement, craft any statement they make very carefully indeed. Mueller and his office are pros. (More on that point below.)
The statement doesn't say the story is false. It says:
"BuzzFeed's description of specific statements to the Special Counsel's Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen's Congressional testimony are not accurate," said Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mueller's office, in a statement.
(emphasis mine, for reasons that will become clear below.) For sure, Peter Carr is saying that something about the Buzzfeed story is not accurate. (And yes, I want journalists to get stuff right and not jump the gun -- this is a given). But it leaves wide open what and how much is not accurate. I.e., whether:
(a) the entire story is false, or that, at least, it may or may not be true, but at any rate the counsel's office has no information demonstrating its truth. That's what Team Maga is assuming. But you know what? I think the Special Counsel's office would say something more like that if that was what they meant. Their very careful and precise wording leads me to think it's more likely (b):
(b) there is just some aspect of the story -- its "description" of "specific" statements and "characterization" of documents/testimony that was "obtained by [the Special Counsel's office" -- that are "not accurate". And that aspect may have nothing to do with the heart of the story.
Go back and read the statement again, and remember that top notch lawyers carefully crafted it. (If you think Mueller's office spews stuff out the way Trump does, you have another think coming.)
This phrasing could mean, for example, simple that the information the Buzzfeed reporters received was not from Mueller's office, but instead from another source -- e.g., the much leakier Southern District of New York. It could also mean that while some "description" or some "characterization" of "specific" documents and testimony was "not accurate" it doesn't mean all of Buzzfeed's info was inaccurate. The heart of the story could be true, even if they got some aspects wrong.
I lean towards the former -- I think Buzzfeed has info (what they say is consistent with what Cohen has said, they claim to have documents, and they are still standing by their story). But since Mueller's ship is way tight, I don't think Buzzfeed got that info from the special counsel's office. I think someone involved in the SDNY investigation has loose lips.
I also think it likely that this is the main reason Mueller's team issued this statement, by the way -- to make it clear that their office is not the source of the leaks, and to protect the integrity of their investigation. They usually don't bother to comment on stories that purport to break news from the various investigations. But this one directly attributed info to the Special Counsel's office. They may have felt compelled to step up and make it clear that their ship is tight.
To note, this is exactly the statement I would have issued in those particular circumstances.
2. On that point -- that there have been a trillion stories breaking news about the investigations into Trump, Mueller's office has simply been mum with regard to them, and yet spoke up on this one --
Trump and Team Maga are accepting Mueller's statement as a repudiation of the Buzzfeed story and a vindication of Trump. Fine. Let's take it Team Maga's way for a minute. Does that mean they are ready now to acknowledge that Mueller has integrity, is merely seeking truth and justice, and that his investigation is not merely 13 Angry Democrats looking to sink Trump and invent partisan evidence against him? Does this mean that if Mueller does come up with a report concluding that Trump was in a conspiracy with Putin or whatever, that Team Maga will accept that evidence?
Excuse me while I laugh. I already know they won't. They will, as always, seize on whatever Mueller or anyone says that they feel is good (or at least not bad) for Trump as gospel, and simultaneous ignore or deny anything that looks bad and scream that it's all a fake witchhunt.
3. Again on that point -- Since Mueller did speak now, but has been silent with regard to all those other stories, does that make Team Maga wonder if maybe those other stories were accurate?
Excuse me while I laugh again. I already know that no matter what happens, even if there is video evidence and Trump confesses to a conspiracy, Team Maga will defend Trump and villify Mueller. Thus, all inferences will be drawn in favor of all the stories being Fake News.
Actually, for the record, that's not quite the inference I draw. The inference I draw is that the other stories may or may not be wholly accurate. This one may or may not be wholly accurate (or wholly inaccurate). But I believe the reason Mueller's team felt the need to pipe up is because the story sourced the info to the Special Counsel's office, which is not correct -- and I think they felt it was extremely important to correct this impression.
I'm on team "we have investigations going -- let's see what they say." We are simply not going to get real confirmation until then. As hungry as I am for news on this, I'd really like to have the news media be extra, more than usually careful about what they report.
4. Finally, I have to note the irony of Team MAGA gleefully jumping all over the occasional mistake or mischaracterization by mainstream news. If only they held their President, Mr. Lie An Average Ten Times A Day, and his reps, Lyin' Sarah Sanders and Fibbin' Kellyanne Conway, or their right-wing media, e.g., SethRich-propagating Fox News or Russian State Media RT -- to anything close to that standard. So fucking ridiculous that they hold Buzzfeed to a far higher standard than the President they elected.
ETA:
I had a drink with our own markesq last night. I told him to go look at the Mueller team's statement which he hadn't yet read. When he does read it, I'd be interested in hearing his lawyerly take.
ETA:
In any case, whatever the deal with this particular story, I stand by this: Trump is going down. By that, I don't mean he'll necessarily mean he'll be impeached and removed from office. That's a political remedy that I frankly think he's earned ten times over, but that we are unlikely to get with this Senate. (If it were Hillary, they'd have impeached her long ago.) What I mean is that I think he's guilty -- of many things, from financial crimes to conspiring with Putin -- and that sooner or later, most likely when he leaves office, he'll pay the price. Even if President Pence pardons him, he can't escape the state procedures. And I think his issues go back decades. He probably could have kept the older pre-inauguration stuff under wraps, if he'd lost the election. But he didn't. I think he goes down, and Junior with him. The thing that terrifies me is just how much he brings down with them. That's why I cannot just sit around smiling. This is going to suck.