The Barr Memo Is A Classic Legalism

The Barr memo released today is a classic legalism designed to obscure rather than illuminate the truth. His summary consists of two parts. In the first, he maintains that the Mueller report shows there was no conspiracy or coordination by the Trump campaign with the Russian government to influence the 2016 election. That determination consists of two parts. First, no “U.S. person or Trump campaign official or associate conspired or knowingly coordinated with the IRA in its efforts”. Second, Mueller “did not find that the Trump campaign, or anyone associated with it, conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in efforts” to influence the election.

The key legalism here is that Barr’s description of Mueller’s determination is solely focused on the Russian government. By that standard, a quid pro quo where Trump willingly accepted Russian help without actively coordinating with them in return for Trump Tower Moscow and/or a relaxation of sanctions would not be covered by this determination. In addition, neither would Manafort’s passing of internal polling data to Kilimnick since Kilimnick is not technically a Russian government official. Roger Stone’s interactions with Wikileaks is also not covered by this determination. In other words, the determination on conspiracy or coordination ignores the documented conspiracy and coordination with foreign nationals, many of whom are closely connected to the Russian government but are not an official part of it.

Having laid out that initial determination, Barr then ignores Mueller’s specific determination about possible obstruction of justice. On that issue, Mueller concluded that “while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him”. Barr, on his own, declares that the Mueller’s evidence “is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice offense”. He bases that decision on the fact that, since there was no underlying crime of conspiracy or coordination, the “absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction”. But, by restricting the underlying crime to coordination with the Russian government per se, Barr has eliminated other potential crimes that Trump may have thought he was exposed to and needed obstructing. Primary among those other potential crimes is the aforementioned quid pro quo. In addition, it is interesting to note that Barr can interpret “the President’s intent” since Mueller never even questioned Trump.

Barr’s memo is a classic legalism designed to give a definitive impression based on a very narrow interpretation. His willingness to ignore Mueller on the obstruction of justice has exposed his own bias, which he clearly laid out in his 20 page memo seeking the AG’s job. Nadler has already announced that intends to call Barr before the Judiciary Committee. What Barr’s memo does make crystal clear is that we need to see the full Mueller report and its underlying evidence in order for all Americans to make their own determination and not be swayed by the AG’s legalisms.

UPDATE: William Saletan does an even better job of detailing for numerous legalisms that Barr employed in his memo. Worth a read.