Mueller Investigation

Lindsey Graham Continues To Demonstrate Everything That's Wrong With Republicans in the Age of Trump

Graham's "evolution" during the Trump years has been more dramatic than most, but his performance on Wednesday was on par with how many other Republicans have handled the explosive details in the Mueller report.

|

Almost three years to the day from when he issued a now all-too-prescient warning on Twitter—"If we nominate Trump, we will get destroyed….and we will deserve it"—Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) gave a performance that reminds us of just how deeply Trumpism has corrupted the Republican Party.

Graham, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was nominally the man in charge of the committee's hearing on Monday—a hearing in which Attorney General William Barr offered his testimony and answered questions about his handling of the release of the report written by Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller.

Right from the start, Graham made clear that he did not see the hearing as an opportunity to clear up the remaining confusion about key differences between Barr's initial statements on the Mueller report and the details in the Mueller report itself. Instead of seeking answers, Graham picked up where Barr had left off in doing damage control for the president.

"After all this time and all this money, Mr. Mueller and his team concluded there was no collusion," said Graham, borrowing from Trump's favorite characterization of the Mueller report's outcome.

"As to obstruction of justice, Mr. Mueller left it to Mr. Barr to decide," Graham continued. "After two years and all this time, he said to Mr. Barr 'you decide' and Mr. Barr did."

Incredibly, that's an interpretation—some might say spin—that's even more generous to Trump than Barr's original framing of the Mueller report, which Mueller has criticized for not fully capturing the "context, nature, and substance" of his investigation.

Graham's claim that Mueller found "no collusion" is an oversimplification, at best, of the first half of the report, which details numerous attempts by both the Trump campaign and the Russian government to find common ground during 2016. Whether you agree with the senator's assessment likely depends on your existing opinions about what, exactly, constitutes "collusion."

But Graham is objectively wrong to claim that Mueller left the obstruction question for Barr "to decide." In fact, Mueller explicitly tossed that specific ball into Congress' court.

"The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President's corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law," the Mueller report states.

That's probably the right thing to do since longstanding Department of Justice precedent says a sitting president cannot be indicted. Mueller's report outlines 10 times that Trump attempted to interfere with the investigation—going as far as telling then-White House counsel Don McGahn "Mueller has to go. Call me back when you do it." Mueller was allowed to continue his investigation only because McGahn flat-out refused to follow a direct order from the President of the United States.

That same pattern emerges again and again in the Mueller report's damning second volume. "The President's efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests," the Mueller report says.

How did Graham describe Trump's actions?

"The president never did anything to stop Mueller from doing his job," Graham said Wednesday.

Members of Congress are free to draw their own conclusions from the Mueller report, of course, and that is exactly what Mueller appears to have intended by tossing the obstruction question into their court.

And to be fair, the Mueller investigation and report have driven nearly everyone in Washington to the brink of insanity. When Trump's critics inflate details of the report to create wild conspiracy theories completely unsupported by the facts, they are doing an equally significant disservice to the dialogue surrounding the president and what he may have done or not done with regard to Russia and the subsequent investigation.

Still, Graham's mischaracterization of both the report's findings and the legal process used to arrive at them is a telling indication that GOP leadership remains loyal to Trump's cult of personality.

Graham's "evolution" during the Trump years has been more dramatic than most, but his performance on Wednesday was on par with how many other Republicans have handled the explosive details in the Mueller report. Instead of using his immense power as the chairman of a powerful Senate committee to determine whether Trump's presidency should continue, or at least to get straight answers about why Barr apparently misled Americans about the content of Mueller's report, Graham is now making a show of rolling over for a president that he once said was a "kook" and "unfit for office."

NEXT: Florida Legislature Passes Moratorium on Straw Bans

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I hate to sound like a racist…

    Butt Lindsey Graham is a Graham Cracker!!! A “creepy-assed” cracker at that, in the words of the illustrious Treyvon Martin-went-a-fartin’!!!

    1. It is amazing the level of idiocy now on The Reason site. Sound like a racist? No but you appear to have single digit IQ scores. Don’t worry you share a great deal in common with the so-called Libertarian reporter that wrote this hack piece. I get it that most libertarians don’t like Trump but when considering the alternatives in the Democrat/ Socialist ranks I would argue it could be much much worse and if they are elected it will be in short order. If you don’t see that the Constitution is in grave danger in the hands of Democrats/Socialists and Progressives. Again I don’t expect you to understand this I question your ability to remember where you parked your car.

      1. Christ man. This plus your performance in the other threads. You’re embarrassing me and others in your age cohort.

        You obviously don’t know who these people are and are just kneejerk taking what they’re posting at face-value.

        1. SQRLY does say a lot of stupid shit though. He was in about something moronic just yesterday. As he does that frequently it tends to run together, and I can’t recall exactly what he was babbling about just this moment.

        2. I really fail to see any humor in what he posted if you had watched the Senate yesterday there was plenty to be embarrassed about. Likewise Reason has a great deal to be embarrassed about.

          1. And Trump? He hired a guy on the payroll of the Russian govt to run his campaign while his lawyer was trying to score a multi million dollar real estate deal with the Russian govt. Trump invited the Russian govt to hack his political opponents and they did. Trump offered to lift sanctions and he tried. If you only had a brain.

            1. Trump in Helsinki said he had no reason to doubt Putin’s denial of Russia’s interference in the 2016 election and then had to backtrack the very next day with an embarrassing (even for him) semantic trick which fooled no one but his anal-sniffing sycophants in the Republican kennels.

              https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-44852812

            2. “”Trump invited the Russian govt to hack his political opponents and they did.””

              Again with this crap. The hack occurred before Trump’s comment.

              1. That is a lie. The information was downloaded by an insider – Seth Rich who was disgusted that the DNC cheated Bernie in the primary. There is absolutely zero evidence that the DNC server was hacked and the fact that the DNC have refuse to allow the FBI to check their server because they KNOW it was not hacked. Julian Assuage has stated that the information was not given to him by ANY government and he posted a reward for information leading to the arrest of anyone for the murder of Seth Rich. Why would he do this if he did not know who Seth Rich was.
                The DNC and the Democrats shout to the rooftops about openness and continue to cover up any and all investigations into their own wrong doings.
                The Dems are the epitome of hypocrisy.

            3. Hillary is calling for China to get Trump’s tax returns.

              It’s a joke, but the same level of joke when Trump joked about Russian finding the 30,000 emails that Clinton deleted.

              Something the dems forget is those emails were under a subpoena and the Clinton camp deleted them. That’s obstruction of justice. If you care about principles over principals then you would want the obstruction prosecuted.

          2. BTW as one who fights dementia daily I retain the right to be embarrassing but thanks for your concern

    2. I would say he is being blackmailed. by and South Carloina Republican Top who knows way too much, and has the pictures.

  2. explosive. details.

    1. Yup. I stopped reading right there as well.

      1. Me too.

        Police state spying on a political campaign. Should be libertarian red meat.

        Reason is rooting for obstruction of a crime that never happened.

        Fucking embarrassing.

        1. Reason refuses to write a word about the abuses of the FBI and IC in spying on Trump. They just don’t give a shit about civil liberties anymore.

          1. This might have been one of the most asinine things I’ve read here.

            Does Boehm not remember that Mueller wasn’t exactly shy about charging people for nothing, such as the Russian company that didn’t exist when they committed the “crime”? If there was anything, his rabid dog prosecutors would’ve gone hog wild.

            “That same pattern emerges again and again in the Mueller report’s damning second volume. “The President’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the President declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests,” the Mueller report says.”

            If Trump REALLY wanted him fired…he’d have done so. He did fire Comey, after all.

            “But Graham is objectively wrong to claim that Mueller left the obstruction question for Barr “to decide.” In fact, Mueller explicitly tossed that specific ball into Congress’ court.”

            Oh FFS — he was investigating an alleged CRIME. No, he did not put the prosecution of a CRIME into Congress’ hands, you fuckwit.

            “When Trump’s critics inflate details of the report to create wild conspiracy theories completely unsupported by the facts,”

            …like what you’ve done here, eh?

            1. Boehm’s life is worth literally nothing.

            2. Trump CONSIDERED firing Mueller. So clearly that is blatant obstruction of justice. According to progtarded democrats and their pets in the media anyway.

          2. They didn’t spy on Trump.

            That’s bullshit Trumpist conspiracy theory only believed by morons who can’t or won’t read the source documents that are publicly available.

            1. Dumbass that has no idea how FISA warrants work makes post calling others morons.

              5 eyes loopholes, unprecedented unmasking, misfud, halper and strozk all trying to entrap or create retroactive justification of spying. Shit, the entire Mueller investigation is a transparent attempt to create a retroactive justification for spying.

              They aren’t giving up because their only defense is a good offense right now.

              Boehm, most of the staff, and the trolls of reason who always seem to be the only ones cheering on the writers are little more than big government police state boot lickers.

              1. Lately, Reason posts are promoting bigger government and admiration for socialists. Whats next, a full endorsement of Bernie 2020?

            2. According to Merriam-Webster online definition of Spy (noun)

              a : one who keeps secret watch on a person or thing to obtain information

        2. There Does Not need to be an underlying Crime to be hauled into court on an Obstruction of Justice Charge. Any Type of deliberate attempts to slow, impede or thwart any LEGAL INVESTIGATION into an Alleged Crime. Ex: A teen is arrested for the alleged theft of $1,000. And that teens Mother starts taking measures of inserting herself into the investigation and starts taking up more and more of the investigators Time. Finally sick of the antics she’s arrested and charged with Obstruction of Justice. Then Her Son is found not to have taken anything. The money was misplaced. But His Mother still has to Answer for her stupidity of Obstruction of Justice.

          1. Except absolutely none of that happened here. Trump handed over a million pages of documentation. He made every single member of his staff available for questioning. Not once did he invoke executive privilege even though that was his right.
            He allowed Mueller to continue for 2 years when at any time he could have fired both Mueller and Rosenstein. He did not need to ask an underling to do the job for him. He could have picked up the phone and told both of them ‘You’re Fired’
            Tweeting and publically criticizing the investigation is NOT obstruction no matter how much Mueller says ‘I believe’
            Trump made no action whatsoever to stop the Mueller investigation, therefore there was NO OBSTRUCTION.

    2. I haven’t read anything this explosive since I saw the transcripts of LBJ complaining about pants chafing his “nuts.”

    3. Explosive details, it was written with a quill dipped in Olestra.

      1. With 20% verbal leakage?

    4. Yeah. An investigation can investigate, and find dirty laundry, but a prosecutor’s job is to prosecute crimes: if no indictments for crimes are handed down, then the investigator has no business, and in fact is legally,ethically, and morally prohibited from, publicizing said dirty laundry. Mueller is a punk ass bitch.

      1. As are all his cronies and pretty much every democrat.

  3. It’s ironic to read an article complaining about the Republican mischaracterization of the Mueller report that itself mischaracterizes the Mueller Report.

    1. That’s the funny thing about it.

      1. It is also funny to hear someone who seems to be totally obsessed with Trump to accuse Trump’s supporters of being a “cult of personality”.

  4. There were no explosive details. There was nothing. There was no collusion. All there was was Trump being pissed off that he was being investigated for something so absurd. Give it up reason. It is pathetic. You sound like 911 truthers

    1. At this point I hope Mueller does testify. I don’t think it’s going to go the way the antiTrump crowd thinks it will. They have miscalculated Mueller in their wishful thinking.

      1. I think you are right. There is nothing there and Mueller more than anyone knows that. What do they expect him to say?

        1. They expect him to come out and contradict Barr. Which isn’t not likely to happen. Particularly since Barr and Mueller have been in contact.

          I think it would be funny as hell if Mueller came out and criticized everyone trying to connect dots to make something out of Mueller’s report that he did conclude.

          1. This IS Trump, for pete’s sake. Hilary lost, so Trump must be guilty of *something*!

            1. He’s obviously guilty of being innocent…

            2. Worst candidate in the history of elections loses elections – should be a dog bites man story. But we’re dealing with progressives, who are the worst people in the history of people.

              1. Progressives are not people.
                They are a hive mind. Like insects

        2. Now the information unearthed in the investigation must be used to investigate and prosecute all the de cheats that actually were involved in criminal activity.

    2. You sound like 911 truthers

      I disagree. When a 9/11 truther slams a plane into a building to prove that jet fuel can’t melt steel, then Reason’s position about the ‘explosive truths’ contained in the Mueller report will seem reasonable in comparison.

      1. I’m pretty buzzed, and that still doesn’t make any sense.

        1. I’ll vape up real good later and see if that helps. If not, I’ll get even higher and read it again. At some point it will click, or I will pass out.

        2. I’m pretty buzzed, and that still doesn’t make any sense.

          9/11 truthers are cheering for an impossible truth, a Hail Mary. Reason, OTOH, is (still) cheerleading a report that, at this point, represents an ‘own goal’.

          9/11 truthers have been and are mostly harmless. Nobody’s questioned the Constitutionality of a President firing the head of the FBI for investigating the truth about 9/11. Nobody’s home was raided by a SWAT team because of 9/11 truthers.

          So:
          Crazy Guy 1 is wearing a gas mask because chemtrails.
          Crazy Guy 2 is in the clock tower taking pot shots at people below. Crazy Guy 3 is on the ground cheering on Crazy Guy 2, hoping he manages to hit Trump .

          IMO, craziest to least crazy is 2, 3, 1. Crazy Guy 1 would have to start doing something far more afoul of the NAP to get ahead of either of the other two, IMO.

    3. from HRC: China are you listening? can you fwd Trump tax returns?

      every R and C will agree , no crime warrants no investigation?

      1. What’s funny is watch how context matters for Hillary but not Trump. Both said it as a joke.

  5. When is reason going to merge with salon?

    1. They’ve been moving more in the Vox direction. It’s not just the political and cultural tilt. Much of the writing is dumbed down from what it was even a few years ago. They’re adopting that “I just learned this new wrong thing, let me flail at condescendingly trying to explain it to you” tone.

      1. Whines the fella who just can’t leave.

  6. when Mexico helps Biden, maybe sending over a flood of immigrants or maybe delaying that same flood, whichever is the better play, you guys will of course be satisfied if a Biden staffer says ‘nothing to see here”.

  7. Who cares whether RM said Congress should decide something or the DOJ? Yes I’m serious. It’s not his call. (Not to mention the constitutionality of his appointment in the first place.)

  8. Right from the start, Graham made clear that he did not see the hearing as an opportunity to clear up the remaining confusion about key differences between Barr’s initial statements on the Mueller report and the details in the Mueller report itself.

    Are you fucking serious? WE HAVE THE REPORT. WHO GIVES A DAMN WHAT BARR’S INITIAL STATEMENTS WERE, MADE A COUPLE OF DAYS BEFORE THE RELEASE OF THE REPORT?

    At no point do you explain why the hell we should care about them.

    Graham’s claim that Mueller found “no collusion” is an oversimplification, at best, of the first half of the report, which details numerous attempts by both the Trump campaign and the Russian government to find common ground during 2016.

    No, that’s not an oversimplification. There was no collusion. You’re not even capable of pointing to anything more than ‘trying to find common ground’. Something you didn’t have a problem with when Obama’s ‘Russian reset’. They found some common ground there.

    1. Did Obama collude with Iran?
      How about with Cuba?

      Come on, Reason, be fucking consistent. For once.

      1. Did Emperor Hussein interfere in an Israeli election?
        Using US tax dollars?
        Does the honey badger care?
        Who is John Galt?

        1. And Georgia.

          And Ukraine.

          And Iraq.

          And Libya.

          And Venezuela.

          I’m sure there’s a bunch more, but that’s the list rattled off the top of my head from publicly acknowledge efforts.

        2. Ive never had badger dipped in honey. Is it good?

          1. A good thing to remember is to make sure it’s dead first.

    2. There isn’t any examples of that. The report actually says that once Trump won the election, the Russians didn’t know who to call. There were so many close contacts with the Russians that Russians had no idea who to talk to in the Trump transition team.

      This might be the most asinine thing reason has ever published. It is right up there with Richman’s the American Sniper guy is like the Sandy Hook shooter article.

      1. Did they stop publishing Sheldon’s work here? I haven’t noticed any of his articles in months.

    3. Yeah, I made it to exactly that first quote before I copied it to come down here and comment.

      If you believe for even one second that this hearing was supposed to be about “clearing up confusion about key differences…”, then you are not firing on all cylinders. And if you believe for even one second that there was any reason at all for congress to “investigate” the statement made by AG Barr as he released the report, you are part of the problem.

      That’s not congressional oversight. That’s petty political points scoring. And it is stupid, petty political points scoring at that.

      Next you’ll be calling for the FBI to investigate a speech made by Chuck Schumer about the President for “discrepancies from the record.”

      If this is really your opinion – you are sucked into the world of partisan politics and nobody should be bothering to digest your opinions. Barr could have stood up there and sung “God Bless America” in Kate Smith drag and it wouldn’t have been an excuse for congress to investigate anything.

      In an extremely long list of dumb takes inspired by this round of politics, this is one of them.

      1. Don’t take that shovel away; let ’em keep digging.

  9. Barr looked like a deer in headlights when Sasse started talking about Manafort and the work he did for that Russian mob boss. Barr didn’t want to talk about it saying it best left to q closed session. Trump’s campaign manager was on the payroll of the Russian mob. There’s your collusion right there by the ordinary understanding of the word at the very least.

    1. Sasse looked like a deranged lunatic. And stop fucking lying. No one buys it.

      1. Yea, Sasse looked retarded. It was embarrassing

      2. Now John, OP obviously does. But then, ‘he wants to believe’.

        1. No I just understand human psychology and it makes me more aware then I guy like you who fantasies about mass murdering your political opponents.

          1. No I just understand human psychology

            Not by any objective measure I’ve seen. It’s mostly been a projection of your own exceptional neuroses.

          2. No, you’re fucking nuts. Shove your ad hominem arguments up your shithole where they came from.

    2. Aww still trying anything. Yeap, sure Manafort worked for a mob boss. …oh wait that’s in your fairy tale.

      You know unlike Biden without aid from Ukraine till they stopped investigating his son. Or Hillary making tons off a deal. Or Obama and Iran.

      Keep trying for your team.

      1. I read the NY Times article on Biden’s kid and Ukraine. Very interesting.

    3. “” Trump’s campaign manager was on the payroll of the Russian mob. There’s your collusion right there by the ordinary understanding of the word at the very least.””

      Collusion of what?
      Makes me wonder if you know the meaning of the word. Just because you can point to a relationship does not mean they were doing things you think they were doing.

      Was this the same guy Podesta was working for?

      1. Collusion is akin to fascist now. Fascist means “Republicans, because I don’t like them.” Collusion means “Things fascist Republicans do, because I don’t like them.”

        1. Collusion means trying to get Putin “on board” with “electing our boy Trump”. Collusion means taking money from a Russian oligarch and using your position as a campaign manager to change GOP policy to favor the mob boss. Collusion means meeting with representatives of the Russian govt to discuss trading sanctions relief for dirt on Hillary. Collusion means sending your coffee boy to Russia to find the Hillary emails. Collusion means using your lawyer to work out a real estate deal with the Russian govt while you’re running for public office. Collusion means asking the Russian govt to find your opponent’s secret communications. Collusion means trying to lift sanctions on Russia to reward them for interfering on your behalf. Collusion means parroting Putin’s lies about not interfering and trying to shut down the investigation into Russian scheming.

          1. Good thing none of that stuff happened, then.

          2. All that is true b-b-but Hillary!

            1. Are you talking about that lady who was not prosecuted because they said they could not prove criminal intent beyond reasonable doubt?

          3. So where’s your spittle-flecked rant about the COLLUSION with Russia of Obama and Hillary, you ignorant partisan hack?

            1. Principals over principles. Partisan hacks need it for self esteem purposes.

      2. Manafort was sharing campaign data and discussing campaign strategy with this Russian mob boss’s henchman. Manafort was altering the GOP platform for this Russian mob boss. Manafort was trying to negotiate a way to end the sanctions against Russia with the henchman of this Russia mob boss. Y’all are the delusional ones. The useful idiots as the Russians put it.

        1. Stop lying, you’re sounding manic at this point.

        2. How is working with a mob boss collusion with the Russian government?

    4. OK. You do know the Russian mob in the United States has nothing to do with the Russian government, right?

      That’s why they’re here in the US and not running things in Russia.

      1. The Deripaska guy has everything to do with the Russian mob. The Russian govt is the mob.

    5. Ordinary Person
      May.1.2019 at 6:33 pm
      “…There’s your collusion right there by the ordinary understanding of the word at the very least.”

      There’s OP’s post once again competing it the ‘worst case of TDS’ event right there. And getting a 4.5

    6. Firstly, Manafort was working for the Ukraine, not Russia. You do realise they are 2 different countries who actually hate each other.
      Secondly, Manafort worked for the Ukraine over 10 years before he became Trump’s campaign manager, so no collusion.
      What most idiot Dems don’t understand is that if there were any sniff of evidence of collusion then Mueller and Weisman would have stated it in the report.

  10. His job was to investigate Russian interference, and any US political collusion in that effort.
    He did in fact determine there was no collusion by anyone Trump-ish.
    Yet not word one about the collusion of Hillary Clinton’s campaign and GPS.
    Yet not word one about the collusion of GPS and the FBI.
    Yet not word one about the collusion of the FBI and DOJ.
    Yet not word one about the collusion of Russia and the democrats.
    And finally, after millions of dollars and ruined lives, he refuses to make the specific decision required, collusion or not? It was his call. and he refused to do his job. He should have to personally repay the costs of the investigation.

    1. And not one word about collusion between the media and Democrats.

      1. The Democrats are the media and the media are the Democrats. More like incest.

      2. It is impossible to determine whether the media is the propaganda arm of the DNC or if the DNC is the political wing of the media oligarchs.
        I go for the former because when Pelosi started to talk about health care this was a clear message to the media to run health care talking points 24/7 which is exactly what they did.

  11. WTF Reason, why are you letting people with Trump Derangement Syndrome write nonsense “articles” like this here?
    This crap belongs in the CNN comment section, not here

    1. Not even CNN, it’s more MSNBC.

      1. Hell, it’s almost past MSNBC and into DemocraticUnderground fever swamp teritory.

        1. +r Dammit. My kingdom for an edit button.

  12. It makes me sad to witness the destruction of the Republican Party. Politicians who used to at least pretend to be honorable have become sniveling boot lickers trying to cozy up to sub-human Trump.

    1. Calling the other side sub human. Keep it classy dickhead. Keep it classy.

    2. Unlike the democrat party that are all victims right? You keep it classy. Liberals are so tolerant afterall

    3. KWlib
      May.1.2019 at 6:35 pm
      “It makes me sad to witness the destruction of the Republican Party.”
      It makes me sad to see but one more dick-head make an ass of himself. No, it really doesn’t, dick-head.

      “Politicians who used to at least pretend to be honorable have become sniveling boot lickers trying to cozy up to sub-human Trump.”
      Dick-heads who were probably never honorable have been infected with TDS, dick-head. Seek help.

    4. Aww, do you need a wetnap and a safe space to curl up in?

      I loathe Trump but your pathetic whining makes you even more loathsome.

  13. TDS is strong at Reason.

    Before Trump was elected “We are going to impeach him”
    For 2 years – “He colluded with the Russians”
    For months – “He’s obstructing justice”

    Did Trump, like say Obama use executive privilege to stop anything? No.

    Was there collusion? No
    Did he obstruct justice – some view it yes, some view anything Trump as wrong (Tony).

    Reason, you used to be a great site. Now the commentators are great but you are horrible.

  14. As I predicted months ago, Mueller definitively proved Drumpf is a Russian intelligence asset who colluded with a hostile foreign power to win a hacked election. It is now the duty of all patriotic Americans to sign the MoveOn petition demanding impeachment.

    #MaddowWasRight
    #OlbermannWasRight

  15. Eric is enjoying his Russian Tofu Nothing Burger with a side of free range illegal aliens.

    1. You don’t want to know what the “special sauce” is.

      1. You cannot say on a family website but it definitely is a product of the journolist

        1. I’m trying to stop using vulgar language.

          1. Fuck that; obscenity serves a purpose when describing obscene events. Like the attempt by the Democrats, media, and Deep State, to overturn the results of an election that they didn’t like. Fuck those assholes- they are the true enemies of freedom.

            1. Overturn the election? You do realize the Senate Republicans were always the only people with that power and arguably also Trump’s cabinet officials.

              1. Overturn the election?

                Contesting the election is what Steele said was the purpose of the dossier.

          2. I’m trying to use more vulgar language. And cackle more when I say something mean to a prog. So as to really rub it in.

  16. Another shit article. I wish Trump would have fired Mueller via McGahn just so the claim that this would be obstruction could have been obliterated. Trump can do whatever he wants with the executive branch (and his pardon power). Asking McGahn to fire Mueller, even if there are some reasons that the Courts would say the President can’t use his discretion to use (which would create massive separation of powers issues – particularly if POTUS then just ignored the Court), could be defended on many grounds. If he thought Mueller was wasting money, not doing a good job, being political, taking too long, or he just didn’t like him — any of those reasons would suffice.

    This article reads like someone with no legal education or understanding of the Constitution wrote it. I get it. Trump is icky because he represents a lot of lower middle class people. For a publication entitled “Reason,” there sure as fuck isn’t a lot of it being used.

    1. This is the same fucking retard who wrote an entire article trying to defend the private property rights of a couple of squatters here in Pittsburgh. While i disagree with the law he was writing about…his dumbass wrote the article citing the situation of a couple already reported locally to be squatting on the property. That’s why they couldn’t produce the deed dumbass!

      But this idiot writes an entire article about them like their victims…of all the possible misuses of the conservatorship law he picked the example that was total bullshit and already reported as such locally a full day prior.

      It’s was some of, if not the, most pathetic journalism i ever read.

  17. There has been no “evolution”. It’s exactly unusual for politicians to trash nominees from the own party only to embrace him later. Graham was always a company man who was in the center when it came to immigration and some other issues. He was Mccain’s best friend. The right wing detested him as a RINO. Remember Grahamnesty?

    Now that Graham is on Trump’s side, his former fans view him as a turncoat. It’s politics as usual, and libertarians aren’t immune to tribalism.

    Reason seems almost completely undisturbed by the fact a probe of this scale was launched from on a phony dossier, a single meeting at Trump tower and political pressure. Barr concluded that Trump tried to fire Mueller based on his sincere belief that the probe was unethical / witch hunt. Does Reason have evidence of corrupt intent? Trump cooperated with the probe fully, aside from his refusal to be interviewed solo.

    If we ever find that illegal surveillance and corrupt / biased agents were involved in this probe, then is it all that different from Silk Road? Why aren’t libertarians alarmed by a politically motivated power play by the government that was rooted in less than 100% facts? I don’t get it. Trump’s unethical behavior in some instances isn’t enough to offset the many things that went wrong in this probe.

    1. Graham seemingly has found his testicles since McCain died.

  18. Graham’s claim that Mueller found “no collusion” is an oversimplification, at best, of the first half of the report, which details numerous attempts by both the Trump campaign and the Russian government to find common ground during 2016.

    Here’s right-wing reactionary Glenn Greenwald on the” fixation on the legalistic language that Mueller included in his report finding that we didn’t establish something doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.”

    1. Greenwald really has covered himself with glory on this issue. The contrast between his integrity and reason’s complete sellout on the issue is pretty striking

      1. A Men

    2. They’ve never established that I sprouted wings and flew to Alpha Centuri, but everyone better stop what they are doing until that proof is found.

  19. I stopped at the 6th paragraph. No collusion is an oversimplification?!? GTFO This is an embarrassment

  20. Center-right authoritarian partisan hacks. Probably inspired that school shooter too.

  21. While I’m not a fan of president donald trump, didn’t vote for him and probably never will, it is very apparent that the media, democrats and never trumpers are attempting to reverse the election. The are very willing to use a mentality that ends justify the means even if they become the embodiment of what they are claiming that donald trump is. If the this was attempted during the obama presidency these very same people would have screamed at the top of their lungs. It’s time that they grow up and accept that they lost the election. If they don’t like trump then they should do what they can to elect someone else the next election cycle. The beauty of our democratic republic is that we typically have a peaceful exchange of power. It’s sad and disgusting that these idiots are attempting to thwart the outcome of the last presidential election.

    1. Exactly my perspective. My GF likes to say that I’m “supporting” Trump, or Kavanaugh, or whomever, when I feel that what I’m supporting is the rule of law. All these conspirators need to see the inside of a courthouse.

      1. Tell your girlfriend she needs to stop hanging out with bitter, forever alone wine moms.

      2. Or the inside of a gas chamber.

    2. For about a year I kept prefacing comments about idiotic criticisms of Trump with disclaimers about how I was so against him that I loudly and publicly predicted that he would not get one single vote.

      But the insanely stupid and off base criticisms keot coming. Eventually I gave up on the prefacing disclaimer. If you want to know my stance on Trump just go back to 2016. You’ll see plenty. Mostly about how he is too stupid for anyone to seriously support him.

      I even gave up imploring people to stop forcing me to defend him.

      At this point the critics have proven that they are even dumber than Trump.

      1. Cyto
        May.1.2019 at 9:02 pm
        “For about a year I kept prefacing comments about idiotic criticisms of Trump with disclaimers about how I was so against him that I loudly and publicly predicted that he would not get one single vote. ”

        Yep, and now it turns out to dimwits like turd, I was a Trump supporter all along!
        Imagine my surprise!

    3. Reverse the election? How exactly does that happen? If Trump gets impeached and convicted it will be with Republican Senate votes. Votes from Trump partisans. Trump is no victim. He’s the president of the United States. If he can’t handle the heat then he’s in the wrong business.

      1. It’s not about reversing the election but to take down Trump because he beat Hillary.
        Here’s a question for you. Steele has testified in court that the purpose of the dossier was so Hillary could contest the election. How do you operationalize that? Use it in a secret court against Trump via proxy? Spread it in the media?

      2. Trump is handling the heat quite well.
        It’s his haters that are melting down.

  22. The Democrats and the media haven’t learned a thing. I guess Hillary’s book didn’t really detail “what happened”. They are not going to get an indictment of a sitting president. That simply isn’t going to happen in any possible reality. The House can impeach if they want, but they’ll never get a conviction from the Senate. All they’ll do is guarantee every single person who could possibly vote for Trump will show up for him on election day.

    Yes, he’s a pretty terrible president. He’s a shining example of why we have checks and balances and separation of powers. But so what? Every president is that to some extent. And this is not the way to beat him if you want to beat him. The way to beat him is to… field a decent alternative candidate. Which no one is doing.

  23. What a dumb fuck article. Nick Gillespie is a joke.
    Better keep Stossel

  24. Man, I’m too late as all the Trump bootlickers have already come out in force to defend him against whatever. Doesn’t matter anymore- anything Trump did was fine, great even. Killed someone? Who cares? MAGA right?

    Article hits the nail on the head. Graham has fallen into what a pathetic display the Republican party has become. The only justice would be seeing the requisite parties in prison for their crimes (yes, their crimes, get over it you pathetic cultists) and the destruction of the Republican party by the voters. Then you could work on reforming the system so we could get rid of the Dems too and have some actual legit representation.

    1. Look everyone, a drive by retarding.

    2. “all the Trump bootlickers”

      You got the licking part right, but a little higher. No, higher. OK, around to the back. Between the cheeks. Spead ’em and lick the hole. Mmm, Trump!

      1. A proglydyte with an anal fixation–must be that kiddie-porn linking, bet-welshing pederast shriek.

      2. Prog harder, Chip!

    3. Well, once you Deep State clowns tell us what we Trump bootlickers need to defend Trump against, we’ll start working on it. Right now, we’re just mocking you.

  25. “The libertarian case for Stacy Abrams: She doesn’t look like someone who would ban food trucks”

    1. She definitely appears to often have the munchies.

  26. Shorter Reason: “Why won’t Lindsey Graham be more like John McCain?”

  27. Oh fuck off Eric

  28. Yawn. Can this fake Russia stuff go away already yet?

    1. It won’t, the Democrats just cannot accept Trump beat Hillary and won. Now they want anyone that disagrees with their pre-drawn conclusions to resign. When Trump wins again, expect 4 more years of this nonsense. Even if and when the Democrats win the Presidency and Congress, they will not forget Trump won, will change the constitution on the electoral college, and then that will come back to bite them in the ass.

  29. Reporting like this is an embarrassment to Reason.

    1) Barr does not subscribe to belief that you can “obstruct” a crime that did not happen. This is not so “crazy right wing” belief. In fact, while it is outside the mainstream of Proprietorial norms, it is not that far out. Many prosecutors subscribe to this. If reason didn’t suffer from the same TDS as the rest of the media, they would likely subscribe to this as well. Obstruction of a Non-crime would not be a crime in any sane world.

    2) The report was absolutely NOT for congress. It was written and submitted to rod rosenstein, who then was obligated to turn it over to the Attorney General. It WAS the attorney generals job to make the final call on weather Obstruction took place. As, as noted above, when the underlying crime of a criminal conspiracy was non-proven by Muller or the 5000 subpoenas nor the hundreds of witness statements, nor the constitutionally questionable raid of his then attorney, Michael Cohan when they raided his office, Barr made the choice not to indict Trump. A case he was almost certainly going to fail to make and he knew it.

    3) As to the 2nd volume, have you EVEN READ IT!? I suggest you go down to your fact checker’s office and snag a copy, and actually read it for yourself. Then find a 1st year lawyer at any law office east of san francisco and west of chicago. I think you might find that your case wont hold up real well.

    1. good god I hate spell check. I corrected this thing about 3 times, and I click post and the damn thing is unintelligible. Well, good luck, I think you more or less get my reasoning, which I dare say is more reasonable than the reasoning of Reason these days.

    2. “Reporting like this is an embarrassment to Reason.”

      If they could be embarrassed by their propaganda, they wouldn’t be spreading it.

  30. Ya’ll are going to die in the desert, pounding that drum, waiting for rain, aren’t you?

  31. ‘ Barr’s original framing of the Mueller report, which Mueller has criticized for not fully capturing the “context, nature, and substance” of his investigation. ‘

    Who could have ever imagined that a 4 page summary wouldn’t “fully” capture everything a 400 plus report report?

    1. If he could have captured everything in four pages, it would have been a pretty crappy 400 page report.

  32. “The conclusion that Congress may apply the obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law,” the Mueller report states.

    That seems pretty straightforward for the average English-speaker with a pulse and a functioning brain. But let’s translate it into Republicanese, just for kicks:

    “No collusion, FAKE NEWS, Crooked Hillary, 12 Angry Democrats, NO COLLUSION, #MAGA!!!

    1. Don’t know the difference between obstruction and collusion Tony?

  33. a question: as the invasion of Venezulea move inexorably forward, who , of the trump brainiacs , will devise and manage the strategy.

  34. […] General Bob Barr by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Reason‘s Eric Boehm has torn apart Lindsey Graham’s shameful performance during […]

  35. Trump was hounded by the Deep State for two years over Hillary’s conspiracy theories and it turns out there was nothing to it. And this is Eric’s “libertarian” response.

  36. At the tail of the article is it’s truest comment, “to be fair, the Mueller investigation and report have driven nearly everyone in Washington to the brink of insanity.” From the rest of the piece, its obvious this is applies to the author.

  37. Not sure how much more of this garbage I can read.

  38. Enough Reason. You’re being made a useful idiot to the retard Democrat party.

    Honk, honk.

    1. for
      Instead of wasting time with this crap give us an edit button.

      1. “give us an edit button”

        Still waiting for that? You’re dumber than the average bear.

  39. So the story here is that Graham believed the disgustingly bias media and went with the flow. Now, with overwhelming evidence that contrary to this ridiculous prediction, the economy is soaring on every single metric, Reason is criticizing Graham for changing his opinion of Trump.

  40. “…which Mueller has criticized for not fully capturing the “context, nature, and substance” of his investigation.”

    This is utter bullshit. If Mueller had something he wanted to get across to us, clearly and unabmiguously, he had every opportunity to say it. This is calculated to cast doubt forever. He wants us to suspend critical thinking and substitute an endless quest to prove a negative. This is another political boondoggle. I’m throwing his objections in my mental circular file.

  41. As I’ve opined before, if you are unjustly accused of something, it is not obstruction of justice to defend yourself, because there was no existing “justice” to obstruct. Not defending yourself (the opposite) would be facilitation of injustice. And this has nothing to do with Trump. It should be clear that this applies to anyone accused of anything.

  42. “explosive details in the Mueller report.”
    FFS. There was nothing new or “explosive” in it. It’s all old news, except for what wasn’t in it: Nothing New. The problem is that there are two sides, who have chosen to define the words “collision” and “obstruction” in two different ways. As long as that continues, we cannot have a solution. Let’s just move on.

  43. […] Top-notch Trump sycophants like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) have gone further, claiming that “the president never did anything to stop Mueller from doing his job,” despite […]

  44. […] investigation. Top-notch Trump sycophants like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R–S.C.) have gone further, claiming that “the president never did anything to stop Mueller from doing his job,” despite […]

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.