Robert Mueller's testimony is too little, too late
Why the former special counsel's appearance before the House this week is unlikely to make much of a difference
In some other universe, this would be the week that Donald Trump's presidency begins to fail.
In that happier alternate reality, former Special Counsel Robert Mueller would testify this week before Congress about the Trump campaign's links with Russia in 2016 — and any other presidential wrongdoing his investigation had discovered along the way — and that testimony, offered on live TV, would be so devastating that Republicans and Democrats would join together to demand the impeachment of the president, kickstarting a process that would finally bring an end to our latest long national nightmare.
Unfortunately, we're stuck with our reality.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Mueller is expected to testify before two House committees on Wednesday. But given his resistance to making this appearance — and his sphinx-like demeanor during his only other public comments on the Russia investigation — it seems likely he'll do his level-best to avoid offering straight answers.
"For anybody hoping he's going to provide new information or evidence against the president, I think many people will be very disappointed," a former aide to Mueller told The Washington Post.
Which means that by the end of this week, any decision about Trump's fitness for office will be hot-potatoed right back to where it has always belonged: in the lap of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). Given her reluctance to pursue an impeachment inquiry against the president, Mueller's testimony is unlikely to produce any tangible favorable results, either for Democrats or the American people.
It didn't have to be this way, of course.
Back in the spring — which in modern political terms was about two million years ago — I argued that Mueller's congressional testimony could well be devastating to Trump if it turned him into an "instant TV star by knocking down the central pillars of Trump's 'Russia hoax' narrative."
The key word there, though, was "instant." If Mueller's testimony had been offered when I wrote those words, instead of now, it might've had a bigger effect on the resulting national conversation. Instead, nearly three months have passed, and roughly four months have gone by since Attorney General William Barr released his first, misleading summary of Mueller's report to Congress and the public. Unless Mueller decides to make a spectacle of himself at this week's hearing — and he won't — the American public will probably figure that his testimony is old news, and tune him out as a result.
That's too bad, because Mueller's report really is devastating.
Did the special counsel find conclusive evidence that Trump and his campaign colluded with Russia in its efforts to undermine the 2016 presidential election? No. But the report demonstrates that Trump and his advisers welcomed Russia's interference — and Trump has indicated he is fine if Russia interferes again in 2020. The report also offers multiple examples of how Trump repeatedly tried to obstruct Mueller's investigation. It certainly appears that Mueller intended his report to serve as an impeachment referral, even if he did not explicitly say so.
"The Constitution," he said rather pointedly in May, "requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing." It was about as close to a nudge-nudge wink-wink moment as you will get from Mueller. You can expect members of Congress — the Democratic ones, at least — to seek clarity on that point this week.
Not that it will matter all that much. Despite Mueller's nearly ostentatious deference to Congress on the president's fitness for office, Democrats led by Pelosi seem desperate to avoid an impeachment collision with Trump. That is somewhat understandable — even if the House of Representatives impeaches the president, it's unlikely the Republican-led Senate would convict him — but it mostly seems feckless.
Without a congressional willingness to act, a congressional oversight hearing is often just empty political theater. So this week's hearing is less likely to join great moments in televised congressional oversight — there will be no Oliver North brandishing a chestful of medals, no Howard Bake asking what the president knew and when he knew it. Instead, there is a good chance that Mueller's testimony will go down as a historical footnote. It is too little, too late. And that's a shame.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Joel Mathis is a writer with 30 years of newspaper and online journalism experience. His work also regularly appears in National Geographic and The Kansas City Star. His awards include best online commentary at the Online News Association and (twice) at the City and Regional Magazine Association.
-
'It may not be surprising that creative work is used without permission'
Instant Opinion Opinion, comment and editorials of the day
By Justin Klawans, The Week US Published
-
5 simple items to help make your airplane seat more comfortable
The Week Recommends Gel cushions and inflatable travel pillows make a world of difference
By Catherine Garcia, The Week US Published
-
How safe are cruise ships in storms?
The Explainer The vessels are always prepared
By Devika Rao, The Week US Published
-
US election: who the billionaires are backing
The Explainer More have endorsed Kamala Harris than Donald Trump, but among the 'ultra-rich' the split is more even
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
US election: where things stand with one week to go
The Explainer Harris' lead in the polls has been narrowing in Trump's favour, but her campaign remains 'cautiously optimistic'
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Is Trump okay?
Today's Big Question Former president's mental fitness and alleged cognitive decline firmly back in the spotlight after 'bizarre' town hall event
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
The life and times of Kamala Harris
The Explainer The vice-president is narrowly leading the race to become the next US president. How did she get to where she is now?
By The Week UK Published
-
Will 'weirdly civil' VP debate move dial in US election?
Today's Big Question 'Diametrically opposed' candidates showed 'a lot of commonality' on some issues, but offered competing visions for America's future and democracy
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
1 of 6 'Trump Train' drivers liable in Biden bus blockade
Speed Read Only one of the accused was found liable in the case concerning the deliberate slowing of a 2020 Biden campaign bus
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published
-
How could J.D. Vance impact the special relationship?
Today's Big Question Trump's hawkish pick for VP said UK is the first 'truly Islamist country' with a nuclear weapon
By Harriet Marsden, The Week UK Published
-
Biden, Trump urge calm after assassination attempt
Speed Reads A 20-year-old gunman grazed Trump's ear and fatally shot a rally attendee on Saturday
By Peter Weber, The Week US Published