Brad Sallows said:
>Honest question: what abuse of process is Mueller alleged to have committed?
Who alleged that Mueller committed one?
A leader apologizing for wrongdoings by his team is not the same apologizing for something he did.
Mueller's main shortcoming was not ending his investigation as soon as he realized there was no "Russian collusion" crime, which some observers believe he should have know within the first couple of months. That's not a process crime, that's just poor judgement.
Undoubtedly the investigators prior to Mueller's appointment have more to answer for regarding abuses. That doesn't mean Mueller can't answer for his part in prolonging a politically sensitive unproductive investigation founded mostly on rumour and bullshit.
Well, you allege that " 'mistakes' and abuses of process" were committed during their investigations, and I am asking for examples of Mueller's (and his team).
To state that the Special Counsel (or his team) somehow erred and/ or committed an abuse of process by not ending or curtailing the investigation because "some observers" believe he should have realized there was no "Russian collusion" crime within the first few months is highly subjective, and, I would argue, fails to account for what Mueller's full mandate entailed.
According the the acting AG's order, Mueller was appointed to "ensure a full and thorough investigation of the Russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election" and was specifically authorized to investigate:
"i) any links and / or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump; and
ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation; and
iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. section 600.4(a)"
Further, the same order explicitly authorizes Mueller to "prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters", if he believes it "necessary and appropriate".
So, Mueller was clearly given wide latitude to not only investigate Russian links / coordination with individuals associated with Trump, but also Russian interference in the 2016 election writ large. Mueller was also explicitly authorized to investigate "any matters" that arose, and 28 C.F.R. section 600.4(a) specifically empowers the Special Counsel to "investigate and prosecute federal crimes committed in the course of, and with the intent to interfere with, the Special Counsel's investigation, such as perjury, obstruction of justice, destruction of evidence, and intimidation of witnesses..."
I fail to see how Mueller's investigation exceeded the mandate given to him by the acting AG, as outlined above. Taking into consideration the authorized scope of his investigation, where exactly is the abuse of process, or "poor judgement" you are alleging of Mueller (and his team)?
I'm just trying to understand the arguments being made here.
Thanks.