CNN's Attack on Mueller Begins: No Ruling on Obstruction 'Atrocious'

March 25th, 2019 9:29 AM

You knew this was coming. For two years, Robert Mueller was a secular saint of the liberal media. But now that he has issued a report not to the MSM's liking, Mueller's halo is tarnished, and overnight he's become fair game for criticism.

An opening salvo of the MSM attack on Mueller was launched on CNN's New Day this morning. CNN legal analyst Laura Coates said she was "completely unsatisfied" by the Mueller report, claiming it is "really atrocious" that Mueller did not rule on the question of obstruction of justice. 



Coates also claimed that by not coming to a firm conclusion on obstruction, Mueller failed to fulfill "one of the things [he] was tasked with." She was particularly agitated over the fact that Mueller did not force President Trump to testify in person, accepting written answers instead. Just how Mueller could have compelled a sitting President to testify, Coates never explained.

Again, this was just an opening salvo. As liberals continue to digest the bitter fruit of the Mueller report, look for the attacks on their erstwhile hero to become more pointed. 

Coates began by disputing the claim by Trump personal attorney Jay Sekulow, who had just appeared on the show, that the report had exonerated the president on obstruction as well as on collusion.

Here's the transcript.

New Day
7:14 am EDT

LAURA COATES: First of all I think it's impossible for them to get around the notion that there is a direct quote that Mueller has said it does not exonerate the president. Now, I happen to look at that as kind of "a Mueller maybe," which to me is really atrocious. After two years, if you still have questions, when you still can't answer that question, it's not good enough to say, 'well, you decide whether or not he's actually committed a crime.' That's one of the things you were actually tasked with. Which is why think there must be something more behind the scenes to say that -- I find it impossible that he would say, 'You know what, I don't feel like wrestling with a very hard question, why don't you go aheand and take it, Barr, I'm done, I'm kind of tired.' There must be something more. 

But the problem is we're left with one of the great triumphs of Jay Sekulow and his presentation, which is, all we have are written answers of the President of the United States. There was never an opportunity, it appears, that Mueller was actually able to ask questions, follow-up questions, have an in-person opportunity to assess whether the president did indeed have corrupt intent in any form or fashion, which to me sounds look a very self-fulfilling prophecy. If you never endeavor to get the information, well then, you would not have the information. Therefore, the report to me until I have all the context and see the basis as to why they didn't pursue that action, and why it went to somebody other than the person who had the duty to do so, I'm completely unsatisfied.