Analysis by WorldTribune Staff, April 19, 2019
Shrugging off the part where President Donald Trump was exonerated of Russian “collusion” and obstruction, Democrats and their corporate media messengers are seizing on the “political document” that is the Mueller report to extend the “national nightmare,” analysts say.
Media reaction to special counsel Robert Mueller’s report only shows how tied they are to the anti-Trump movement, radio and TV host Mark Levin said.
“As a group, they are offended that they were unable to successfully influence the outcome of the last presidential election, and they seek retribution,” said Levin.
“Today, having failed in their collusion narrative, the Democratic Party-press, as I characterize them, are unfazed, as they push obstruction, impeachment, and ultimately, their desired removal of the president,” Levin told Washington Examiner columnist Paul Bedard.
Levin has authored a new book, “Unfreedom of the Press”, (out May 21) which he said details the American media’s history of press bias and its effort to promote progressive policies and diminish conservative initiatives.
He also addressed charges that Trump poses a threat to freedom of the press.
“This president has been accused of leading a war against the media,” Levin said.
“Is Donald Trump a great threat to freedom of the press? What has Donald Trump done exactly to freedom of the press? He’s done exactly nothing. He directs his anger, correctly, and disappointment at specific news organizations and specific reporters, he’ll call them here and there ‘enemy of the people,’ and they say, ‘That’s just like Stalin,’ ” Levin said.
“Let me tell you something folks. Donald Trump has done nothing to the media,” he added.
Media reaction to the Mueller report is “par for the course,” Levin said, adding that “the reason is that most newsrooms and journalists share the progressive ideology and Democratic Party policy agenda, and are increasingly inclined to show it by their ‘news coverage.’ The reporting is less about news and more about opinion and social activism … and their contempt for President Trump extends to his supporters. The public sees it. As a result, the modern media contributes significantly to the growing divide and even anger in our society.”
Radio host Rush Limbaugh said Mueller’s investigation, “wasn’t an investigation. It was an attempt at a coup. It was an attempt to throw Donald Trump out of office and nullify the election results of 2016. It was disguised as an investigation.”
Mueller’s report, Limbaugh said, “is made to order for people who want to continue running this operation to get rid of Trump. … The report itself says there was no collusion.”
Limbaugh continued: “You’re unable to conclude there was no criminal conduct – then what the hell are you writing 400 pages for? You don’t do this to people you’re attempting to prosecute. You find nothing on ‘em and then submit a 400-page report about it? That isn’t done except in this case.”
The president “knows he’s being set up here. … What would you do in this circumstance?” Limbaugh said.
“This report reads, in fact, as if Trump was supposed to cooperate in his own obstruction. And because he didn’t, he’s guilty of obstruction. ‘Donald Trump attempted to obstruct our coup,’ is how this should read. ‘Donald Trump attempted to obstruct our effort to throw him out of office,’ is how this report should read,” Limbaugh concluded.
Writing for American Spectator, columnist Daniel Flynn noted: “When you checkmate a dishonest person in an argument, they shift the discussion, insisting this second concern always animated their position. This describes the response to the Mueller report from the conspiracy-theory wing of the Democratic Party.”
Flynn continued: “They now talk in muted terms, if at all, about Donald Trump conspiring with an unfriendly nation to rig the 2016 presidential election. Instead, they obsess over obstruction of justice, a crime Mueller’s investigators seem agnostic about in noting it could neither prove obstruction nor exonerate the president. Such mental gymnastics seems rich, particularly when one ponders the spectacle of the subject of an investigation obstructing justice over nonexistent crimes. They essentially accused the president of treason. Now they claim that obstruction of justice, a crime somewhat lower on the totem pole, justified this prolonged national nightmare.”
Former Trump attorney John Dowd told The Washington Times: “You don’t write a 400-page report. What this report does [is] try to feed the negative narrative, which I think is wrong, I think it’s political, which a department of professionals should never do. I’m very, very disappointed with the special counsel and his people.”
“They were out to get him [the president]. This document is Exhibit A, in any case, to find out whether they were political or not. This is a political document. This is not a fair document at all,” Dowd said.
Mueller was influenced too much by former FBI Director James Comey and ex-deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, Dowd said.
“It looks like Mueller bought Comey and McCabe hook, line and sinker. Huge mistake. Those boys are in trouble. They cooked this thing up. That’s the next round, will be finding out what happened there.”
The president and his advisers are calling for an investigation of the origins of the FBI’s counterintelligence probe of the Trump campaign in 2016. Attorney General William Barr has said he is reviewing those actions, although there is no formal investigation yet.
Dowd noted that Trump turned over millions of documents to the Mueller team and also declined to assert executive privilege over any of the information.
“To me, all the credit goes to the president,” Dowd said. “Even not asserting executive privilege – that’s how we got the information to Mueller so quickly. We gave Bob everything.”
He said he’s also glad that the president gave written answers to the special counsel’s questions instead of giving testimony in person. Dowd said Mueller had no legal basis for questioning the president face to face.
“You can’t say the president deprived them of any information,” he said. “I’m just glad he took our advice eventually, because it was a trap. Seeking his testimony, given what the law is, was pure mischief by Bob and a way to slow-roll this for another year. It’s disgraceful.”