PD Editorial: No collusion, but no exoneration of Trump either

Let's give President Donald Trump his due: Neither he nor any of his associates conspired or colluded with the Russian government to influence the 2016 election.

So said special counsel Robert Mueller. And, as Americans, we ought to be relieved that our leaders aren't in cahoots with a hostile foreign power.

But that's a low threshold for judging any president's character and conduct. And it doesn't begin to address the damning conclusions in Mueller's investigative report.

As anyone who takes the time to read the two-volume report will see, the special counsel delivered anything but the “total exoneration” claimed Thursday by the president. Which may be why, on Friday, he was back to calling it a hoax. Check that - an “ILLEGALLY STARTED HOAX.”

Even with its redactions, the report is a gripping account of “sweeping and systematic” Russian efforts to deliver the presidency to Trump. Mueller determined that, while the president and his campaign didn't coordinate or conspire, they expected to “benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.” Mueller confirmed collaboration between the Trump campaign and WikiLeaks, which acquired and released much of the material stolen from the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton's campaign by Russian hackers.

The report also details Trump's volcanic fury with the scrutiny of his actions as well as his attempts to seize control of the investigation - thwarted at times by his own allies and advisers.

The special counsel stopped short of accusing Trump of obstructing justice, a decision clearly influenced by long-standing Justice Department guidelines that a sitting president cannot be charged with a crime. Mueller's report said it would be “unfair” to conclude that Trump committed a crime because, unlike an ordinary defendant, a sitting president wouldn't have an immediate opportunity to try to clear his name in court.

Trump's assertions aside, that's not exoneration.

Indeed, Mueller's report says, “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment.”

Attorney General William Barr had no such reservations, but that's a decision for Congress.

As California Sen. Dianne Feinstein said, “Congress has an obligation to ensure that activities like those laid out in this report are never repeated.”

Don't bet on the Republican-controlled Senate devoting much attention to Mueller's report or the president's disturbing conduct. But the House will. Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler, D-New York, promises “major hearings.” He already has subpoenaed the unredacted report and all of the evidence gathered by Mueller's investigators. He also should invite Mueller to testify.

Oversight of the executive branch is one of Congress' primary responsibilities. It takes on added importance when there is reason to believe the president violated the public trust.

That said, and barring any further revelations, we don't think Democrats should pursue impeachment. Congress, like the electorate, is sharply divided, and the 2020 election is only 18 months away.

No one is above the law, but even if House Democrats pushed through articles of impeachment, there's zero chance that, with the present evidence, Senate Republicans would provide the votes needed to convict. Impeachment proceedings would overshadow every other campaign issue - health care, immigration and border security, the economy, climate change and, yes, corruption.

Persevering through the president's public claims of “witch hunt” and “dirty cops” and private attempts to thwart their work, Mueller and his team concluded that Trump didn't collude with the Russians. They still gave voters ample reason to hold him accountable in the 2020 election. Let them render a verdict.

You can send a letter to the editor at letters@pressdemocrat.com