The Democrats have pinned their dreams of impeachment on the shoulders of Special Counsel Robert Mueller for more than two years.
And after his report came back and showed that there was no collusion with Russia they pinned their dreams on thoughts of collusion.
But Mueller had decided that he did not have the authority to indict a sitting president and the Department of Justice declined.
What all of that means is that rather than accepting their defeat gracefully, which they are not known to do, the time came for a new scam.
And that scam involved pressuring Mueller to testify before Congress to tell them what they already read in his report.
They had banked on President Donald Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr preventing him from testifying so they could create more conspiracy theories.
But when Barr said “It’s Bob’s call whether he wants to testify,” that dream also came to an unceremonious and abrupt end.
And now the bigger issue they have is that Mueller himself has not agreed to testify in their kangaroo court, The New York Times reported.
“Mr. Mueller, who was invited to testify by the chairmen of the House Judiciary and Intelligence Committees a month ago, has not agreed to do so,” The Times said.
If they do not have Mueller to come in and give them the ammunition they desperately want to begin impeachment their dreams are dead.
His absence has left a disappointed House majority with little option but to stage political theatrics like Thursday’s 12-hour reading of the entire redacted Mueller report in a hideaway Capitol committee room before a few reporters, a guest appearance by the liberal activist actor John Cusack and the unblinking eye of a C-Span camera.
“We cannot count on anyone but Mueller to tell us what he was thinking, and it should not be filtered through anyone else — seeing is believing, hearing is believing,” said Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California and the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, adding that a “sterile report” was no substitute for either Mr. Mueller or Mr. McGahn.
Representative Ted Deutch, a Florida Democrat who sits on the Judiciary Committee, added, “If the people who are referenced in the Mueller report won’t testify, then we need to hear from the author of the report.”
Democrats involved in the investigations insist that they still have options. They can hold hearings with empty chairs, summon friendly witnesses and mount new and novel challenges against the administration on health care and other issues. On myriad looming legal fights, they are confident they will ultimately prevail in court — and there is always the possibility that a high-impact witness will be willing to buck Mr. Trump and emerge like John Dean unexpectedly turned on President Richard Nixon.
But those options lack the possible impact of Mr. Mueller, the most recognizable figure behind the investigation.
Representative Jerrold Nadler of New York, the chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, said Mr. Mueller was the only person who could clear up certain ambiguities about the report. Only Mr. Mueller, he said, could tell the American people “if he agrees with the fact that if he were not president, he would have been indicted” for the instances of obstruction identified in the report.
But talking with reporters at the Capitol on Thursday, Mr. Nadler conceded that the White House strategy had thus far succeeded in tamping down energy around the Mueller report and investigations. However, he added, “the temperature can rise very quickly when the first subpoena is adjudged in our favor, and we start getting witnesses.”
Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.