menu

The Profoundly Stupid New Argument to Discredit Mueller Investigation

The Profoundly Stupid New Argument to Discredit Mueller Investigation June 26, 2018

You knew that no matter what the DOJ Inspector General’s report said, Trump and his Pray-torean Guard were going to use it to try to discredit the Mueller investigation and the FBI. But the fact that they could make an argument this utterly moronic and bass-ackwards, and have it succeed with tens of millions of people, is really quite disturbing.


As Robert Mueller’s investigation has amassed more indictments, Donald Trump has increasingly retreated from any defense of the facts to insisting Mueller has no right to investigate him at all. This weekend, Trump praised a Wall Street Journal op-ed by David Rivkin and Elizabeth Price Foley, two conservative legal apparatchiks. If you want to have a road map for where Trump’s defense is headed, and the radical actions he is likely to take, Rivkin and Foley are laying it out in plain view.

1. The jumping-off point for their defense of Trump is the recent FBI Inspector General report, which lambasted former director James Comey for evading Bureau protocol and announcing the reopening of the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails. While they concede that the report “found no evidence that then-FBI Director James Comey was trying to influence the election,” Comey confessed “that his election-eve decision to reopen the Clinton email investigation was motivated by a desire to protect her assumed presidency’s legitimacy.”

This finding of “bias” is the foundation for the argument. What they authors don’t acknowledge is that it was bias against Hillary Clinton. Yes, Comey was trying to safeguard the legitimacy of her presumably certain election. But what was he trying to safeguard it against? The conspiracy theories of the Republican Party, which was already ginning up a postelection campaign to discredit the election as “rigged.”

Comey erred by bending over backward to placate their paranoia. Now the far right is using Comey’s decision to break FBI protocol in order to placate Republicans as a rationale to demand breaking FBI protocol to help Republicans again, this time by quashing an investigation of Trump.

It’s an argument so stupid that anyone who can make it with a straight face deserves an Academy Award for Best Dissembling Actor. Comey’s actions at the end of the 2016 campaign clearly and undeniably hurt Hillary Clinton and probably was enough to cost her the election (though we obviously can’t ever know that for sure). Therefore, that proves how biased he was against Donald Trump, and by some bizzaro world, silly straw logic, it proves that an entirely different person now leading the investigation is also biased against Trump.

The mental gymnastics required to try to pull of this triple axel, double back flip of logic with a full twist is mind-blowing. But I bet the Russian judge will give it a perfect score.


Browse Our Archives