by Karl Denninger, Market Ticker:

Uh, yep.

You’d think that Robert Mueller might know what any licensed attorney-at-law in the land tells a client in a tight spot with a lame alibi: better keep you mouth shut. Instead, Mr. Mueller crept Sphinx-like out of the Deep State woodwork on little cat’s paws and in a brief nine minutes blabbed out a set of whopperish riddles much more likely to get himself in trouble than the target of his hinky inquisition.

The key whopper was that he could not make “a determination” on an obstruction-of-justice charge against Mr. Trump because guidance policy from the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel had said some years ago that a sitting president can’t be indicted. That is not what he told his boss, Mr. Barr, the Attorney General (and a roomful of the AG’s staffers who heard it), in person when he delivered his final report a few weeks ago.

Upon receipt of that report, Mr. Barr asked the Special Counsel three times whether his inability to conclude anything on an obstruction charge was due to the OLC guidance, and three times Mr. Mueller answered “no.” Mr. Barr relayed this on-the-record in testimony before the House Judiciary Committee and, as averred above, he has plenty of witnesses. It should not be hard to reach a determination on who is telling truth here.

Indeed, that is exactly the problem — and the deflection.

Mueller also knows that if impeached it would be nearly impossible to then charge Trump on the same basis.  That is, having established “high crimes and misdemeanors” (whatever that is as Congress determines; that’s how the Constitution works) there is a very clean argument to be made that irrespective of conviction in the Senate Trump cannot be tried again for the same alleged act — double jeopardy prohibits it.

This shouldn’t give old Donald much comfort, however, since there are also State AGs after him, specifically in NY.  I wouldn’t be even slightly shocked to see them come after him personally once he departs office, whenever that is.  Further, even a pardon at the federal level doesn’t help him with state allegations.

On the other hand if there’s one place Trump can fight swamp-like, as he has for the last several decades, it’s in NY.  So while the State has effectively unlimited resources so does Trump and in NY said legal Battle Royale would be likely to play out over decades before delays, deferments, trials and appeals are exhausted.  Who knows how that all comes out but at least he’s playing in his own back yard.

The problem with charging someone, federally or otherwise, is that they are instantly entitled to all of the prosecutions alleged evidence they intend to introduce before the case goes anywhere.  If they fail to produce something they typically are barred from using it.  This is a serious problem; Mueller has a proved history of dirty pool, and so do the people he hired.

Who remember Ted Stevens?  He was prosecuted for taking over $100,000 in “free” work on his house.  A bribe, basically.

The problem was that the government knowingly submitted false accounting records in the trial — and got caught.

Then came evidence that the government knowingly submitted false VECO accounting records to establish the proposition that employee David Anderson and others billed $188,000 for the renovations. The records had been used by the prosecution to show the amount of time and money spent on renovations to Stevens’ chalet—an important part of proving that Stevens had received a benefit.

At yet another hearing, Judge Sullivan said, “It’s very troubling that the government would utilize records that the government knows were false.”

Then it all blew up:

In November, Judge Sullivan received a letter from prosecution witness Anderson, who had worked on Stevens’ chalet. Anderson wrote that he falsely denied on the stand that he had an immunity deal with prosecutors in exchange for his testimony. He also claimed prosecutors left him in a room filled with confidential documents in an effort to coach him. Anderson also claimed Allen had a contract to have him murdered.

The Justice Department has vehemently opposed Anderson’s allegations.

Then came the kicker. On December 2, 2008, FBI Special Agent Chad Joy filed a whistleblower complaint stating that prosecutors tried to hide a witness and intentionally withheld evidence from defense lawyers. Joy further accused a fellow FBI agent of having an inappropriate relationship with Allen.

Where was Mueller during all of this?

Running the FBI; he had been in the job since 2001.

Does anyone seriously believe he wasn’t fully in the loop on the prosecution of a sitting Senator?

C’mon folks.

But it gets better.  Mueller has now been caught editing what he claimed was a transcript (not a “paraphrase”) of a call related to Flynn’s defense in his actual report in such a manner to make it appear that Trump’s attorney was engaged in obstructing the investigation.  The actual transcript and full context proves otherwise but was intentionally omitted from the report as the actual transcript makes clear in plain language that his attorney is not seeking any confidential information.

I think Kunstler has it nailed here, much as I’ve opined.  The last thing Mueller wants is an actual adversarial process where there is a functional duty to disclose, a target that has a ****-ton of money, as many very good lawyers as he wants at his command and the ability to cite the former willing blind eye to misconduct that Mueller has repeatedly displayed — especially since this time he can’t duck behind a “oh some subordinate did it” given that he wrote the report.

Nope, that will fall on him, personally.  And while it’s damn hard to actually jail a prosecutor for misconduct you can destroy their reputation in an indelible manner or even get them barred from ever practicing law in any capacity anywhere, ever again.

Read More @ Market-Ticker.org