What Did That Guy Say?

In my quest to use independent experts to evaluate what I cannot, I turn to Lawfare’s Benjamin Wittes, even though he does not much care for President Trump, for an evaluation of the reactions to the DOJ’s Inspector General Horowitz’ report on his investigation into the FBI investigation into the Russian interference in the 2016 Presidential election:

It is thus important to emphasize the degree to which the Horowitz report debunks the surrounding conspiracy theories. I don’t mean debunk in the way that the Mueller report is said to debunk the idea of “collusion” between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The Mueller report, after all, found copious evidence of contacts, interactions, and cooperation between Trump campaign officials and Russian cutouts and agents—just not enough evidence to prosecute anyone for coordinating with the Russian electoral interference efforts. No, the Horowitz report debunks the “Witch Hunt” conspiracy theories on a far different level—the level of finding that a whole bunch of things alleged to have been done corruptly were, in fact, done on the level, done in compliance with policy for perfectly good reasons, or not done at all. …

A few key additional points that bear emphasis:

  • The investigation was properly predicated and began when the FBI said it began.

  • The FBI did not improperly use confidential human sources.

  • The FBI did not use confidential human sources to gather intelligence on the Trump campaign at all.

  • There is no relationship between the conduct of the investigation and text exchanges between Peter Strzok and Lisa Page.

On some of these issues, the inspector general raises legitimate policy concerns, which I will discuss in a later post. For present purposes, the relevant point is simply that the behavior that has occupied hundreds of presidential tweets and countless hours on Fox News—and dominated innumerable ranting speeches by Republican members of Congress—did not happen. Not that these things can’t be proved or, in Mueller-speak, that the evidence “does not establish” them. They are just not true.

I would not dwell on this point if those who advanced these theories showed any sign of backing off of them. But they don’t. The day the inspector general’s report was issued, President Trump cited it triumphantly for a proposition it decisively rejects: “This was an overthrow of government. This was an attempted overthrow, and a lot of people were in on it. And they got caught. They got caught red-handed,” he said.

And etc. The point is that all the conspiracy theories put forth by Trump and his Republican cohorts were effectively disproven by Horowitz.

I should like Mr. Horowitz to be called in front of a Congressional committee yet again, and in his opening statement simply say,

Every time an elected official of our government uses my report to claim a conspiracy has existed, or continues to exist, to bring down President Trump, he or she is a liar. End of discussion. There are no nuances, no gaps to skate in, no pillars to hide behind. If you cite this report as confirming a conspiracy, you should be removed from office in disgrace.

It’d certainly clarify his findings.

Bookmark the permalink.

About Hue White

Former BBS operator; software engineer; cat lackey.

Comments are closed.