29th in the series — more on Mueller Barr’d, but first —
[ by Charles Cameron — including being mind blind, a flourish or two of Shakespearean trumpets, spawn and other hardball terms, the new Democratic reality.. a spin on the roulette wheel.. more ..]
.
Quick, from Rachel tonight 26 March:
Barbara McQuade: The analogy I have made is, it’s as if you are the New England Patriots, and Tom Brady has been your quarterback all season and throughout the Super Bowl, and for the very last drive of the game, coach Bill Belichick puts himself in as quarterback instead. What on earth is that — I thought we had a game plan here. And to change it up into something so significant at the last minute like that, is not only strange, I think it is contrary to the purpose of the Special Counsel rule, which is to bring in someone who is independent, outside the chain of command in the executive branch, so that the public can have confidence in the decision, that it was free from political considerations. By stepping in, I think Bar has defeated that purpose here.
Rachel: You now have me imagining William Barr in an oversize sweatshirt with the sleeves cut like cap sleeves and a big frown on his face – he does actually kind of look like Bill Belichick, which might be why you came up with that analogy, which would attest further to your brilliance.
We do love our sports analogies, don’t we?
Barbara McQuade: I don’t know whether he anticipated that William Barr would take the ball and run with it this way, or that Barr snatched it from him, so that he could, to continue our football analogy, even if Congress does want to look at this later for possible impeachment, he has now prejudged the evidence and put it out there in the public domain, that this is the decision, and so as football, for instant replay, to change the call on the field requires clear and convincing evidence, a much higher standard — because now the presumption is, that he’s been cleared, and so for Congress to come up with a contrary opinion, would appear to be a very politically motivated, unfair overturning of the original call.,
**
Well, there’s a start.
Let’s go back, and pick up where we left off, with Chris Matthews and Hardball, 3/25/2019:
vs:
Okay. That’s the basic ping-pong, if I may use a sports metaphor myself..
Onwards:
Spawns is a great word..
Chris Matthews:
Why did Robert Mueller not decide? Why did he play Pontius Pilate here? Why did he pass the buck?
Mimi Rocah:
To quote my former boss, Preet Bharara, I think Mueller was punting the ball to Congress, and Barr swooped in and intercepted it and took it out to the bleachers.
I don’t really have much in the way of mental imaging, I’m what’s technically (and recently) termed aphantasic — but those words brought a flash of football to me, utterly momentary, then gone..
Mind blind.
Chris Matthews:
Spy vs Spy — let me picture it for me!
Ah, yes, treasonous — a wonder word that exaggerates furiously, but doesn’t actually assert treason, the noun, the death-penalty offence.
These six lied about their Russian contacts.
Shannon Pettypiece:
It [his spasm of fifty-odd tweets] has kept him in the spotlight, it has kept him out there, able to counter-punch, being able to stir up his base. If he doesn’t have that microphone..
Co-equal. That sounds so Trinitarian, I wonder how the Constitution would have handled the executive, legislative and judicial “branches” of government if the conceot of tghe Trinity hadn’t been hard-wired into the mainstream mind by centuries of credal recitation..
Rep Hakeem Jeffries:
That’s not the House Democratic Caucus playbook, that’s the James Madison playbook, and so we’re well within our rights ..
and
Okay:
Hardball’s the name Chris Matthews chose, meaning (implying) that he intends to play hardball with his guests, so this is a nice one where the implication is made explicit, and the ball is on the other foot — can I say that? — and it’s his guest who’s playing hardball with him.
And Woodward’s a neat choice of guest, with an implied Nixon / Trump parallelism, as so often around the Mueller probe.
Woodward, describing what DJT’s attorneys told him:
You make things up. You lie. You’ll end up in a jump-suit if you testify
>>>>>
All of which leads to, sennet or tucket, ta-rah!!
Chris Hayes, All In:
Ah, yes, McConnell bars, Barrs, the release of the Mueller report:
and Mueller punts:
Ahem, Katyal authored the Special Counsel formulation.
A too obvious pun, or excellent?
A nice Russian Roulette instance:
David Corn:
We havbe this tossed ball on obstruction ..
It’s very unusual for Robert Mueller, or a Special Counsel, to end upm in a tie..
**
Vaarious oddments:
There’s a chyron somewhere:
Trump allies celebrate end of Mueller probe, slam opponent5s
Have I used that? Can I find it? It’s a good one..
Okay..
This one’s a useful quote on the prosecutorial process, the source maybe Hardball, with Barb perhaps speaking and Chris responding —
We direct them at bigger targets. It takes a minnow to catch a barracuda, a barracuda to catch a shark. It’s a metaphor.
I don’t fish..
Not sure where this one came from, either — AMJoy 3/26/2019?
While the President should be relieved, he’s still not ..
I think it’s a bit early for a victory lap ..
And now…
Rachel, 3/26/2019, which is where we started:
Rachel:
If Trump now gets his way.. 21 million AMericans will lose all health insurance just like that..
another 133 million, that’s half the country under the age of 65 wiloll get to take a spin on the roulette wheel ..
Rachel
:We got rid of that roulette wheel nine yers ago in this country with the Affordable Care Act..
If Trump gets his way..
**
One final quote from Chuck Rosenberg, again, source unknown, but a treasure:
These statutes, sometimes in their interpretation, are more art than science ..
/
March 28th, 2019 at 2:00 am
Maddow’s sports Analogy is neat, pithy and wrong.
.
Mueller is not an Independent Counsel like Ken Starr or Lawrence Walsh who operated under an entirely different statute; Meuller is a special prosecutor under a newer statute that replaced the independent counsel law, a change passed by a large bipartisan majority (after Ken Starr, Democrats decided independent counsels had their downside).
.
Mueller while having much greater latitude than a typical US attorney, nevertheless reported to the Attorney-General ( or when recused, the Deputy AG) and was subject to DOJ policy. So a better analogy would be Belichick letting Brady call his own plays so long as he continued to report to the Head Coach
March 28th, 2019 at 4:53 am
Agreed on the difference between ICs and SC — I don’t recall, but I think that point was made to Rachel (I’m mostly scanning for chyrons, and when I come back with my notes I leap from minute 17 to minute 22 without re-checking the intervening matter — and the analogy, as an extended sports analogy, was inherently pleasing to me. But Brian Williams, after I got home from dialysis today, said something to the effect tat “punt” was a word that had been used a lot recently, and he wanted an attorney’s sense of whether it was apt or inept.. so there’s some awareness that metaphors may be tight or loose or flat out misleading.
.
As to what Barr’s actual role was / is, I suspect his friendship with Mueller and their mutual respect may count for more than the left expects. Barr may have a view of presidential power that’s a couple of standard deviations out from the norm, but he also has a reputation — as does Mueller — for appreciation for process and integrity in service of truth.
.
So we shall see..