Yes. I know. That's the Republican schtick right now. And it's probably a good schtick tactically. But it's intellectually dishonest.
We all know that if the shoe was on the other foot and we were talking about a Democrat President doing what Trump did the Republicans in Congress would be howling for impeachment and removal. And, yes, I know that the Democrats would be doing what the Republicans are doing now. At least I think I know. I'm not quite sure because what Clinton did wasn't nearly as bad as what Trump did. So I can't quite use the way the Democrats behaved then as a model.
And BTW I don't even think we needed the Mueller report to tell us that Trump obstructed justice in terms of the way obstructing justice if obstruction of justice is defined as trying to impede an investigation. Trump did that in plain sight.
What did Trump do that hasn't been covered by AG Barr and Rosenstein?
Nothing that was in the Barr report. But, obviously, there are many who have looked at the report and disagree with their conclusions on the obstruction of justice issues. That includes hundreds of former prosecutors from both political parties. Another thing is that the standard for impeachment is different than the standard for criminal prosecution. At least that's what everybody says.
When it comes to the "collusion" thing, Mueller specifically said he wasn't getting into that. The way I read what I've read so far, Mueller was looking at two specific election interference efforts by the Russian government. One was a Social Media campaign conducted by the Russian Internet Research Agency. The other was the hacking of the Democratic Party e mails by the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Army (which is for some reason abbreviated as "GRU"). As I'm reading it Mueller was narrowly looking at whether people in the Trump campaign agreed to assist the Russian government in those two specific efforts. And he concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to conclude that any had. That's it.
To say that means Mueller broadly and affirmatively found that there was "no collusion" with Russians is either intellectually dishonest or ignorant.
And in fact we all know that Manafort, for example, was discussing strategies for winning midwestern states with a guy with connections to Russian intelligence while sharing internal campaign polling data on what was going on in those states with those guys. Mueller said they couldn't say it was part of the potential conspiracies he was looking into, in part, because he doesn't know what the guy with connections to Russian intelligence DID with the data. But Manafort was OBVIOUSLY cooperating with a guy with connections to Russian intelligence. Nobody even disputes the fact that it happened.