On Saturday, conservative Never-Trump columnist Jennifer Rubin outlined the essential questions that Democrats should ask special counsel Robert Mueller in an op-ed for the Washington Post.
“Rather than engage in the normal scattershot questioning punctuated by speechifying, the House Judiciary Committee should assign its able attorney Norman Eisen to conduct the questioning,” proposed Rubin. “Members could then follow up with additional questions.’
One question she proposed asking: “Mr. Mueller, the attorney general said you did not find ‘collusion.’ However, you did not look for collusion. Please explain what you looked for and how that differs from [Attorney General William] Barr’s assertion that you essentially cleared President Trump of collusion?”
Another question that she proposed: “You state that you have transferred 10 cases and made 14 referrals. Do these involve Russia? Do any involve the president?”
Yet another: “You say the Trump campaign welcomed and expected to benefit from Russian meddling. Did the numerous contacts and the president’s public call to find Hillary Clinton’s emails encourage that meddling? Within a few hours of Trump’s call to find Clinton’s emails, Russian hacking efforts began. Can you conclude that there was a connection between the two?”
Perhaps one of the most consequential questions Rubin urged Democrats to ask: “Is it correct that, because an Office of Legal Counsel guideline prohibits prosecution of a sitting president, the judgment as to what action, if any, should be taken is up to Congress? If the OLC guideline were not present, would you have reached a decision on indictment? You cannot tell us what that would have been, but would indictment after Trump leaves office be justified?”
Rubin essentially recommended that Democrats ask Mueller every possible detail of the implications of his report, removing any ambiguity and any window for Trump or Barr to spin it in their favor — and settling just how legally culpable the president is for everything that happened.