We found an error in the Mueller report

In the Mueller report, we were expecting to find a lot of redactions, legalese, clarity about things that never previously made sense, confusing statements about still-secret ongoing matters, confirmations about what we already knew, revelations about things we never knew – and we found all of the above. What we weren’t expecting to find was an error about a material fact.

When the Mueller report refers to the Trump Tower Moscow project on page fifteen of Section II, it states that “Trump pursued a business project…as late as June 2016.” At one point this was believed to be accurate. But in January of this year, Rudy Giuliani publicly admitted on Meet The Press that the Trump Tower Moscow project talks actually continued all the way through election day. Considering that Mueller turned in his report two months after Giuliani made this confession, it’s stunning that this outdated June 2016 claim is still intact in the report.

Robert Mueller and his team have consistently shown themselves to be thorough and professional when it comes to their investigative work and their document filings. Considering the size of their team and their essentially limitless resources, it’s astounding to find such a crucial error in their final report. In fact it may give something away about the circumstances of how the report came together.

This particular section of the Mueller report was surely written prior to Rudy Giuliani’s public confession in January, back when everyone involved believed that project had lasted through June 2016. What stands out is that Mueller and his team were apparently forced to finalize their report in a rush, to the point that no one managed to catch the fact that this section of the report needed to be updated with the revised information. This is the latest evidence that Attorney General William Barr may have forcibly shut down the Mueller probe, and may have done so in abrupt fashion. If Mueller had been allowed to do this on his own timetable, we don’t think an error like this would have seen the light of day.

Leave a Comment

Comments