Appearing on NBC’s Today show Monday morning to discuss Special Counsel Robert Mueller clearing President Trump of collusion with Russia, White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders eviscerated irresponsible liberal media coverage of the investigation and demanded that the press apologize to the President and the American people.
During the contentious exchange, co-host Savannah Guthrie fretted: “...for the last two years, the President has absolutely eviscerated Bob Mueller, a lifelong public servant, a former marine, a registered Republican I might add....Did Robert Mueller deserve better from the President than this kind of language and behavior?”
Sanders countered: “Frankly, I think the American people deserved better. They didn’t deserve for the election of this president to be try to be taken down – ” Guthrie cut her off to lecture: “Wait, but the President’s rhetoric about a public servant doing a job.” Sanders pushed back hard: “Are you kidding! The President’s rhetoric matches, they are literally – the media and Democrats have called the President an agent of a foreign government, but that is an accusation equal to treason, which is punishable by death in this country.”
Portraying herself as a parent scolding a petulant child, Guthrie argued: “You have kids and you know that if you say, ‘Did you do this?’ The answer isn’t, ‘Yeah, but my brother did that.’ So let’s talk about the President’s behavior. He called Robert Mueller – he trashed him for two years....does he owe Robert Mueller an apology for that kind of rhetoric?”
Sanders pointed out that it was the media and Democrats who were guilty of juvenile behavior and needed to show remorse: “I think Democrats and the liberal media owe the President and they owe the American people an apology. They wasted two years and created a massive disruption and distraction from things that people – that impact everyone’s day-to-day life.”
Moments later, after Guthrie noted that “Russia did, in fact, meddle in our elections, which is borne out by this latest report and the intelligence agencies of the U.S.,” Sanders hammered: “And they tried to tie the President of the United States to it, which was completely false and completely wrong.”
Earlier in the interview, Guthrie repeatedly rejected the idea that Mueller’s findings were an exoneration for the President: “It is an exoneration, a legal exoneration with regard to conspiracy or collusion. As to this issue of whether the President obstructed justice in this investigation, the Special Counsel doesn’t say....So would you acknowledge it is incorrect for the President to call this a total exoneration?”
Sanders replied: “Not at all. It is. It is a complete and total exoneration...” Later, she declared: “In the legal community, when you can’t convict somebody on something, you’re exonerating them, legally exonerating them...” Guthrie protested: “I mean, you’re not. I mean, to say – just as a legal matter – to say that you can’t prosecute someone because they don’t meet the elements of the statute is not, it’s not an exoneration.”
When Sanders pointed out that “it’s very hard to obstruct something when there wasn’t a crime,” Guthrie dismissed the idea as “a technical legal argument that may or may not have guided the decision-making here.”
Even when the facts prove that two years of media hype and speculation have been completely wrong, journalists like Guthrie still refuse to accept any responsibility.
Here is a transcript of the March 25 exchange:
7:08 AM ET
(...)
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE: Let’s be clear about what this report – what this letter is and what it isn’t. It is an exoneration, a legal exoneration with regard to conspiracy or collusion. As to this issue of whether the President obstructed justice in this investigation, the Special Counsel doesn’t say, and in fact, makes a point to say, “This report does not conclude the President committed a crime. It also does not exonerate him.” So would you acknowledge it is incorrect for the President to call this a total exoneration?
SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS: Not at all. It is. It is a complete and total exoneration, and here’s why. Because the Special Counsel, they said they couldn’t make a decision one way or the other. The way the process works is then they leave that up to the Attorney General. The Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General went through and based their decision on Mueller’s investigation. This wasn’t based on just their own ideas and their own thinking. It was based on Mueller’s investigation.
GUTHRIE: In point of fact, you have a Special Counsel because the person is supposed to be independent and supposed to make this legal judgment. In this case, for whatever reason, Mueller didn’t. Attorney General Barr took it upon himself to issue a legal conclusion, and some critics are saying, wait a minute, is this on the level? He did it in 48 hours, and he wrote a memo six months ago, eight months ago, in June last year, stating there wasn’t an obstruction of justice case. So the criticism is here’s a guy making a snap judgment who had already made up his mind about the case and it’s on the record.
SANDERS: It’s not a snap judgment. This is a – anybody that knows Attorney General Barr, including a number of Democrats who have known him for decades and have talked about what a great individual he is and how highly respected he is in the legal community, he takes his job seriously. But let’s be clear, it wasn’t that he took this upon himself. That’s the process of the law. When the Special Counsel couldn’t make a decision, couldn’t make a final determination, they refer that to the Attorney General to make that decision. He made it in conjunction with the Deputy Attorney General, who’s been intimately involved in this process from the very beginning. So it’s not like you have somebody that just showed up onto the scene making this in a silo.
GUTHRIE: What about the idea that he already had judged the case? I mean, he wrote a 19-page memo stating there’s no obstruction case against the President before he saw one piece of evidence.
SANDERS: Look, I think that it is very clear – look at Bob Mueller’s report. He could not make a determination. In the legal community, when you can’t convict somebody on something, you’re exonerating them, legally exonerating them...
GUTHRIE: Well, you’re not.
SANDERS: ....when you’re not pushing them on something.
GUTHRIE: I mean, you’re not. I mean, to say – just as a legal matter – to say that you can’t prosecute someone because they don’t meet the elements of the statute is not, it’s not an exoneration.
SANDERS: They couldn’t make a decision. I think the big takeaway here is that there was nothing to show conclusively that the President obstructed justice. They couldn’t make a final decision. They followed the legal process. They referred it to the Attorney General, who consulted with the Deputy Attorney General, who had not been – had no memo and had been intimately involved from the beginning, and together they made that decision.
GUTHRIE: It is a legal clean bill of health. This letter says there’s not going to be charges against the President, okay, on both of these –
SANDERS: Let’s also not forget when there is no crime and there is no collusion, it’s very hard to obstruct something when there wasn’t a crime.
GUTHRIE: Well, that’s a legal – a technical legal argument that may or may not have guided the decision-making here.
Let me ask you this, for the last two years, the President has absolutely eviscerated Bob Mueller, a lifelong public servant, a former marine, a registered Republican I might add. He’s called him “a national disgrace,” “discredited,” “a prosecutor gone rogue” who “oversaw a gang of thugs.” In the end, this individual conducted an investigation, came to a conclusion that ultimately cleared, as we just discussed, the President. Did Robert Mueller deserve better from the President than this kind of language and behavior?
SANDERS: Frankly, I think the American people deserved better. They didn’t deserve for the election of this president to be try to be taken down –
GUTHRIE: Wait, but the President’s rhetoric about a public servant doing a job.
SANDERS: Are you kidding! The President’s rhetoric matches, they are literally – the media and Democrats have called the President an agent of a foreign government, but that is an accusation equal to treason, which is punishable by death in this country.
GUTHRIE: Well, wait a minute.
SANDERS: I mean, that is –
GUTHRIE: You have kids and you know that if you say, “Did you do this?” The answer isn’t, “Yeah, but my brother did that.” So let’s talk about the President’s behavior. He called Robert Mueller – he trashed him for two years, and in the end, Mueller just did an investigation that ultimately the President considers a total exoneration of him. Did – does he owe Robert Mueller an apology for that kind of rhetoric?
SANDERS: I think Democrats and the liberal media owe the President and they owe the American people an apology. They wasted two years and created a massive disruption and distraction from things that people – that impact everyone’s day-to-day life. I mean, let’s not forget, this took place under the Obama administration. You had people like [James] Clapper and [John] Brennan lying to Congress to perpetuate this idea of Russia collusion against the President of the United States –
GUTHRIE: Well, I think they’re talking about the fact that Russia did, in fact, meddle in our elections, which is borne out by this latest report and the intelligence agencies of the U.S.
SANDERS: And they tried to tie the President of the United States to it, which was completely false and completely wrong.
GUTHRIE: I think that was the subject of the investigation, which we now have the results of, and they are very clear. It says no collusion. Sarah, thank you.
SANDERS: I think it’s a shame for the American people, but we’re all very glad I think it’s over and we can move forward and focus on things that really matter.
GUTHRIE: Well, on that collusion issue, it’s as clear as it could be.
(...)
