Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, Fox News host Chris Wallace appears to remain convinced that President Donald Trump may be guilty of obstruction of justice.
As such, the seemingly liberal “Fox News Sunday” host is perturbed by the president’s repeated insistence that special counsel Robert Mueller’s conclusions amount to a “total exoneration.”
No Collusion, No Obstruction, Complete and Total EXONERATION. KEEP AMERICA GREAT!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 24, 2019
“The special counsel cleared the president on collusion, absolutely no question about it,” he said Sunday to White House counsel Kellyanne Conway. “But he especially did not clear him on the question of obstruction, so why is the president telling Americans something that is not true?”
“Well, the Barr memo talks about no obstructive conduct. It also says something — and I don’t think it’s [getting] enough coverage — which answers your question in part, Chris, which is that also nobody in the Department of Justice felt like the investigation was interfered with, that Mr. Mueller couldn’t do the job he wanted to do,” Conway replied before being cut off.
“Now Kellyanne, wait, but I’m asking you specifically about obstruction, and I don’t mean to interrupt, but I do want to keep you on point,” Wallace blurted out.
But the White House counsel had been on point — not to mention correct.
Watch the discussion below:
Following the completion on March 22 of Mueller’s investigation into Russian collusion and obstruction of justice, Attorney General Bill Barr released a memo outlining the special counsel’s conclusions. His conclusions were that, one, the president never colluded, and two, there wasn’t enough evidence to prove that the president ever obstructed justice.
After reviewing the evidence themselves for roughly three weeks, Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein then concluded on their own that the president hadn’t obstructed justice.
But Wallace isn’t convinced. As proof of his thesis that Trump may be guilty of obstruction, he pointed out that Mueller left the obstruction of justice issue up for interpretation.
“[T]he report sets out evidence on both sides of the question and leaves unresolved what the Special Counsel views as ‘difficult issues’ of law and fact concerning whether the President’s actions and intent could be viewed as obstruction,” he said, reading from Barr’s report.
“The Special Counsel states that ‘while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.’”
“So,” Wallace continued, transitioning back to his own sometimes fact-free voice, “the president says it’s ‘total exoneration’ on obstruction, Kellyanne. That’s just not true.”
Quick question: If the president is perhaps guilty of obstruction of justice, why isn’t the Justice Department looking into it? Why isn’t he being charged? It’s because Barr and Rosenstein, who hold the highest positions within the Department of Justice, decided on their own to exonerate Trump. And while Wallace doesn’t appear to realize it, the president’s acquittal by the attorney general and the deputy attorney general outweigh Mueller’s wishy-washy conclusion.
Conway noted this to Wallace, reminding him again that “the ultimate conclusions” of the whole Mueller endeavor were that there was “no conspiracy, no collusion, no contact with any Russian at a campaign that I managed into its final successful phases.”
And if there was no collusion, then there could not have been any obstruction of justice, as Barr explained in his memo: “In making this determination, we noted that the Special Counsel recognized that ‘the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference,’ and that, while not determinative, the absence of such evidence bears upon the President’s intent with respect to obstruction,” Barr wrote in his public letter Sunday.”
Read Barr’s memo/report below:
“[A]nd [I] have always been offended that anyone would think that we would cheat lie steal or talk to any Russians. That’s ridiculous and always was,” Conway added in frustration Sunday.
But again Wallace returned to the “obstruction of justice” canard, only to again be reminded by Conway that, “There’s nowhere in the Barr report that says the president obstructed justice.”
It’s as if he just can’t take NO OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE for an answer.
Fox News viewers were not pleased with his rhetoric.
@FoxNewsSunday i’m disappointed in the reporters & hosts of fox news. The Trump WH was not proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in obstruction. You’re spreading lies and you look like a conceded BULLY rubbing salt in wounds. We r all Americans
— mama T (@mlstoscano) March 31, 2019
@FoxNewsSunday Healy Chris since you seem so interested in this obstruction question. Did your boy Mueller indict people? Was Trump indicted on obstruction? That’s your answer! It’s tiring watching Sunday hosts okay gotcha.
— Rick Stone (@stoner1208) March 31, 2019
So I guess Wallace does not know what “There will be no further Indictments” means. If there was obstruction there would have been an indictment or at least a charge.
Click bait for leftists over nothing. pic.twitter.com/1EbWsog38x
— Mephibosheth (@Az61Ronin) March 31, 2019
What Chris doesn’t seem to understand is that Obstruction of a crime never committed is not a crime at all.
— Paul (@BrockPaul) March 31, 2019
They made some good points.
During the fiery interaction Sunday between Wallace and Conway, the Fox News host also addressed her husband’s unrelenting hatred for the president, i.e., her boss.
“Do you think he’s cyber bullying you to try to get you to quit?” he asked of George Conway’s never-ending barrage of Twitter attacks against Trump. “Do you think he’s jealous of your high profile?”
That was a weird question, though the idea of George Conway being jealous of others isn’t shocking.
“Some people think that and that, they certainly do. My first line of protection in this world is and will always be my four children. And so I don’t really like to discuss this publicly,” Conway replied.
She added that her husband used to be supportive of the president prior to the election three years ago. It’s unclear why he’s become such a loudmouth critic of Trump since.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.