Richard Grenell and Lee Smith among those stoking doubts that Mueller wrote opinion piece

Richard Grenell, the former acting director of national intelligence, reacted to a user late Saturday who said, “Mueller didn’t write this op-ed.”

He replied, “Everyone who saw him testify knows this is true.”

Grenell served as President Trump’s acting spy chief from Feb. 20 to May 26, overseeing the 17-member U.S. Intelligence Community. He also was the U.S. ambassador to Germany and remains the special presidential envoy for Serbia and Kosovo peace negotiations.

Others who shared this same sentiment included other verified Republican and right-wing figures on Twitter and many other smaller accounts.

Lee Smith, a conservative investigative journalist who wrote The Plot Against the President, was another prominent person on the Right who cast doubt on Mueller penning the piece.

“Robert Mueller did not write this article under his byline any more than he ran the investigation that carried his name,” he said in a tweet.

“Paging Robert Mueller. Andrew Weissman [sic] and Aaron Zelinsky are using your name again,” tweeted Rep. Doug Collins, who is running for the Senate in Georgia, referring to two prosecutors who were part of the special counsel team.

The Mueller opinion piece was published by the Washington Post on Saturday, one day after Trump commuted the prison sentence of Roger Stone, a longtime associate of his who was a target of the Russia investigation.

Mueller wrote that Stone “remains a convicted felon, and rightfully so.” The piece also offered up a stern rebuke of the attacks Mueller and his team have endured over the years, including claims that the Russia investigation was nothing more than a “witch hunt” to damage Trump, his associates, and his administration.

“We made every decision in Stone’s case, as in all our cases, based solely on the facts and the law and in accordance with the rule of law. The women and men who conducted these investigations and prosecutions acted with the highest integrity. Claims to the contrary are false,” Mueller wrote.

Last spring, when Mueller ended his two-year investigation, he had become an almost mythic figure, a tireless investigator whom critics of the president hoped might uncover a long list of collusion and obstruction of justice offenses.

Mueller’s report showed that his team concluded that Russia interfered in 2016 in a “sweeping and systematic fashion” but “did not establish” any criminal conspiracy between the Russians and the Trump campaign. Mueller also laid out 10 instances of possible obstruction of justice, which Democrats saw as a road map for impeachment. Attorney General William Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein concluded Trump hadn’t obstructed justice.

By July, when he made his last public appearances testifying before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees, many were struck by how tired Mueller looked, how he repeatedly asked for clarification, and forgot details of his own work.

Defenders of the president, including lawyer Alan Dershowitz and California Rep. Devin Nunes, contended Mueller did not write the report. Nunes, the top Republican on the House Intelligence Committee, said he believed “five or six lawyers” were involved in writing it. Others have said Mueller was a mere figurehead throughout the investigation, and that some of his lieutenants were running the operation.

People “very close” to Mueller claimed they believed “something happened” to the former FBI director over the course of the two-year Russia investigation, Washington Post reporter Carol Leonnig said in January.

One prominent Democrat, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, said in a recent podcast that he was surprised by Mueller’s shaky testimony after his report was released. The California Democrat agreed when asked whether he was “shocked” during a Daily Beast podcast last month.

“I have known Bob Mueller for a long time. I have tremendous respect for him. I think he is just an amazing human being and public servant,” Schiff said. “He was not the man that I knew just in terms of his strength of presence, and so, it was quite surprising.”

A forthcoming book by CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin said it was “startling” for Barr’s team when they had their “first chance” to assess the Russia investigation in early March 2019 during a meeting with Mueller.

Mueller’s mental sharpness remains an ever-present issue as senators on the Judiciary Committee debate whether to call the now-75-year-old to testify as part of an investigation into the Russia investigation. The panel’s top Democrat, Dianne Feinstein, defended Mueller’s “extensive brain cells” in making the case to Chairman Lindsey Graham last month that Mueller, and not one of his subordinates from the special counsel investigation, should make an appearance before the committee.

At the time, Graham warned Democrats to “think twice” about it. But after Mueller’s opinion piece came out, the South Carolina Republican released a statement on Sunday that said he would agree to their demand.

“Apparently Mr. Mueller is willing ⁠— and also capable ⁠— of defending the Mueller investigation through an oped in the Washington Post,” he said. “Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee have previously requested Mr. Mueller appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify about his investigation. That request will be granted.”