Robert Mueller’s congressional testimony stirred a number of responses. He’s been called a “stammering, stuttering mess,” “uncomfortable,” “dazed,” and “confused.”
Mueller’s six hours of testimony before the House Judiciary and Intelligence committees were, for the most part, uneventful. He refused to take the partisan bait and answer questions beyond his purview, and the answers he did give were brief. Some Republicans have argued his monosyllabic reactions demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge in the report he submitted to the Justice Department. Democrats are upset he didn’t give them more standing to launch impeachment proceedings. The testimony had barely ended when both parties agreed that the hearings were a complete failure, specifically a failure of optics.
This presented its own problem: optics was the motivating factor behind putting a reluctant Mueller in front of the camera. As the saying goes, they won’t read the book but they will watch the movie. Democrats wanted the public to see Mueller expose Trump’s alleged crimes on live TV; Republicans wanted him to exonerate Trump. Neither side got what they wanted. In fact, the only person who achieved something was Robert Mueller.
The 74-year-old veteran, prosecutor, and law enforcement officer somehow managed to appear independent and nonpartisan throughout his testimony. He remained detached from the political squabbles and made it clear that he would not choose a side or advance an agenda. He refused to answer leading questions about the origins of his investigation and avoided regurgitating the contents of his report so his words couldn’t be skewed as pro-impeachment soundbites.
To the surprise of no one, Mueller’s above-the-fray demeanor has resulted in numerous character assassinations from displeased partisans.
“Robert Mueller, in his current state, should not have been allowed to supervise the Russia collusion investigation. But the greater question is, how long has Robert Mueller been like this?” reads one article published by the Federalist that was, of course, written under a pen name. It goes on to cite Mueller’s hesitation and silence as signs of “mental acuity.” “Nobody should rejoice in the humiliation of an elderly man,” it concludes.
Defamation based on the age and mental stability of a man who has proven himself capable is ridiculous. Mueller’s hesitation wasn’t because of some kind of mental slowness: He was playing it safe, as Politico’s Renato Mariotti notes. He chose his words carefully, double-checked his report when members of Congress referred to it, and didn’t rush his answers because he knew there would be less time for members to corner him if he took his time.
Mueller was walking a legal tightrope, and he somehow managed to cross it safely while Democrats and Republicans attempted to knock him down. This reveals professionalism and caution, not incapacity. Those who suggest otherwise appear to suffer from their own kind of disability, one of partisan enmity and rancor.
