The history-making news from this last week produced a lot of opinions and articles. Here is a selection of the more interesting pieces I read.
But first, I would be remiss if I didn’t link to the redacted Mueller report (HERE). I do encourage everyone to at least read the two summaries that Mueller wrote for each of the two sections of his report. You can read those summaries HERE or listen to them being read aloud HERE.
Ten of the brilliant legal minds over at LawFare give their analysis of the redacted Mueller report. They cover both sections of the report (Russian interference and obstruction of justice), and include an analysis of how Attorney General Barr characterized it. (Hint: Not well.)
Yoni Appelbaum at The Atlantic argues that Mueller’s determinations regarding Trump’s obstruction of justice are a clear sign that he believed that Congress is the only body that can try the President at this point in time.
Andrew Coan writes an op-ed for the Los Angeles Times where he outlines the long-term consequences of not impeaching the President, whether or not the Senate convicts him.
Nicole Hemmer writes that the Democrats must act on impeachment, noting that few trials begin with an outcome that is certain. Also, that public opinion on Nixon shifted quite a bit once the hearings got underway.
Ezra Klein at Vox mulls over the central purpose of impeachment, and notes both historical and current issues with the process.
Jonathan Chait, writing for New York Magazine, makes the case for impeaching Attorney General William Barr.
Rick Wilson, a never-Trump Republican strategist, looks at the news of this last week with his usual, let’s call it, colorful prose.