Vox’s Andrew Prokop showed clear anti-Trump bias in a recent writeup stating that the Mueller report was “a detailed chronicle of how a president can obstruct justice,” essentially ignoring the Department of Justice’s conclusion that the president did not obstruct justice.
“It’s very difficult to read Volume II of the Mueller report, which details the special counsel’s obstruction of justice probe, and come away with any other conclusion than that President Donald Trump engaged in an extensive effort to impede the Russia investigation,” Prokop wrote, insisting that “the report’s second volume can be read as a detailed chronicle of how a president can obstruct justice — or at least come very close to doing so — and get away with it.”
Prokop then projects obstructive behavior by Trump and excuses the behavior by Democrats who insist that the Department of Justice was incorrect. Prokop doesn’t mention that legal battles under both Democratic and Republican administrations have been found in favor of the executive branch against congressional subpoenas.
“Meanwhile, Barr was on record saying certain acts, such as destroying evidence or suborning perjury, would qualify as obstruction of justice if the president committed them. But Trump’s actual conduct, as detailed in the report, made it difficult to straightforwardly pin activity like that on him,” Prokop wrote. “Legally, an attempt at obstruction of justice is still a crime, even if it fails. But because Trump’s obstruction didn’t obviously ‘work,’ some in the political world have seized on that as an excuse for not doing anything about it.”