Dear Robert S. Mueller III,

I’m so broken, hurt, and dispirited that it’s hard to think, let alone write. But after 22 months of patiently waiting, without receiving so much as a single word from you—not a text, not even an emoji—I’ve decided to unilaterally end our relationship.

You ghosted me, my not-so-special special counsel, and for that, I don’t think I can ever forgive you. When I last wrote, you were the sweet, silent Swan who captured my heart, the square-jawed silver fox who dazzled with his procedural elegance while shunning the limelight. Some of my friends wondered why you were always so quiet, and I vigorously defended you, explaining that silence runs through your veins. I told them not to worry, confident in my conviction that you were playing a stealthy game of three-dimensional chess. But you weren’t playing chess. You were playing me.

If it wasn’t obvious by now, I can tell you that yes, I found the letter from Bill Barr, the letter that explains it all. After all this time, you couldn’t have picked up the phone and given me the heads up that you found no evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Donald Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia? I mean, you could have just told me how you were feeling. Why do I always have to be the last to know?

And don’t even get me started on the obstruction charges. According to Barr’s letter, you did not “draw a conclusion” as to whether Trump’s actions constituted obstruction of justice. Are you kidding me? Throughout your life, Swan, you’ve been nothing if not decisive. Did you hem and haw when you were prosecuting Panamanian strong man Manuel Noriega? No, you did not. How about the time you offered Sammy “The Bull” Gravano a reduced-sentencing deal if he ratted out Gambino crime family kingpin John Gotti? Again, no ambiguity there! But now, faced with a spray-tan charlatan who denounces your investigation as a “witch hunt” on Twitter, tries to intimidate witnesses, and dangles pardons to co-conspirators, you give me mixed messages. What I once thought was B.D.E. is now lacking in E, definitely not B, and insufficiently forceful to be D.

You punted to Rosenstein and Barr, who chatted among themselves for like five minutes and determined there wasn’t enough evidence to say that the president obstructed justice. Not only that, but Barr also added that even if there was obstruction, it would be hard to prove it in court because “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference.” Excuse me, but if I remember correctly, didn’t Martha Stewart go to prison for obstruction of justice, even though the court was unable to establish whether she committed the underlying crime of insider trading? Shouldn’t all of the hosts of The Apprentice be treated equally under the law? I may not be a lawyer, but I did watch The Good Wife and I’m pretty sure that’s in the Constitution.

I’m sure you’re thinking that I shouldn’t rush to judgment, that we should all wait to hear your side of the story. And to that, I say this: why should I have to wait for a congressional subpoena to find out how you really feel? If you testify, I shall block my ears.

I was talking to my therapist yesterday—she was also deeply disturbed by your behavior, btw—and she told me that we all need to stop this pattern of falling for people who we think are going to save our democracy. I’ve looked inward, and now understand that it doesn’t make sense to sit here waiting for a knight in shining armor, because he may wind up being a Cossack.

Moving forward, I’ll try to remember the good times, Swan. I’ll focus on your storied history of honorable service to this country, and think about the butterflies I used to feel in my stomach each time you filed a motion. But let me be crystal clear: while this letter does not conclude that you are a total disappointment, it does not exonerate you either.

Thank u, next, Rachel

More Great Stories from Vanity Fair

— Why can’t we get enough Elizabeth Holmes?

— Kellyanne and George Conway’s cross-platform couples therapy is getting awkward

— How the kids implicated in the college-admissions scandal might save face

— Malcolm Gladwell’s very contrarian take on creativity

Looking for more? Sign up for our daily newsletter and never miss a story.