Noah Bookbinder

Opinion contributor

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s announcement Wednesday morning that he is closing his office and has concluded his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election and obstruction of that investigation served as a poignant reminder that it is Congress’ obligation, not his, to accuse a president of wrongdoing. It is past time for Congress to meaningfully move forward in its investigation, for the administration to stop stonewalling Congress’ legitimate process, and for the American people to view this constitutional crisis with the seriousness it deserves.

Speaking publicly for the only time since his appointment two years ago, Mueller repeatedly referenced his office’s written work, including indictments of Russian government and private elements that attacked our democracy, and a two-volume report that detailed efforts by the Trump campaign to benefit from that attack and efforts by the president to obstruct that investigation.

The special counsel made clear that he believed that he had performed his responsibilities in accordance with fundamental “principles of fairness,” Department of Justice regulations and the Constitution, which only authorizes Congress — not a prosecutor — to seek removal of a president from office.

US still has not responded to Russian attacks

Mueller underscored the seriousness of the conduct that he was appointed to investigate. According to the indictments, Russian military agents hacked computer systems used by Hillary Clinton’s campaign and released information in a manner calculated to undermine her candidacy. Simultaneously, a private Russian entity engaged in an unlawful effort to influence public opinion. Through these efforts, Russia effectively sought to determine who would be our president.

Read more commentary:

If only we had heard from Robert Mueller before William Barr's spin

Robert Mueller told us everything we need to know

Sean Spicer: Democrats should accept the conclusions of the Mueller report

It is easy to understand why Mueller deemed this point worthy of emphasis. After all, Congress has not yet taken any meaningful action on the revelation that a foreign power attacked the most fundamental component of our democracy — the means by which we elect the leader of our executive branch.

Mueller’s emphasis on the Russian attacks also places into context the seriousness of President Donald Trump’s repeated efforts to obstruct Mueller’s investigation of this activity. Some, including Attorney General William Barr, have claimed that the president cannot have obstructed justice because there is no underlying crime.

Mueller’s statement showed why that claim is obviously false: As a result of this investigation, Mueller charged Russian agents, U.S. citizens and entities with multiple crimes — not to mention Roger Stone, who is charged with obstructing the investigation and making false statements to the House Intelligence Committee, along with multiple campaign officials who have pleaded guilty to making false statements to investigators. In fact, there were many underlying crimes.

Think obstruction, not collusion

From that perspective, Mueller’s statement served as an indictment of the public discourse to date. As a country, we have been suckered by the president into a back and forth about whether or not there was “collusion,” whatever that nonlegal term means, when in fact we should be demanding more of our president. It is completely unacceptable that the president repeatedly sought to obstruct an investigation that had such enormous consequences for our democracy.

It doesn’t matter that there was insufficient evidence to charge the Trump campaign of conspiring with the Russians; what matters is that the president took concerted steps to shut down an investigation of crimes perpetrated by a hostile foreign power on our election.

Cast in this light, the multiple episodes of obstructive conduct that are detailed in the second volume of the Mueller report could not be more serious. When the president asked White House counsel Don McGahn to have Mueller fired, he was attempting to shut down our country’s investigation of Russian interference. When the president later asked McGahn to lie about that conduct, he was trying to cover up the fact that he was trying to put his interests in not being investigated above the American people’s interest in ensuring that our elections are free from foreign interference.

The question is not just whether Trump committed a criminal offense — it is whether he abused the powers of his office by using the presidency to protect himself instead of our democracy.

Responsibility sits squarely with Congress

Mueller emphasized that the option of charging Trump with obstruction was never on the table because Department of Justice policy forbids it. As Mueller explained, that policy “says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.”

With respect to the president’s obstruction of justice, Mueller viewed his job as assembling the facts and placing them in context, but it was always going to be up to Congress, not his office, to determine what to do with his findings.

The fact that the special counsel followed DOJ policy, that his investigators conducted themselves with such integrity, and that Mueller will limit his future comments about the investigation to the four corners of the report is a healthy thing for our democracy, not a curse. Mueller’s remarks will not, as perhaps some hoped, make any of the hard decisions now left to Congress any easier. But our representatives in government, as Mueller knows, were not elected to make the easy choices.

In deciding “not (to) reach a determination — one way or the other — about whether the president committed a crime,” Mueller and his team have left critically important questions to our elected officials, as the Constitution intended.

This is why it is crucial for the House Judiciary Committee to continue its efforts to hold the president accountable and for courts to enforce subpoenas that are duly issued by that committee (as well as others). If it is true that no man is truly above the law, then the president cannot be permitted to escape scrutiny from Congress, the only body that is constitutionally capable of passing judgment on his conduct. Congress surely has a right and obligation to obtain whatever evidence and testimony it requires to make that assessment.

The decision of whether President Trump is fit to continue serving the American people is for Congress and the American people. It is time for all of us to step up.

Noah Bookbinder is the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. Follow him on Twitter: @NoahBookbinder