Background and feature photo credit: The Ind.

Louisiana Gov. Earl K. Long on his Attorney General.

A couple of hours after Robert Mueller III spoke to the American public for the first and only time about his two-year investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and the allegations that President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice in order to illegally end the investigation before it even began, Jeff Landry, Louisiana’s attorney general and a former one-term member of the U.S. Congress, turned to Trump’s favorite online soapbox, Twitter, offering his own assessment of Mueller’s remarks.

In his haste to reflexively defend a President who once boasted about sexually assaulting women, paid $25 million to settle a case involving claims of fraud against his phony university, encouraged a foreign government to criminally infiltrate the email account of his opponent, ordered the separation of undocumented immigrants from their children, ordered those small children to be held in cages, a man who illegally funneled money to a porn star in order to force her to remain silent about their sexual relationship, spoke about white supremacists as “good people,” and, among other things, instituted an unconstitutional ban on Muslims seeking to travel to the United States, Landry inadvertently proved his comically wrong and vapid understanding of the law.

Jeff Landry currently has fewer than 7,000 followers, a paltry amount for an official who pines for the spotlight as much as he does, but that hardly mattered. His tweet is so riddled with basic errors about the judicial process, including the differences between a court case and an investigatory report, that he quickly generated nearly 20,000 people, including a number of celebrities, responding to point out the obvious: Landry’s comment reflects an embarrassing ignorance of his own profession. Thousands asked a variation of the same question: How are you a lawyer?

Did this go to an invisible court? As I understand it Mueller has his hands tied by a non legally binding DOJ policy paper. — Patricia Arquette (@PattyArquette) May 29, 2019

Wow I guess the rest of us missed Trump being having his day in court. — Molly Knight (@molly_knight) May 29, 2019

Let me be CLEAR: in this nation, when the Prosecutors grant you IMMUNITY, it doesn't mean you're INNOCENT.



It's time for the GOP to believe in the Rule of Law again. — Jesse Ferguson (@JesseFFerguson) May 29, 2019

Where did you study law? — Brian J. Karem (@BrianKarem) May 29, 2019

Well let me be clear Jeff…in this country most people are capable of being indicted for crimes. And tried. The president is not by rule…you are either a liar, an idiot or both…the latter is my guess — Tim Wise (@timjacobwise) May 30, 2019

a drive thru — Danny (@recordsANDradio) May 29, 2019

In what court of law was he tried and exonerated, you freaking idiot? — yvette nicole brown (@YNB) May 30, 2019

You are a state Attorney General? Mueller was brutally clear he did not find Trump innocent. Assuming you understand the law, are you really ok with embarrassing yourself like this? — Fred Guttenberg (@fred_guttenberg) May 30, 2019

You should learn the definition of “exonerated”

Though I just remembered you’re a Republican, so education and facts don’t actually matter in your world. — zack r. smith (@thezackrsmith) May 30, 2019

There was no court. There was no trial.



Did you go to law school or did you just print out a diploma from the Internet? — Lynn Comella (@LynnComella) May 29, 2019

Now we can see why you were a failure as a lawyer and decided to become a career politician. — Ned Pyle (@NerdPyle) May 30, 2019

A "court" didn't find anything about Trump. Special Counsel Mueller said DOJ policy precluded him from even accusing Trump of a crime. So Mueller laid out the evidence.



If you want a "court" involved in Trump's innocence or guilt, then you're saying Trump should be indicted. — Max Kennerly (@MaxKennerly) May 29, 2019

Ummm…do you really think the special investigation was a court proceeding? Because either you’re frightfully stupid or a pretty cynical liar. You folks have a good night. — Peter Ames Carlin (@peteramescarlin) May 30, 2019

1—you're found "not guilty", not "innocent"… but whatever



2—was Trump indicted in a court and found "not guilty" at some point? No



3—criminal proceedings (where one is found "guilty" or "not guilty") are different from impeachment proceedings; see @justinamash for explanation — Pé Resists (@4everNeverTrump) May 29, 2019

How the hell are you attorney general of anything? — Kevin Gannon (@TheTattooedProf) May 29, 2019

Is @JeffLandry —the Louisiana AG —a lawyer? He must be, right? That means he is the stupidest lawyer in the United States—quite an accomplishment. https://t.co/Hoho3YRhat — Jonathan Alter (@jonathanalter) May 30, 2019

Do you need closed captions? pic.twitter.com/0VaK6Fa5hr — ed (@edmartineztx) May 29, 2019

Three sentence fragments in a row and they're all lies. Impressive stuff. — Jonathan M. Katz✍🏻 (@KatzOnEarth) May 29, 2019

This tweet makes you sound really stupid. How are you AG? How did you get through the LSATs?

How does this happen? — Christopher Jackson (@ChrisisSingin) May 30, 2019

Didn't know trump university had a law school. pic.twitter.com/mnP4xddNOL — Jim O'Rourke (@JimORourkeESQ) May 30, 2019

And my personal favorite: