Former special counsel Robert Mueller has confirmed US President Donald Trump’s claim of “total exoneration” is false and reiterated that it’s not what his Russia report said.

For many of Donald Trump’s opponents, Robert Mueller’s testimony was one final chance to impeach the President.

In a best-case scenario, the former special counsel would shed damning new light on his 22-month investigation and reveal that Mr Trump was indeed impeachable.

At the very least, Mr Mueller would relay powerful excerpts from the 448-page document on national television, which would engage the 90 per cent majority of the American public who did not read the report, and in particular dissuade people in crucial swing states from voting for him at next year’s election.

Instead, the almost seven-hour testimony fell flat. Not only did it fail to yield any new information on the investigation, but Democrats failed to get that powerful made-for-TV sound byte they were hoping for.

WHERE DID IT ALL GO WRONG?

For Mr Trump’s opponents, the testimony was like watching a really great trailer for a movie that … ultimately kind of sucked.

Mr Mueller repeatedly refused to answer questions from Democrats and Republicans alike.

The Democrats had hoped to hear him respond to a series of questions surrounding Mr Trump’s potential crimes and ongoing investigations relating to him and his associates.

Republicans sought to interrogate him on any potential political bias that may have compromised the investigation.

Both sides were waived off — along with any questions on impeachment. Instead, Mr Mueller focused almost entirely on the text of the report — which was already made public months ago.

None of this should have come as a surprise. In the lead-up to the testimony, this is exactly what Mr Mueller said he would do. In his opening statement, he reiterated: “The report is my testimony and I will stay within that text.”

Bear in mind, not all Democrats supported impeaching the President. Some, like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, vocally opposed an impeachment motion but still supported the testimony as a way of discrediting Mr Trump in the lead-up to the 2020 election.

For this to work, Mr Mueller was to read out a selection of powerful excerpts from the report, which, in televised form would resonate with the viewer.

But instead, he largely stuck to “yes” and “no” answers, refused to comment on a range of questions, and basically refused to dramatise his findings.

Several media commentators across the US have since concluded the testimony was a bust, saying it’s now time for the Democrats to move beyond the impeachment issue.

“Impeachment’s over,” declared ABC’s Terry Moran. “I don’t think Nancy Pelosi is going to stand for her members bringing forth something that is going to obviously lose in the Senate, lose with the American public.”

“It’s time for Democratic leaders to stop obsessing over this closed case and to put the American people first,” wrote CNN’s Alice Stewart, who described the testimony as an overall “nightmare” for Congressional Democrats.

Fox News anchor Chris Wallace deemed the testimony “disastrous”. “I think this has been a disaster for the Democrats and I think it’s been a disaster for the reputation of Robert Mueller,” he said.

Experts have warned the Democrats need to move on from the impeachment issue and focus on producing sound policies and unity ahead of the 2020 election.

Earlier this week, Dr David Smith, senior lecturer in American politics and foreign policy with the United States Studies Centre, told news.com.au were going to need a bigger focus than calls to impeach Mr Trump if they wanted a fighting chance at the 2020 election.

“They’ll need something for the segment of the American public that isn’t particularly for or against Trump, that doesn’t pay a huge amount of attention to politics and may or may not vote,” Dr Smith said.

“What (the Democrats) can offer them is policy — things like universal healthcare, which we know is a winning issue in America.

“I don’t think the hearing will derail or distract the Democrats. Nancy Pelosi won’t let that happen. But certainly, as the election approaches, they’re going to need more than just ‘impeach Trump’. We saw in the 2018 mid-terms that they were very focused on policy, and that paid off for them.”

DID THE DEMOCRATS GET ANYTHING OUT OF THIS?

The testimony may have been anticlimactic, but there were some moments of light for Mr Trump’s opponents.

The televised broadcast did reinforce (not expose) one of Mr Trump’s biggest lies from the Mueller investigation: that the report was a “complete and total exoneration.”

The report findings, released in March, did not exonerate Mr Trump. They simply said there wasn’t enough evidence to impeach him.

Still, the President posted this jubilant tweet immediately after its publication:

No Collusion, No Obstruction, Complete and Total EXONERATION. KEEP AMERICA GREAT! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 24, 2019

During the testimony, Mr Mueller reaffirmed that this was incorrect.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler asked him: “Director Mueller, the President has repeatedly claimed that your report found there was no obstruction and that it completely and totally exonerated him. That is not what your report said, is it?”

Mr Mueller responded: “Correct, that is not what the report said.”

But some on Mr Trump’s side of politics continued to peddle this myth as fact. Top Republican on the intelligence committee Devin Nunes said it’s “time for the curtain to close on the Russia hoax”, which he deemed a “conspiracy theory”.

Mr Mueller disputed this directly. At one point, Mr Schiff asked him: “Trump and his campaign welcomed and encouraged Russian interference?”

“Yes,” replied Mr Mueller.

“And then Trump and his campaign lied about it to cover it up?”

“Yes.”

Also, specifically asked, “Would you agree it was not a hoax that the Russians were engaged in trying to impact our election?”, Mr Mueller replied, “Absolutely, it was not a hoax”.

Lastly, the testimony raised the prospect of Mr Trump indeed being indicted — but only after he leaves office.

Mr Mueller gave no conclusive answer on whether the President obstructed justice, because he followed Department of Justice advice stating that a sitting President cannot be indicted while in office.

But when Mr Nadler asked if it was true that “under Department of Justice policy, the president could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice crimes after he leaves office”, Mr Mueller simply responded: “True.”

He was later asked: “You believe that he committed — you can charge the president of the United States with obstruction of justice after he left office?”

“Yes.”

In other words, Mr Mueller confirmed Mr Trump could still have legal troubles for obstructing justice after leaving office.

The President won’t be leaving the Oval Office any time soon, but he certainly may have some explaining to do.



@gavindfernando