Mueller Quietly Established His Credibility and Re-Focused the Agenda: Part 2, What He Didn't Say

Robert Mueller, FBI photo

People are asking, why did Special Counsel Robert Mueller not take a firmer stand when he spoke to the public yesterday? The answer is simple: although his talk frustrated both of the opposing sides, Mueller’s calm, fact-filled strategy helped to reestablish his credibility.

When Mueller spoke, his number one challenge was credibility. This is not because he had done anything wrong. No, it is because President Donald Trump and his supporters have unleashed the foulest vitriol against Mueller, challenging his integrity and objectivity in the harshest possible language. Although the Special Counsel’s report uncovered extensive unethical and possibly illegal conduct by the President and his team during the 2016 campaign, Mueller did not file criminal charges. The report explained that a Department of Justice opinion says that a sitting president cannot be indicted. (That opinion is at this link.)

My previous post noted that neither President Trump nor his surrogates have questioned the report’s factual accuracy. Their only defense has been to attack Mueller. Russian interference isn’t the issue. The issue is whether Mueller conducted a fair investigation.

To reestablish his credibility, Mueller used three brilliant rhetorical tactics: First, he stayed above the battle. Second, he confined himself to information that was already in the written report. Third, Mueller praised his staff’s quality and objectivity. Let’s look at each tactic in turn.

Above the Battle

Mueller neither took sides nor spoke for any policy. Importantly, he never mentioned the word “impeachment.” Saying “impeachment” (as Special Prosecutor Ken Starr did 17 times in his report when he investigated Bill and Hillary Clinton) would have made him seem political and would have created the impression that he was taking sides. Instead, he said: “the [Department of Justice] opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing.” We all know that the other process is impeachment, but Mueller didn’t say that. 

However, impeachment is what the opinion talked about. Page 32 of the Department of Justice opinion suggests that: “an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office.” By referring to the Department of Justice policy, but not using the word “impeachment,” Mueller gave his conclusion without using the exact word himself. Clever.

Sometimes, what you don’t say is more important than what you do say. Sometimes the best way to make a point is to not make it out loud!

Did Not Add to the Written Report

News reports show that many news analysts, many members of the public (and surprisingly many members of Congress) have not even read Mueller’s report. Mueller performed an important public service by reviewing the report’s findings in a brief, newsworthy speech. This made it more difficult for people to spin or misrepresent his findings. This is especially important since his superior, Attorney General William Barr, had reinterpreted the report in an inexcusable and distorted manner. Mueller was able to set the record straight without contradicting his boss. Indeed, he praised his boss (on a different issue!). Yet Mueller gave no information that was not already in the report itself. This gave the impression that he was measured, dignified, and determined to follow procedure. 

As he refocused attention on the written report, with its detailed findings and summary of evidence, Mueller not only conveyed a sense of objectivity, but he also drew attention back to the report itself:

“The report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress. In addition, access to our underlying work product is being decided in a process that does not involve our office. So beyond what I have said here today and what is contained in our written work, I do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the Justice Department or Congress.”

Did the President obstruct justice? Mueller stated his point very carefully: “if we had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime.” This left the issue to Congress, making Mueller’s position clear enough without stating it outright and avoiding the harsh, politicized language of Ken Starr’s report.

Mueller’s #1 lesson was, do your homework! Read the report!

Third, He Praised His Staff

A speech like this, given by the boss at the end of a lengthy investigation, would normally end by thanking staff members. Not a surprise. But Mueller fulfilled an obvious purpose: aware of the numerous criticisms of his staff, who President Trump often referred to as “13 Angry Democrats” or “18 Angry Democrats,” Mueller praised his staff to reinforce to the public that they did their jobs in a professional, non-partisan way:

“Now before I step away, I want to thank the attorneys, the FBI agents, the analysts, the professional staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner. These individuals who spent nearly 2 years with the special counsel’s office were of the highest integrity.”

Mueller’s word choice was very clever: “the professional staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner.” His people were “of the highest integrity.” I’ve seen some pushback against Mueller on social media, but Mueller contradicted the “Angry Democrats” tweets and made his point.

Conclusion

In public speaking, sometimes less is more. Lincoln’s short Gettysburg address is the United States’ best-remembered speech. Mueller said enough, and only enough, to refocus attention on his report. He chose words very carefully, saying just enough to make his point and not a word more. He stayed above the fray and reestablished his reputation.

Tangentially related is what communication experts call the "rhetoric of silence." In other words, what you don't say is as important as what you do say. I've blogged about that a few times.