I'm reading The Mueller Report, Not surprisingly, it is a prosecutor's document with the strengths and weaknesses that implies. Given the way the investigation was structured, I am not surprised by Robert Mueller's performance at the House hearings other than he should have been far better prepared for some of those questions. We can now expect that his associates, who may have been far closer to the preparation of the report, will receive greater attention.
Law professor Alan Dershowitz's view, coming not surprisingly from a defense attorney's perspective, is that a commission, not a special counsel, should have been appointed. With a commission, there could have been open hearings in which all sides could have presented - and argued over - the evidence. I agree. [One wag noted over a year ago that the idea of appointing a special counsel always sounds good for 24 hours.]
With a management consultant's bias, I believe this is an example of how organizations rush into taking an action without considering the system that is being employed. The old line that organizations get the results they are designed to get should be painted above conference room doors. We have gotten the product of a special counsel.
Repeat: we have gotten the product of a special counsel.
And that, however well-intended, has both the benefits and limitations of that structure.
Post a Comment