Mueller's restricted options as: "special counsel" rather than "independent counsel"

Many of us have wondered why Robert Mueller did not make his report directly to Congress.    Isn't that what Kenneth Starr did when he led the Bill Clinton impeachment investigation?

Yes, but Starr's appointment was as "independent counsel," operating under different guidelines and restrictions than Mueller, who was a "special counsel."  It not only mandated that the independent counsel report directly to Congress but that he also "advise the House of Representatives of any substantial and credible evidence that may constitute grounds for impeachment," in the words of Michael Zeldin and Julian Zelizer reporting for CNN.

After what many felt was Starr's unnecessarily salacious open report, Congress let the independent counsel law expire and left the Justice Department to rely on its own newly written regulation for a "special counsel," reporting only to the Attorney General.

So, legally, Mueller did not have that option to report directly to Congress.   The special counsel regulation gives power to the Attorney General to release the report . . . or not.   Which might be just fine when you have an independent AG who is not beholden to the president.

But, as has become obvious, that is not what we have in AG William Barr.   It is equally obvious that Congress needs to pass a new law that gives the power of impeachment fully back to Congress as part of its legitimate, constitutional role of oversight over the Executive Branch and the president.

Zeldin and Zelizer suggest that given the time and difficulty of passing new legislation (especially with Republicans controlling the Senate) that the House could voluntarily analyze Mueller's findings under the same standard as that which existed in the independent counsel.     They could ask Mueller whether he "would have been obligated to advise the House of substantial and credible evidence constituting grounds for impeachment."   In other words, ask Mueller to advise them as though he were operating under the old independent counsel regulations.

They explain that this would give the House, in its oversight capacity, "a workable framework for analyzing whether they believe that an impeachment inquiry is warranted."

Perhaps this is exactly what Mueller was trying to do when he gave his 9 minute press briefing.    As Zeldin and Zelizer point out, Congress will need to make its own determination, "as impeachment is a political judgment informed by, but not dependent on, violations of statutory law."

I agree.   I think this would be a good idea and a useful move.   I also think I know what Mueller's response will be:    "Read my report."    He's already told Congress what to do.   Just read the damn report.   It's all there.

Ralph