Mueller, in First Comments on Russia Inquiry, Declines to Clear Trump

New York Times ^ | 05/29/2019 | By Sharon LaFraniere and Eileen Sullivan

[SeekAndFind]

Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel, on Wednesday declined to clear President Trump of obstruction of justice in his first public characterization of his two-year-long investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election.

“If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so,” Mr. Mueller said, reading from prepared notes behind a lectern at the Justice Department. “We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”

He also said that while Justice Department policy prohibits charging a sitting president with a crime, the Constitution provides for another process to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing — a clear reference to the ability of Congress to begin impeachment proceedings.

Although his remarks closely matched statements contained in his more than 400-page report, Mr. Mueller’s portrayal of Mr. Trump’s actions was not as benign as Attorney General William P. Barr’s characterizations. While Mr. Barr has seemed to question why the special counsel investigated the president’s behavior, Mr. Mueller stressed the gravity of that inquiry.

“When a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of their government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable,” he said.

He suggested that he was reluctant to testify before Congress, as the House Judiciary Committee has asked. “The report is my testimony,” he said.

[FourtySeven]

Sorry didn’t see your post until now. Please see my post #100 on this thread and remember, I’m not saying those examples are evidence, the Dems are.

[SoCal Pubbie]

Thank you for that, and I won’t shoot the messenger!

It still seems to me those items you cited hardly add up to evidence. More like innuendo. In fact doesn’t he contradict himself in part?

[Flaming Conservative]

I just now read, on Redstate, that a joint statement has been put out by Barr and Mueller spokespersons, that Mueller absolutely did NOT mean to imply that the only reason the President wasn’t charged is because you can’t charge a sitting president. He’s had to backtrack, not that the demonrats will pay ANY attention to that. I’ll bet Barr ripped him a new one, after that stunt he pulled yesterday.