Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: SeekAndFind

Robert Mueller is guilty of prosecutorial misconduct. If an investigation does not find enough evidence to charge a suspect, the prosecutor cannot create a permanent cloud over the suspect by claiming they could not “exonerate” the suspect, then close the investigation, leaving the suspect with no recourse. If so, this leaves the suspect guilty until proven innocent. A prosecutor’s mandate is simply to find evidence of a crime sufficient to charge or, failing to do so, close the investigation without charging. Leaving the public with the impression that the suspect still might be guilty is improper and unconstitutional. Mueller either lied today, or he lied when he told A.G. Barr and Deputy A.G. Rosenstein that his decision to not charge was because of the Department of Justice’s guidelines against indicting a sitting president. The fact is, he could have issued a sealed indictment to be opened when the president is out of office if his investigation found any evidence of criminal wrongdoing. If Mueller knew from the beginning that he would not charge the president due to guidelines, then what was the purpose of the investigation, except as an impeachment investigation, which is solely the province of the House of Representatives. Mueller decided instead to breath new life into the democrat calls for impeachment.


31 posted on 05/29/2019 11:49:45 AM PDT by Skeptical constituent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Skeptical constituent

What you said. This statement made by Mueller infuriates me.

“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.”

That’s not how it works in America. Investigators are supposed to look for evidence that a crime was committed, and, if they don’t find enough to contend that a crime was a committed, they are supposed to say “We didn’t find enough to contend that a crime was committed.”

They are NOT supposed to look for evidence that a crime was not committed and then say, “We couldn’t find evidence of innocence.”

If a person doesn’t have enough evidence that someone committed a crime to contend that a crime was committed, he is obliged to PRESUME HIS INNOCENCE.

“Not exonerated” is not a standard in our system, and it shouldn’t be one in our culture, either. By doing what he did, Mueller just set a very bad precedent.


49 posted on 05/29/2019 12:06:36 PM PDT by SeekAndFind (look at Michigan, it will)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson