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.
“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.”
Guilty until proven innocent, that is an OUTRAGE and an AFFRONT to our Civil Liberties.
“If we had had confidence that the president had clearly not committed a crime we would have said so.”
Guilty until proven innocent, that is an OUTRAGE and an AFFRONT to our Civil Liberties.