Posted on 05/29/2019 12:57:50 PM PDT by COUNTrecount
Special prosecutor Mueller’s statement upon the shuttering of his two-year investigation into the Trump campaign was weird even by the standards of the weirdness of the past couple of years. “Charging the president with a crime was not something we could consider,” he reported. Indeed, even pursuing that question, he added, would have been unconstitutional under long-standing Justice Department guidelines.
But then he said that if his office could have exonerated the president, it would have: “If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”
Granted, he said pretty much the same thing in the report he produced: “If we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state.”
His statement was only 8 minutes long. The report is 400 pages long. It matters what he chose to repeat from it and what he did not. He wanted the American people to hear him speak those words. He wanted to emphasize this point.
The “I couldn’t exonerate him” point is discomfiting for another reason, which is: Since when do prosecutors exonerate people? That isn’t a prosecutor’s job. Maybe in the aftermath of a wrongful conviction, with irrefutable physical evidence, prosecutors will say something exculpatory. But even in most of these cases, they usually drop charges on grounds of insufficient evidence, not positive proof of innocence.
The obvious rejoinder here is that the president of the United States isn’t just any person and that it is bad for our government and our country for a dark cloud to hang over the president’s head. Therefore,dissipating that cloud would be a good thing (even if such a purpose was not in any way Mueller’s charge when he was hired in 2017).
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
If you could not prove the President had committed a crime, he is innocent. Time to move on.
This is sort of fun to watch...
Body Language: Mueller & Nadler Press Conference
https://youtu.be/AWyQ2wbsbuw
I would be surprised if Rep Nadsler cares about
Mueller’s testimony. He might have even made a
deal w/Mueller to forego a hearing if he would
do his little dogn’pony show on his way out the
door. Then Mueller wouldn’t have to answer GOP
questions at the House committee hearing.
Graham needs to subpoena Mueller for a Senate
hearing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.