SiIly WilIy wrote:
You Lefties need to stop lying.
Mueller DID NOT "make it clear" that Trump wasn't indicted because of an OLC opinion. In fact, as everyone now knows because the Democrats stupidly made him testify, Mueller started the afternoon session by correcting an earlier statement he made that would lead some to believe what you do... which effectively DESTROYED any of the "bombshell" about the "couldn't indict a sitting president" hoax. He said "That is NOT the correct way to say it.....We didn't make a determination..." If there was sufficient evidence (and if the investigation wasn't a hoax to begin with), they certainly know they could indict a POTUS. But there wasn't.
That testimony, like yesterday's, was a total joke and resulted in nothing. NOTHING.
You, either intentionally or mistakenly, misunderstand what Mueller corrected.
The initial exchange with Ted Lieu was this:
"The reason again that you did not indict Donald Trump is because of the OLC opinion stating that you cannot indict a sitting president, correct?" Lieu had asked.
"That is correct," Mueller replied.
Later that day Mueller amended his statement with this:
"That is not the correct way to say it. As we say in the report, and as I said at the opening, we did not reach a determination as to whether the president committed a crime."
He and his team did not reach a determination because that was not in their authority to do so...not just to not indict, but not to even make a determination. So, it was incorrect for him to say they didn't indict because of the DOJ opinion that they can't. It was correct for him to say they did not reach a determination about whether he committed a crime, because it was not within their authority to do so. He also made it clear that if the evidence had shown that the President clearly did not commit a crime, they would have said so.
'If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so' - Robert Mueller
10 instances of potential obstruction of justice in the initial report, plus one more that was added to that list after more of the report was unredacted, 5 of which have been declared by legal experts, to have all the elements of prosecutable crimes. This is now up to Congress for impeachment purposes, and as Mueller clearly stated, Trump can be prosecuted after he leaves office.
Note this - Mueller also said he was legally unable to charge the president with a crime, emphasizing it's against Justice Department policy and describing it as "unconstitutional."
That is debatable about it being unconstitutional, but it is important only to know that Mueller had that opinion.
More quotes from Mueller:
'Charging the president with a crime was ... not an option we could consider'
"Under long-standing department policy, a president cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional," Mueller said. "Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view, that too is prohibited."
More points made by Mueller (taken from a businessinsider news article):
*The first is that if he'd suggested Trump obstructed justice without charging him with it, it would have deprived Trump of an opportunity to defend himself as he normally could in a court of law.
*The second is that even if prosecutors had filed a sealed indictment against Trump, there was a chance of the document leaking. And filing an indictment in the first place, Mueller added, would also have been against department policy.
Mueller's hands were tied with regard to making any determination about Trump.
Finally:
'Nadler: "Under Department of Justice policy, the President could be prosecuted for obstruction of justice crimes after he leaves office, correct?"
Mueller: "True"'
Doesn't say he should be, only that he could be.
Trump is a bad guy. You defending him is shameful.