Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
From the Mueller report:
“If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”
"The conclusion that Congress may apply obstruction laws to the President’s corrupt exercise of the powers of office accords with our constitutional system of checks and balances and the principle that no person is above the law.”
From Mueller yesterday:
"It explains that under long-standing Department policy, a President cannot be charged with a federal crime while he is in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the charge is kept under seal and hidden from public view—that too is prohibited.
The Special Counsel’s Office is part of the Department of Justice and, by regulation, it was bound by that Department policy. Charging the President with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider."
"When (Mueller chooses his words very carefully, notice he did not say If) a subject of an investigation obstructs that investigation or lies to investigators, it strikes at the core of the government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable."
Testimonials for the choice of Robert Mueller
"Robert Mueller is superb choice to be special counsel. His reputation is impeccable for honesty and integrity" – Newt Gingrich, May 18, 2017.
"I have a lot of confidence in Bob Mueller. I think it was a good choice" – Mitch McConnell, June 13, 2017.
"Robert Mueller is highly regarded by Republicans and Democrats" – John McCain, June 13, 2017.
"I have a lot of confidence in Bob Mueller. This is someone who will go to where the truth leads him" – Condoleezza Rice, June 28, 2017.
From the infamous Rudy spoken a year ago:
Rudy Giuliani on Wednesday claimed to CNN that special counsel Robert Mueller’s team told President Trump’s lawyers that they cannot indict a sitting president. “All they get to do is write a report,” Giuliani, who currently serves as a Trump lawyer, told CNN reporter Dana Bash. “They can’t indict. At least they acknowledged that to us after some battling, they acknowledged that to us.”
Now we get to watch them spin................................
|
I watch you keep spinning. If they had had confidence that the president clearly did commit a crime, they would have said so. There is nothing, no law, no tradition, that would have prevented them from saying so. In fact, the purpose of the investigation was exactly to say so if the evidence clearly led to that conclusion. The purpose of a prosecutorial investigation is to convict, not to exonerate. The American way, the American tradition, is that there is firstly a presumption of innocence. If conviction cannot be had, the presumption of innocence stands.
We are now, according to your spin, supposed to assume guilt and innocence must be proved.