Let's try to understand what Mueller said yesterday, because he could not say the president was innocent of obstruction, but the reason he could not say he committed crimes was NOT insufficient evidence, as some here claim, but because guidelines were such that the Mueller team decided at the very start, that they could not even consider the question at all.
But first, some folks think obstruction is not in the cards for Trump if he did not commit an underlying crime, in this case conspiracy, therefore obstruction is factored out. No, that is not the case. Here is why considering obstruction was important.
Everything that follows in my comment, that is in quotes, is Mueller.
This is why obstruction of justice does not require an underlying crime:
"The indictments allege, and the other activities in our report describe, efforts to interfere in our political system. They needed to be investigated and understood. That is among the reasons why the Department of Justice established our office.
That is also a reason we investigated efforts to obstruct the investigation. The matters we investigated were of paramount importance. It was critical for us to obtain full and accurate information from every person we questioned. When 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."
----------------------------------------------
Now, let's look at what Mueller said about part 2, the obstruction investigation:
"And in the second volume, the report describes the results and analysis of our obstruction of justice investigation involving the President.
The order appointing me Special Counsel authorized us to investigate actions that could obstruct the investigation. We conducted that investigation and we kept the office of the Acting Attorney General apprised of the progress of our work.
As set forth in our report, after that investigation, if we had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said that.
We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime. The introduction to volume two of our report explains that decision.
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.
The Department’s written opinion explaining the policy against charging a President makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. Those points are summarized in our report. And I will describe two of them:
First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting President because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents are available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could now be charged.
And second, the opinion says that the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting President of wrongdoing.
And beyond Department policy, we were guided by principles of fairness. It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of an actual charge.
So that was the Justice Department policy and those were the principles under which we operated. From them we concluded that we would not reach a determination – one way or the other – about whether the President committed a crime. That is the office’s final position and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the President."
--------------------------------------------
OK, read his above comments carefully. 1. If it was clear that Trump did not commit a crime, Mueller would have said as much. He could not say that. 2. He could not say he did commit a crime, NOT because of insufficient evidence, as some on this site claim, but because DOJ policy forbids charging the president with a crime. In fact, he says it is unconstitutional to charge the president with a crime. So, Mueller decided at the start that they were not going to consider, AT ALL, if Trump committed a crime. 3. Beyond those limitations imposed by DOJ policy, it would not be fair to charge anyone with a crime if they could not have their day in court. 4. Mueller clearly states that DOJ "opinion states that the Constitution requires a process other then the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing"( translation: it requires the process known as impeachment)
(Note: Barr misled Americans by saying DOJ policy was not the reason Mueller could not say Trump committed crimes. But, Mueller said that is EXACTLY the reason. Some are putting this huge difference bluntly: Barr LIED. Therefore, in yesterday's statement, Mueller REPUDIATED what Barr said weeks ago when he released the Mueller report.)
------------------------------------------------
So, in summary. if the report could say the president did not commit a crime, the report would say so. But, the report could not even consider if he did commit a crime, because the Constitution does not allow it. The Constitution requires impeachment hearings to determine if there was wrongdoing on the part of the president.
"We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime." That is not the equivalent of saying insufficient evidence!! It is saying that is not our job, per DOJ guidelines, and, in Mueller's view, the Constitution.
Here is a full transcript. There are people on this site misinterpreting what Mueller said. Read the transcript!
http://time.com/5597514/robert-mueller-statement/?amp=true
And here is Mueller's statement, as recorded. Understand what the man said! He repudiated Barr's claims. And he passed the ball to Congress! Get it right, and stop the spin!:
