,
8 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Mueller: “I’m resigning to return to public life.”
Starts with Russian interference, “a concerted attack on our political system,” “damage a presidential candidate,” “social media campaign.”
“This is also why we investigated obstruction.”
1/
Starts with Russian interference, “a concerted attack on our political system,” “damage a presidential candidate,” “social media campaign.”
“This is also why we investigated obstruction.”
1/
2/
“If we had confidence that the president did not commit a crime, we would have done so. We did not have that confidence.”
“But we are bound by OLC policy. It would be unconstitutional” to indict a sitting president.
“It is important to investigate a sitting president...”
“If we had confidence that the president did not commit a crime, we would have done so. We did not have that confidence.”
“But we are bound by OLC policy. It would be unconstitutional” to indict a sitting president.
“It is important to investigate a sitting president...”
3/ “We also decided based on fairness. It is unfair to accuse someone of a crime if there can be no judicial resolution.”
“I appreciate [Barr] making Report largely public... in good faith.”
“The report is my testimony. It is not appropriate for me to speak further.”
“I appreciate [Barr] making Report largely public... in good faith.”
“The report is my testimony. It is not appropriate for me to speak further.”
4/ “I will close with the central allegation in our report: Russian interference. We need to do something about it.”
Mueller gives a rebuttal of the Barr letter and “No Obstruction” spin.
But same old Mueller. Speaking too unclearly, too deferential to a mistaken policy.
Mueller gives a rebuttal of the Barr letter and “No Obstruction” spin.
But same old Mueller. Speaking too unclearly, too deferential to a mistaken policy.
5/ I meant “private life.”
I’ll say it again: it is incongruous that Mueller was more deferential to an OLC policy (which was based on a legal error) than to Congress (on clear definition of campaign coordination). The constitution doesn’t address the indictment of a president.
I’ll say it again: it is incongruous that Mueller was more deferential to an OLC policy (which was based on a legal error) than to Congress (on clear definition of campaign coordination). The constitution doesn’t address the indictment of a president.
6/ OLC policy that a president cannot be indicted relies on something that simply does not exist in our legal system: the equitable tolling of criminal statutes of limitations. But there was something significant in Mueller’s hinting: future prosecution...
slate.com/news-and-polit…
slate.com/news-and-polit…
7/ Mueller rebutted Barr & Trump on obstruction, implicitly but most clearly calling for Congress to act.
This won’t move GOP Senators, but maybe this finally moves @SpeakerPelosi.
But less clearly, Mueller was hinting that there could be a future prosecution of an ex-president.
This won’t move GOP Senators, but maybe this finally moves @SpeakerPelosi.
But less clearly, Mueller was hinting that there could be a future prosecution of an ex-president.
Mueller emphasized that even if a sitting president can’t be indicted, it’s important to investigate “while memories are still fresh.”
Why would that be important? Congress can do that itself.
The implication: investigate now, record sworn statements, for prosecution later.
Why would that be important? Congress can do that itself.
The implication: investigate now, record sworn statements, for prosecution later.
