Thread by @willchamberlain

Robert Mueller just reiterated the bottom line of his report:

1) They didn't charge the President for a variety of reasons, including the OLC opinion;

2) They couldn't "exonerate" the President on obstruction.

Why on earth did he feel the need to make a statement?

The entirety of volume II is Mueller slinging innuendo at Trump without making a firm commitment to anything

That strategic vagueness allowed Mueller to dodge the massive constitutional problems with his obstruction theory

Which aggressively impinges on the President's power

And now - more vagueness, more innuendo?

"Charging the President with a crime was not an option we could consider."

Did you ask Bill Barr whether you could consider it, Mr. Mueller?

Because he was your boss and could have filled you in

But he didn't ask the question

Not because Barr would have said no

But because if he had recommended a charge, that would have been an investigatory step that Barr could review

And Barr could have shut down their unlawful obstruction theory under 1512(c)(2)

I explained much of this one month ago, in my very first article for @HumanEvents, CHECKMATE

If you haven't read it, now is as good a time as any

humanevents.com/2019/05/01/che…