Thread by @neal_katyal

Another big question: Rep. Lasko (republican) just asked about this:
Lieu: "The reason you did not indict Donald Trump... is because of the OLC decision. Is that correct?"
Mueller: "That is correct."
Lasko says this contradicts what Mueller earlier said 1/

, that Mueller said on May 29 that he wasn't saying we would have indicted if there was no OLC opinion.
Mueller did not take back what he said to Lieu. If he doesn't take it back, will be big news: despite all his guardrails, Mueller saying he would have indicted but-for OLC op

Would mean the Democrats talking point, that if anyone else but Donald Trump acted this way they'd be in jail, is right.

The transcript even more damning:

Rep Lieu: Thank you. So to recap what we've heard, we have heard today that the president ordered former white house counsel don mcgahn to fire you. The president ordered don mcgahn to then cover that up and create a false paper trail. [more]

And now we've heard that the president ordered Cory Lewandowski to tell Jeff sessions to limit your invso that he, you, would stop investigating the president. I think a reasonable person looking at these facts could conclude that all three elements of the crime of obstruction

of justice have been met. I'd like to ask you again the reason again you did not indict president trump is because of a longstanding tradition that you not indite a standing president, correct?

>> ANSWER BY MUELLER: That is correct. END