Special counsel Robert Mueller said Wednesday that charging President Trump with a crime “was not an option we could consider” due to Department of Justice (DOJ) regulations.
Mueller said that his office interpreted current DOJ guidance that states a sitting president cannot be indicted as meaning his team could not bring a charge against Trump as they investigated him for obstruction of justice.
The special counsel said that the Constitution requires a “process other than the criminal justice system” for taking disciplinary action against a sitting president, but did not mention impeachment directly.
Mueller also reiterated that while his final report “does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
And he noted that the opinion would have prohibited him from filing a charge under seal that could be made public once Trump left office.
“After that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime we would have said so,” Mueller said.
Mueller noted that the DOJ guidance, in the form of an opinion from the Office of Legal Counsel, “explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president because it’s important to preserve evidence when memories are fresh and documents are available.”
………
Tagged: Election 2016, Robert Mueller, Russia, Trump campaign
- Discussion
-
#BREAKING: Robert Mueller: Charging Trump with a crime was "not an option we could consider" https://t.co/3qQZPKbkxj pic.twitter.com/zFwvJiojzi
— The Hill (@thehill) May 29, 2019
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) May 29, 2019
What strikes me is he closed by repeating the threats to the election were real and organized.
— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) May 29, 2019
Note Mueller's comment that his testimony is the report but he has nothing to do with the Congress's access to his work product.
— Richard M. Nixon (@dick_nixon) May 29, 2019
If it wasn't already clear how Barr misled the public on the Mueller repot, it is now
— Igor Bobic (@igorbobic) May 29, 2019
!!!! “Charging the president with a crime is not an option we could consider” – Mueller makes clear it was not the evidence but the DOJ policy that precluded an indictment. This is huge.
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) May 29, 2019
More: “WHEN A SUBJECT OF AN INVESTIGATION OBSTRUCTS THAT INVESTIGATION OR LIES TO INVESTIGATORS, IT STRIKES AT THE CORE OF THEIR GOVERNMENTS EFFORT TO FIND THE TRUTH AND HOLD WRONGDOERS ACCOUNTABLE.”
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) May 29, 2019
"If we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so."
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) May 29, 2019
Shorter Mueller: Do I have to do everything? Congress, you have the report. I couldn't charge the President because of DoJ policy. We documented the attack. We showed you the collusion, but couldn't charge "broader" conspiracy. We laid out the obstruction. That's it."
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) May 29, 2019
That was a more forceful statement from Mueller than I expected, tbh
— Tom Nichols (@RadioFreeTom) May 29, 2019
He wants to avoid testimony so he can avoid further insinuations that he is a partisan working with Democrats to damage Trump. All the material they need, they have. He doesn't have to become part of a circus act.
— PostFactSojournerTim (@PostFactSojourn) May 29, 2019
Mueller statement: "Can't any of you people read?"
— David Frum (@davidfrum) May 29, 2019
Shorter Mueller: "Over to you, Nancy."
— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) May 29, 2019
Robert Mueller: "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." #Mueller https://t.co/m1zbvZ2Yuy pic.twitter.com/6mgm8dm66s
— The Hill (@thehill) May 29, 2019
Robert Mueller: "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." #Mueller https://t.co/m1zbvZ2Yuy pic.twitter.com/wppsBL9Aym
— The Hill (@thehill) May 29, 2019
Robert Mueller: "I hope and expect this to be the only time I will speak to you in this manner." #Mueller https://t.co/m1zbvZ2Yuy pic.twitter.com/Ag08nX10Ny
— The Hill (@thehill) May 29, 2019
Full transcript: Read Robert Mueller’s statement on the Russia investigationhttps://t.co/ScLSgX0b2d
— POLITICO (@politico) May 29, 2019
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s remarks to reporters on Wednesday at the Department of Justice:Good morning, everyone, and thank you for being here. Two years ago, the acting attorney general asked me to serve as special counsel and he created the special counsel’s office. The appointment order directed the office to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. This included investigating any links or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the Trump campaign.
Now, I have not spoken publicly during our investigation. I am speaking out today because our investigation is complete. The attorney general has made the report on our investigation largely public. And we are formally closing the special counsel’s office and as well, I’m resigning from the Department of Justice to return to private life.
I’ll make a few remarks about the results of our work. But beyond these few remarks, it is important that the office’s written work speak for itself.
Let me begin where the appointment order begins, and that is interference in the 2016 presidential election. As alleged by the grand jury in an indictment, Russian intelligence officers who are part of the Russian military launched a concerted attack on our political system.
The indictment alleges that they used sophisticated cyber-techniques to hack into computers and networks used by the Clinton campaign. They stole private information and then released that information through fake online identities and through the organization WikiLeaks. The releases were designed and timed to interfere with our election and to damage a presidential candidate. And at the same time as the grand jury alleged in a separate indictment, a private Russian entity engaged in a social media operation where Russian citizens posed as Americans in order to influence an election.
These indictments contain allegations and we are not commenting on the guilt or the innocence of any specific defendant. Every defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
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. And 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 their government’s effort to find the truth and hold wrongdoers accountable.
Let me say a word about the report. The report has two parts, addressing the two main issues we were asked to investigate.
The first volume of the report details numerous efforts emanating from Russia to influence the election. This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.
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.
And as set forth in the report, after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.
The introduction to the Volume 2 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.
A 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 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 for you.
First, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. Among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now.
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 — it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge.
So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated. And 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.
We conducted an independent criminal investigation and reported the results to the attorney general, as required by department regulations. The attorney general then concluded that it was appropriate to provide our report to Congress and to the American people. At one point in time, I requested that certain portions of the report be released and the attorney general preferred to make — preferred to make the entire report public all at once and we appreciate that the attorney general made the report largely public. And I certainly do not question the attorney general’s good faith in that decision.
Now, I hope and expect this to be the only time that I will speak to you in this manner. I am making that decision myself. No one has told me whether I can or should testify or speak further about this matter.
There has been discussion about an appearance before Congress. Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. It contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made. We chose those words carefully and the work speaks for itself. And the report is my testimony. I would not provide information beyond that which is already public in any appearance before Congress.
In addition, access to our underlying work product is being decided in a process that does not involve our office.
So, beyond what I’ve said here today and what is contained in our written work, I do not believe it is appropriate for me to speak further about the investigation or to comment on the actions of the Justice Department or Congress. And it’s for that reason I will not be taking questions today, as well.
Now, before I step away, I want to thank the attorneys, the FBI agents, the analysts, the professional staff who helped us conduct this investigation in a fair and independent manner.
These individuals who spent nearly two years with the special counsel’s office were of the highest integrity. And I will close by reiterating the central allegation of our indictments, that there were multiple systemic efforts to interfere in our election.
And that allegation deserves the attention of every American. Thank you. Thank you for being here today.
Shorter Mueller: Trump's obviously a criminal but DoJ wouldn't let us indict, so he's your problem now, Nancy.
— John Schindler (@20committee) May 29, 2019
Rep. Jerry Nadler: "The special counsel did not exonerate the President of the United States of obstruction of justice." https://t.co/EQhE5WZGnJ pic.twitter.com/9hkcfFl1TB
— The Hill (@thehill) May 29, 2019
Rep. Jerry Nadler: "Unfortunately, Special Counsel Mueller was unable to pursue criminal charges against the president because Department of Justice policy prevents a sitting president from being prosecuted. That policy in my opinion is wrong." https://t.co/EQhE5WZGnJ pic.twitter.com/ANmZtkVlOM
— The Hill (@thehill) May 29, 2019
Let me be CLEARER: You literally don't know what you're talking about. https://t.co/zQWbiFt3q4
— Jonah Goldberg (@JonahNRO) May 30, 2019
Here's what Robert Mueller actually said, citing long-standing DOJ policy that forbids indicting a sitting president: "Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider." https://t.co/daLP6jUnFW
— Peter Alexander (@PeterAlexander) May 30, 2019
Reminder: Trump’s own aides told him the conflicts angle was silly.
-Mueller said he never considered bringing charges because of DOJ policy.
-The government has recouped most of the probe’s cost because of forfeiture of properties by Manafort, including Trump Tower condo. https://t.co/k8PB6HcDXQ
— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) May 30, 2019
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.