A newly released DoJ memo supports the reason then-AG Bill Barr made a statement to support no DoJ action on obstruction. Because ‘thought experiments’ are never doublespeak, just like hypotheticals even if uttered, aren’t actionable.
Mueller acted out of principle relative to the OIC ruling on prosecuting a sitting POTUS, but in Volume II, the deferral of judgement was not to be read as a conclusion. Andrew Weissmann on MSNBC opines that Mueller did not want to come to a conclusion on obstruction was not the same as exonerating Trump. More importantly Barr had “already made up his mind”.
Buried in the meaning is that Barr had already come to a conclusion about not prosecuting Trump, even if it was not made obvious in his 2019 “summary” of the yet-to-be released Mueller report, and the subsequent one month delay to chill the reception of the completion of the report.
Because no one surely wants to acknowledge a 2022 firewall against making the Mueller report still relevant in other instances of indicting Trump for obstruction of justice. And don’t call me Shirley, because the meme of “Russiagate” needs preserving even if history might show that there was a cover-up.
The Department of Justice has released a 2019 memo to then-Atty. Gen. William Barr advising him not to pursue obstruction of justice charges against then-President Trump related to the special counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the Department to release an unredacted version of the memo under the Freedom of Information Act. The Justice Department argued in court that the document should be shielded from public view.
But the federal appeals court found that Barr never seriously considered charging Trump with obstructing the Mueller investigation, stating in the ruling that the memo the former attorney general requested was an “academic exercise” and a “thought experiment.”
Special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation listed several instances in which Trump’s actions while president could meet the requirements for an obstruction of justice charge, but Mueller left the decision to Barr, citing precedent that a sitting president cannot be charged with a federal crime.
The memo advised Barr that the facts laid out in Mueller’s report were insufficient to establish that Trump had obstructed justice during the investigation, and that even if he were not president, the Justice Department should not pursue charges.
“We conclude that the evidence described in Volume II of the report is not, in our judgement, sufficient to support a conclusion beyond a reasonable doubt that the President violated the obstruction-of-justice statutes,” the memo states. “Accordingly, were there no constitutional barrier, we would recommend under the Principles of Federal Prosecution, that you decline to commence such a prosecution.”
www.abcnews.todaytrendingtweets.com/...
The memo was written by Assistant Attorney General Steven Engel and Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Edward O'Callaghan.
"We conclude that none of those instances would warrant a prosecution for obstruction of justice, without regard to the constitutional constraint on bringing such an action against a sitting president,” the memo reads.
Politico noted DOJ, "fought release of the memo for years, arguing that it was part of a deliberative process advising Barr on what to do in response to Mueller’s report. However, judges concluded that at the time the memo was written, Barr had already decided not to charge Trump, so the issues hashed out in the memo were theoretical and not linked to any pending decision."
www.rawstory.com/...