[ad_1]
Similarly, Mr. Barr truncated the explanation given by the special advocate about what "coordination" meant – and did not mean
From William P. Barr
"In assessing the potential conspiracy charges, the special council also examined whether the Trump campaigners were" coordinated "with electoral interference activities in Russia. The special council defined the "coordination" as an "agreement – tacit or express – between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on electoral interference."
From Robert S. Mueller III
Flight. Me, page 2: We understood that coordination required agreement – tacit or express – between the Trump campaign and the Russian government on electoral interference. For that to happen, it is not enough for both parties to take action informed by the actions or interests of the other party or to take them into account.
In the second sentence, omitted by Mr. Barr, Mr. Mueller again pointed out that there may be a type of complicit behavior that does not fit the definition given by the special advocate for coordination.
Mr. Barr omitted the reason why Mr. Mueller flouted the minutia of his factual investigation.
From William P. Barr
"After conducting a" thorough fact finding "on these issues, the Special Council considered whether to conduct an assessment in accordance with departmental standards governing prosecution and declination decisions, but finally decided not to pronounce traditional judgment. "
From Robert S. Mueller III
Flight. II, page 2: Second, while the O.L.C. The opinion concludes that a sitting president can not be prosecuted, he acknowledges that a criminal investigation is permitted during his term of office. The O.L.C. The opinion also recognizes that a president does not enjoy immunity after leaving. And if persons other than the president have committed an offense of obstruction, they may be prosecuted at that time. Given these considerations, the facts we know and the great public interest in protecting the integrity of the criminal justice system, we have conducted thorough fact finding to preserve the evidence when the memories were fresh and documents were available.
In his letter to Congress, Mr. Barr did not explain that Mr. Mueller was trying to leave open the possibility that prosecutors in the future, after Mr. Trump's departure, could examine the evidence. that he would have collected and then decide whether or not to indict Mr. Trump. This reasoning – which stems from the opinion of the Office of the Legal Counsel of the Department of Justice, or OLC, that presiding officers can not be charged but that past presidents lose immunity – is inconsistent with the Mr. Barr's decision to declare Mr. Trump laundered.
Barr described Mueller as facing "difficult problems" in reaching a decision on the obstruction
From William P. Barr
"The special board therefore did not reach any conclusion – in any way – as to whether the conduct being examined was an obstruction. Instead, for each of the relevant actions investigated, the report sets out evidence on both sides of the issue and leaves open what the Special Council considers to be "difficult questions" of right and fact as to whether the actions and intent of the President may be considered an obstruction. . The special advocate stated that "even if this report does not lead to the commission of a crime by the president, he does not exonerate him either".
[ad_2]
Source link