Can’t be indicted? The only reason Special Counsel Robert Mueller did not indict on obstruction (and likely criminal CONspiracy with Russians as well) was not based on a conclude that there was “no obstruction.” (He did, however, say that we was not sufficiently confident that he could prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the 140 instances of mutually helpful interactions between the Russians rose to the level of criminal conspiracy.) The ONLY reason Mueller gave for not being able to indict was an internal Department of Justice rule based on a 1973 (Nixon-era) memo from their Office of Legal Counsel.
In fact, Mueller laid out very ten separate very specific instances in which he demonstrated all the elements of the crime of obstruction could be proved, and that the ONLY reason he did not bring charges was that 1973 Nixon-era OLC memo (later modified in 2000) asserting that a sitting president cannot be indicted.
Mueller did not cite any law, statute or Constitutional provision as his basis; only the OLC opinion, which itself is inconsistent with the impeachment provisions in Article 1, Section 3 Paragraph 7 of the Constitution, which establishes a single protocol of impeachment by the House and conviction by the senate applicable to any elected or senate-confirmed appointed official in the Executive or Judicial branches. A single standard. But the OLC opinion explicitly differentiates between the vice-president and president, and implicitly between the president and how indictments of SITTING federal judges have been handled, thus is contrary to (and not validly based on) the Constitution, even if the memo writers might have claimed otherwise).
Mueller did specifically punt the issue of indictment to Congress for consideration of impeachment and/or to any future Department of Justice for consideration after Trump is no longer in office.
Can’t be indicted? The only reason Special Counsel Robert Mueller did not indict on obstruction (and likely criminal CONspiracy with Russians as well) was not based on a conclude that there was “no obstruction.” (He did, however, say that we was not sufficiently confident that he could prove “beyond a reasonable doubt” that the 140 instances of mutually helpful interactions between the Russians rose to the level of criminal conspiracy.) The ONLY reason Mueller gave for not being able to indict was an internal Department of Justice rule based on a 1973 (Nixon-era) memo from their Office of Legal Counsel.
In fact, Mueller laid out very ten separate very specific instances in which he demonstrated all the elements of the crime of obstruction could be proved, and that the ONLY reason he did not bring charges was that 1973 Nixon-era OLC memo (later modified in 2000) asserting that a sitting president cannot be indicted.
Mueller did not cite any law, statute or Constitutional provision as his basis; only the OLC opinion, which itself is inconsistent with the impeachment provisions in Article 1, Section 3 Paragraph 7 of the Constitution, which establishes a single protocol of impeachment by the House and conviction by the senate applicable to any elected or senate-confirmed appointed official in the Executive or Judicial branches. A single standard. But the OLC opinion explicitly differentiates between the vice-president and president, and implicitly between the president and how indictments of SITTING federal judges have been handled, thus is contrary to (and not validly based on) the Constitution, even if the memo writers might have claimed otherwise).
Mueller did specifically punt the issue of indictment to Congress for consideration of impeachment and/or to any future Department of Justice for consideration after Trump is no longer in office.