That's not what he said. He said if Trump was found to be innocent of these things they would have said so.Clean the earwax out dude. Prosecutors make a choice to charge or not charge. Mueller said if they lacked sufficient evidence to charge obstruction, they would have said so (and in fact did say so with respect to conspiracy). So, in other words, there was sufficient evidence to charge obstruction. The reason they didn't charge obstruction was doj policy.
Ok.... did you read the report? In it, it specifically says they couldn’t make a determination on obstruction.
In the United States if a prosecutor can’t prove you committed a crime, it means you’re innocent.
Clean the earwax out dude. Prosecutors make a choice to charge or not charge. Mueller said if they lacked sufficient evidence to charge obstruction, they would have said so (and in fact did say so with respect to conspiracy). So, in other words, there was sufficient evidence to charge obstruction. The reason they didn't charge obstruction was doj policy.
Actually he stated that since there was no remedy in the courts he would not make an accusation as he said that would not be fair. And he’s right on that. It would just be left hanging.He said he couldn't charge a sitting president of a crime.
If Trump is guilty of a crime, don't they have a duty to impeach?