Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone
https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-u-...185812955.html
Former U.S. Attorney Tells Congress Trump Committed ‘Multiple Crimes’
Politics
Former U.S. Attorney Tells Congress Trump Committed ‘Multiple Crimes’
The Daily Beast By Barbara McQuade,The Daily Beast Mon, Jun 10 2:58 PM EDT
Reactions Reblog on Tumblr Share Tweet Email
Andrew Harnik/AP
Statement as prepared for testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.
Chairman Nadler, Ranking Member Collins, and distinguished members of the Committee: Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today about lessons from the Mueller Report regarding obstruction of justice.
Overview of Testimony
The most significant finding in the Special Counsel’s Report is that Russia interfered with our election in “sweeping and systematic fashion.”
Through that lens, I will share 2 observations about the report—
What happened and why it matters.
First, the conduct described in the report constitutes multiple crimes of obstruction of justice, supported by evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
If anyone other than a sitting president had committed this conduct, I am confident that he would be charged with crimes.
One thousand former federal prosecutors signed a letter agreeing that the president committed crimes.
Second, why it matters.
The obstruction described in the report created a risk to our national security because it was designed to prevent investigators from learning all of the facts about an attack on our country by a hostile foreign adversary.
hit the link to read more.............................
|
Prosecutors prosecute, it's not unsurprising that they see the burden of reasonable doubt met. Let's get 1000 former defense lawyers to agree that a crime of obstruction was committed based on the Mueller report (including the exculpatory evidence within that the Daily Beast did not delve into).
Personally, if the House wants to impeach him, I think they should. They should call Mueller to testify about the report and allow the evidence to be viewed cross-examined.
And if in the end, the burden of proof is met, the Senate should execute it's duties aside from political partisanship.
But I stand by the fact that until he is found guilty by the Senate, our system of justice demands that everyone acknowledge that Trump has not been found guilty (regardless if 10,000 prosecutors swore on a stack of 10,000 Bibles and said it was enough), and is therefore innocent - not just "not charged".