Attorney General Bill has again challenged Special Counsel Robert Mueller on a major legal issue – this time he says he believes Mueller could have decided to sue President Trump if he had evidence that the president had committed a crime.
Barr was able to enter into a form of mutual reply hours after Mueller had stunned the nation by finally breaking his silence on his 448-page report and its conclusions – including his in-depth inquiry into whether the President's right.
& # 39; I personally felt that he could have made a decision, & # 39; said Barr CBS News in an interview from Alaska, where he held a round table discussion with indigenous tribes, just as Mueller made his bombshell statement.
FIRESIDE CHAT: Attorney General Bill Barr contradicted a central claim by special attorney Robert Mueller & # 39; s press statement Thursday
Mueller had said the opposite: he argued that guidelines from the Office of Legal Counsel of DOJ forbade him to sue the president during his tenure. He further argued that it would be unfair for Trump to say that he committed a crime because Trump would not be able to defend himself through the criminal trial without a charge and trial.
& # 39; That is unconstitutional & # 39 ;, Mueller said – stressing that the fundamental reason for not blaming Trump was not to do with guilt or innocence, but rather with those fundamental factors.
& # 39; Due to regulations, it was bound to that department policy &, said Mueller. & # 39; Therefore, suing the president with a crime was not an option we could consider. & # 39;
Special council Robert Mueller will speak on Wednesday 29 May 2019 in Washington about the investigation in Russia
& # 39; There was no crime. There was no crime, & T 39 said, asking if he expected him to be dropped off
Mueller explains why he did not make a decision about charging Trump
& # 39; And as explained in the report, after that investigation, if we had been confident that the president had clearly not committed any crime, we would have said so. However, we have not made a decision as to whether the President has committed a crime. The introduction to part II of our report explains that decision. It explains that according to a long-term departmental policy, a president cannot be accused of a federal crime while in office. That is unconstitutional. Even if the cargo is kept sealed and hidden from the public, it is also forbidden. A special law firm is part of the Ministry of Justice and was bound by that department policy by regulation. Charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option that we could consider.
Asked about Mueller's opinion, Barr told CBS: & According to the opinion you can't sue a president while he is in office, but he could have made a decision about whether it was a criminal activity. & # 39;
Then Barr pulled back. & # 39; But he had his reasons for not doing what he explained and I'm not going to argue, you know, about those reasons, & # 39; he said.
The two men, who have been friends for years and whose wives have attended Bible study, have come into conflict with the circumstances of the Mueller probe. Mueller seemed to accuse Barr in a March letter in which he disputed how Barr typed his report. And yesterday, an assistant distributed a document that revealed a breakdown of how the charging issue was resolved.
When Mueller did not make a decision about whether the Trump Committee was a crime, Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein stepped in and decided not to charge Trump. They made their decision within 48 hours after Mueller submitted his report.
Barr also responded to a common interpretation of Mueller & # 39; s comments: that he was preparing the table for Congress to further investigate what he discovered in accusations of deposition. Mueller noted in his comments that & # 39; the Constitution requires a different process than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a incumbent president of misconduct & # 39 ;. That process is deposition.
& # 39; The Justice Department does not use our powers to investigate crimes as an addition to Congress & # 39 ;, said Barr, in images that hours after insult was mentioned, & & # 39; disgusting & & # 39; word broadcast. Barr is currently engaged in a fierce confrontation with congressional democrats who demand that the full, non-edited Mueller report be published.
Barr also challenged a writ of summons and refused to stand up for a hearing of the House Judicial Committee after Democrats buried themselves on demanding committee members who asked the Attorney General's questions for a longer period of time.
Countless Democrats took Mueller's comments on Wednesday as an opportunity to advocate the start of deposition proceedings.
Special advice Robert Mueller & # 39; s editorial report on the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. Democrats demand access to a non-edited version
When Thursday asked Trump if he was expecting to be cut off, he replied: "I don't understand how … It's a dirty, nasty, disgusting word … It's a huge intimidation of the president."
He then referred to the impeachment clause of the constitution, which states that Congress can accuse the executive of & # 39; high crimes and crimes & # 39; – a sentence that is neither precisely defined nor limited.
& # 39; There was no crime. There was no crime, & T 39 said.
Mueller told the country in a dramatic statement on Wednesday: & # 39; If we were confident that the president had clearly not committed any crime, we would have said so. & # 39;
The line contradicts President Trump's claim that he & # 39; fully exempt & # 39; was through the report. Trump and the White House replied that Mueller & # 39; s comments meant that the & # 39; case closed & # 39; used to be.
. [TagsToTranslate] Dailymail