Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor, Emeritus, said Mueller copped out by not deciding the obstruction issue
Mueller seems to be trying to appease Democrats by not dealing with the obstruction issue. However, Attorney General Barr says there is inadequate evidence to support an obstruction charge
Special counsel Robert Mueller did not find evidence that President Trump’s campaign conspired with Russia to influence the 2016 election, according to a summary of findings submitted to Congress by Attorney General William Barr.
Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law Professor, Emeritus, was quick to criticize Mueller’s report. He said that Mueller did not do his job when he concluded, “While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”
Barr says there is a lack of evidence to support constructive intent to obstruct justice.
OUR FREE OPINION
We agree with Dershowitz. Mueller did not have probable cause to indict President Trump for any crime—period. He should not have injected his opinion (and that is what it is) by stating that the report does not exonerate Trump. The investigation costs taxpayers millions of dollars—Mueller knows that—he seems to be trying to justify these expenditures. There is either an indictment, or there isn’t. Mueller should have limited his comments to this end.