Mueller Report Thread

Let’s see what two crack lawyers have to say about it:
JAY SEKULOW: As to the obstruction, Wolf, the key there is that the attorney general and the deputy attorney general made the conclusion that you don’t have obstruction when there’s no underlying crime. I think that we’ve said from the outset that this was a situation where there was no collusion, there was no obstruction, and now we have the weight of the Department of Justice agreeing with us.
WOLF BLITZER: Very important, though, I want to get your reaction to one line in this letter. They quote the special counsel, Robert Mueller, as saying, as far as obstruction of justice, quote, “While this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.” What’s your reaction to that?
GIULIANI: Yes, but then if you go on to the next two paragraphs, Wolf, the attorney general does kind of a brilliant analysis of it. He says that he and deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein have concluded that the evidence is not sufficient to establish the president committed obstruction of justice. Then he goes even further and points out that basically under settled law, it’s almost impossible to have obstruction of justice if there’s no underlying crime. A brilliant lawyer-like analysis. Then he concludes with a very strong statement, “in cataloging the president’s actions, many of which took place in public view, the report identifies no actions that in our judgment,” that’s Rosenstein and Barr, “constitute obstructive conduct.”

In my view, it is quite clear that a President cannot be considered to obstruct justice for exercising his official duties and/or acting in a manner specifically authorized by the Constitution.
Thus, by way of example, the President can pardon anyone, for any reason, for any and all actions taken prior to the pardon. He may do this even if the person was obviously guilty, or if the crime has not come to light and the person has not been charged, or anywhere in between.
The President also may fire anyone in the executive branch, at any time, for any reason or no reason. The President may direct the activities of executive branch personnel, including federal prosecutors and/or investigative personnel. The President may classify information is such a way as to preclude its disclosure in a criminal trial. While any or all of these activities may interfere with a criminal investigation and/or prosecution, they clearly fall within the President’s duties and thus may not be characterized as obstruction of Justice.
Yes, a President could obstruct justice by, for example, corruptly tampering with evidence, but the valid exercise of a President’s constitutional duties cannot be a crime.