My take on Mueller's statement. The Constitutional way that indictments are done

[lunatica]

Mueller said he can’t indict a sitting president and therefore he feels that to accuse Trump of any crimes would be unfair because without an indictment the president cannot defend himself legally. So Mueller will not say if he found that Trump committed crimes. But not “saying” it does not mean Trump was found innocent. Mueller said as much. The link takes you to a site that explains in plain English how indictments happen. Our Justice system is quite complex and has a foundation based on the Constitution.

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/charged-with-crime-how-29677.html

[Igel]

1. The objection, though, is simple.

And also correct.

Nothing precluded Mueller from reaching a conclusion, even if the conclusion couldn't result in an indictment.

The report to be written was for the AG's eyes, and confidential; anything said in that could have been simply kept back, with the note that "it's at the recommendation of the special counsel that this portion of the report not be released." And Mueller could have said the same thing. Now, that would have set off a firestorm of speculation and potential leaks, but what was redacted at the SC's request would have been redacted and probably not released.

Conversely, the information could have been imparted orally, not in written form.

Either way, a conclusion could have been reached.

[lunatica]

2. The way I see it is

Mueller was very careful in the language he used to impart information to the public. Perhaps he chose to tell the public directly that he did not find Trump innocent. That he also chose to deliberately say he didn’t indict only because he considered it to be unfair.

Mueller’s statement is quite clear if you understand that a double negative statement is actually a positive statement. I’m assuming it’s a careful way of wording something to show ambiguity so someone like Barr can’t throw it out. I wonder if maybe Barr overlooked the intent in his zeal to put words in Mueller’s mouth.

Trump and his staff don’t seem to be knowledgeable enough of grammar to get that the correct use of a double negative actually has a positive meaning.

Mueller in effect said he won’t say Trump is not found guilty nor is he found innocent. He also said that if Trump was found innocent he, Mueller, would say so. He would say, “Trump is innocent.”

In other words, the jury is still out on whether Trump is guilty or innocent.