Ann Marie Tracey, Opinion contributor
Published 10:18 a.m. ET May 10, 2019
This past week over 500 former federal prosecutors asserted that contrary to Attorney General William Barrs finding, the Mueller Report sufficiently laid out a prosecutable case against President Donald Trump for obstruction of justice. I was a signatory and here is why.
The oaths public servants take require upholding the U.S. Constitution and the laws of the United States. Implicit in these pillars is safeguarding the rule of law. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the U.S. dispatched judges to the newly independent former republics to preach the rule of law; any course on the law or our Constitution embrace it as the backbone of our society.
This rule requires that all people are subject and accountable to law that is applied and enforced fairly. (In explaining it to Ukranian judges, my interpreter could not translate "fair."
It means people of import or wealth should not receive special favor or treatment. It appears that AG Barr discarded this principle in declaring there was insufficient evidence to prosecute the president.
It is important to address why the AGs action is untenable. Department of Justice policy asks three questions for determining an indictable offense: 1) Is the conduct a crime? 2) Is admissible evidence likely to obtain and sustain a conviction? 3) Would prosecution serve a substantial federal interest not otherwise adequately protected? ...
https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/2019/05/10/trump-obstruction-charge-mueller-report-barr-prosecutor/1162761001/