Mueller: We did not exonerate Trump of obstruction.
Collins: did anyone in the administration hinder your investigation in any way
Mueller: NO
Ratcliffe: “Which DOJ policy or principle sets forth a legal standard that an investigated person is not exonerated if their innocence from criminal conduct is not conclusively determined?” asked Rep. John Ratcliffe, R-Texas, a former federal prosecutor. “Where does that language come from, director? Where is the DOJ policy that says that?”
When Mueller didn’t respond, Ratcliffe asked the 74-year-old former special counsel to “give an example other than Donald Trump where the Justice Department determined that an investigated person was not exonerated because their innocence was not conclusively determined.”
“I cannot, but this is a unique situation —” Mueller said before he was interrupted by Ratcliffe.
Ratcliffe: “Let’s just leave it at you can’t find it because — I’ll tell you why — it doesn’t exist,” said Ratcliffe.
“Respectfully, director, it was not the special counsel’s job to conclusively determine Donald Trump’s innocence or to exonerate him because the bedrock principle of our justice system is a presumption of innocence,” Ratcliffe said, raising his voice. “It exists for everyone. Everyone is entitled to it — including sitting presidents.”
Ratcliffe continued: “You didn’t follow the special counsel regulations. It clearly says write a confidential report about decisions reached. Nowhere in here does it say write a report about decisions that weren’t reached.”
The lawmaker argued that the second part of the report, which detailed 10 instances of potential obstruction by Trump, was written “in violation of every DOJ principle about extra-prosecutorial commentary.”
“I agree with Chairman [Jerry] Nadler this morning when he said Donald Trump is not above the law,” Ratcliffe said. “But he damn sure should not be below the law, which is where Volume II of this report puts him.”