The conclusion :
Because we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment , we did not draw ultimate conclusions about the President's conduct. The evidence we obtained about the President's actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly, while this report does not conclude that the President committed a crime
Meaning there is no crime.
it also does not exonerate him.
In the absence of a crime there can be no exoneration. Do we need to tattoo this in reverse on your forehead to remind you each morning?
It's a lot more than that.
{I begin with the SCO's stated conclusion on the obstruction question: The SCO
concluded that the evidence prevent[ed] [it] from conclusively determining that no criminal
conduct occurred." 300 Report v.2. p2. But conclusively determining that no criminal
conduct occurred was not the SCO's assigned task. because making conclusive determinations
of innocence is never the task of the federal prosecutor.
What prosecutors are supposed to do is complete an investigation and then either ask the
grand jury to return an indictment or decline to charge the case. When prosecutors decline to
charge. they make that decision not because they have conclusively determin[ed] that no
criminal conduct occurred, but rather because they do not believe that the investigated conduct
constitutes a crime for which all the elements can be proven to the satisfaction of a jury beyond a
reasonable doubt. Prosecutors simply are not in the business of establishing innocence. any more
than they are in the business of "exonerating" investigated persons. In the American justice
system, innocence is presumed; there is never any need for prosecutors to conclusively
determine it. Nor is there any place for such a determination. Our country would be a very
different (and very dangerous) place if prosecutors applied the SCO standard and citizens were
obliged to prove ?conclusively . . . that no criminal conduct occurred.}
Read the letter White House counsel Emmet Flood wrote to AG Barr
