tied by this doj policy and didn t believe there is anything he could do and what can do something is congress and that is where he left us. and when they say do something or drop it in the well of the house, does that mean he s saying to congress, impeach? if you look at it, what i think mueller was saying today is the office of legal counsel opinion doesn t let let him charge. his hands are tied. and the fundamental view of fairness is to say i would charge because i can t charge. and so he s saying. i don t want to be the judge and grand jury and how does the president get held accountable and how is there vetting of the evidence? it would be a trial. how does that happen? and the only mechanism in the constitution is the impeachment process in the house. and speaker pelosi, she has been reluctant to to go there on impeachment. do you think that this forces her hand? i think it pressures her quite a bit. look, there is going to be a conflict between what is
gum from the state of new jersey and john sale is a former watergate prosecutor. so with all of this legal power up here, ladies first. round robin. biggest takeaway of what we saw from robert mueller this morning. biggest takeaway, there are a couple, robert mueller is saying i did my job and now it is up to congress to do their job. he went through and sort of said, i didn t indict because of the offense of legal counsel opinion but i ve set out the facts and this is what it is. the second i think major takeaway is the russia piece which is where mueller started and stopped and i don t think we can ignore that. a whole segment on that coming up because it is so, so important. john sale? well when you say i didn t indict because the constitution says i couldn t, i think he just decided not to indict. and everyone is saying, he did not exonerate the president. prosecutors don t exonerate. they either charge or they don t charge. i ve done this for a long time as a defense lawyer.
melissa: nancy post making a statement short time ago, she says they will continue to investigate and legislate. she staying away from the letter i word. we re getting it right now. you bring up a very interesting point. robert mueller clearly was trying to get out there and clarify something, that something was bugging him. maybe it was that criticism that he was supposed to have made a decision. no, i wasn t supposed to make a decision, i wasn t allowed to. all he was trying to do was lay out the facts, and i have done that, soon i m leaving, goodbye. it s more that than we found enough evidence. we didn t. he says it wasn t his job to decide one way or the other, oh stop bothering me about that. it sounds very technical, this olc decision stuff. the truth of the matter is that there is a big difference between saying, i would have found obstruction but i can t charge. we had obstruction but we can t charge.
american people enough that they feel satisfied that they have a sense of what this investigation is about, but then have to walk that line that michael was talking about that he has to protect that line that he legally can t divulge. underlying the whole issue here, the doj policy is you don t indict a sitting president. what is it in this report, what does it say about donald trump s actions? that s why democrats want it so badly to become public. they said this is about their responsibility of oversight and if there should be impeachment proceedings, were there high crimes that they need to investigate. that s buy they re pushing saying he can t be shielded because doj policy says you can t indict a sitting president, if in fact there is a crime and activity that mueller found but he can t charge. yes. there is this narrative of victory or defeat 12 hours in. and we don t have anything from the report. we don t know what s in it. we don t know.
giving us nothing to see. we know individual one is donald trump they haven t said that. what, why is it still empty, blank? and not only blank, but they could have done sort of limited redactions, you could imagine, where they redact out a couple of names or details. they re redact everything about this. you keep the name out of it. exactly. every time it says a name or a sentence. but that s no what they ve done. there is a whole story here. we re not privy to it next. the only thing i can think is this is an active investigation with a lot of uncharged individuals, whose culpability is being assessed by the u.s. attorney s office. so you think there could be more charts, more indictments coming. i do. there are more charges coming. it s a certainty that there are people who are named in here that the government either hasn t charged, maybe can t charge, either due to doj rules or the absence of evidence, sufficient, let s say, for proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but t