it s an issue that had never really been seriously considered and decided one way or the other. before the justice department was confronted with it urgently during the nixon administration. thanks to this sort of odd a series of things happening all at once in the early 70s, the vice president spiro ag new going to prison, the president, richard nixon, being removed by office against his will by impeachment. thanks to those things coming together all at once in a big felonious mess because the american people in our infinite wisdom that it be a good idea to elect guys that cry me to the white house twice, thanks to that mess around nixon and add new the justice department in the early 70s bumbled our way into putting down, on paper, that it was policy of the justice department to not ever bring criminal charges against a sitting president of the united states. and that s an important sort of, a landmark moment for the nixon years right? it s never a good sign when your presi
evidence developed during the special counsel s investigation is not sufficient to establish that the president committed an obstruction of justice offense. our determination was made without regard to and is not based on the constitutional considerations that surround the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting president. that s what barr did, that s what barr said. it turns out that was a lie. at least a federal appeals court in washington has just ruled that that was a lie. according to a unanimous ruling from the d.c. circuit court of appeals, a three judge panel, when robert mueller turned in his report to the justice department, attorney general bill barr and the justice department never actually considered, at all, whether or not trump committed crimes, or whether trump should be charged. they literally never even looked at that possibility, despite what they said they were doing publicly. barr lied, according to the appeals court, and told congress and the public the j