Even though Starr ultimately decided not to indict Clinton, he concluded he *could* do so. 4/http://www.nytimes.com/1999/01/31/us/president-s-trial-independent-counsel-starr-weighing-whether-indict-sitting.html …
-
-
The format of this report isn't specified by regulation, but if Mueller were otherwise inclined to indict Trump, I suspect he would set forth relevant facts. I also believe Rosenstein would make relevant portions of the report public, although he isn't obligated to do so. 15/
Show this thread -
While some have suggested that Mueller would make an "impeachment referral" to Congress if he finds evidence of impeachable acts, that was part of the now-expired independent counsel statute and is no longer an option for Mueller. 16/
Show this thread -
Other than judicial filings and trial proceedings, Mueller's work can reach Congress only with Rosenstein's blessing -- unless Congress subpoenas Mueller's report, which isn't likely to happen as long as the GOP controls Congress. 17/
Show this thread -
(It's also possible that Congress might subpoena grand jury evidence, as suggested here by
@rgoodlaw and@alexgwhiting.) 18/https://www.justsecurity.org/44191/mueller-grand-jury-report-public-hand-congress/ …Show this thread -
Bottom line: Trump won't be indicted, this is all about impeachment, the upcoming midterm elections are crucial, Rosenstein remains a very important guy, and I’m holding my nose and hoping that Sessions stays where he is. 19/end
Show this thread -
P.S. I just published a piece in WaPo based upon this thread.

https://twitter.com/EricColumbus/status/958437941319208961 …Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.