On the recordMay 9, 2019
This is in response to the attorney general's claim that the President has constitutional immunity from prosecution. Mr. Mueller writes: ``We were not persuaded by the argument that the President has blanket constitutional immunity to engage in acts that would corruptly obstruct justice through the exercise of otherwise valid Article II powers.'' He goes on at some length to talk about what that standard is, but I want to read the footnote in that section. ``A possible remedy through impeachment for abuses of power would not substitute for potential criminal liability after a President leaves office. Impeachment would remove a President from office, but would not address the underlying culpability of the conduct or serve the usual purposes of the criminal law. . . . ``Impeachment is also a drastic and rarely invoked remedy, and Congress is not restricted to relying only on impeachment, rather than making criminal law applicable to a former President . . . '' That is from Volume II, page 178.
