he fired comey and then, sessions. he said he's doing it because of the russia thing. i didn't think it was obstruction when it was just comey as maybe comey just didn't seem competent to trump or something. but now we are getting into territory where an investigation might actually be halted or impaired because of trump's direct action. that is starting to sound like obstruction which would warrant impeachment. like they say, only in washington can you be prosecuted for a crime you didn't commit. point being i dont think trump actually did anything illegal per russia, but the crime is in the process, the cover up, that sort of thing.
trump and obstruction of justice
Posts
Total:
41
21 days later
he also talked to manafort and his lawyers while they were supposedly supposed to be cooperating in a plea agreement.
he also went out of his way to call and tell the media that he might pardon manafort.
this all is starting to look like obstruction. i agree it's much ado about pretty much nothing, but an actual crime is becoming apparent.
on the campaign finance violation, i heard that cohen is going to be charged with that, and the only way he could be found guilty is if trump did something illegal too. that is, i thought trump had the benefit of the doubt that he used his personal money to pay the women he had affair with to stay quiet, but if cohen is being charged, they must think something different.
Who holds the FBI accountable for malfeasance?
-->
@linate
Trump has done nothing wrong. Don't listen to the CIA mockingbird media.
-->
@linate
The Department of Justice called Trump a felon today. Cohen is going to jail. Stone is going to jail. Papadoupolis is in jail. Flynn is likely going to jail. Manafort is invariably going to jail. The two Fredo sons of Trump, and the son in law are going to be indicted. So far, the only person whose felonious proclivities are not solidly evident is Ivanka. Though, her time in Central and Eastern Europe may suggest otherwise.
Cohen brokered a deal between a Russian Oligarch and Trump to build Trump Tower in Moscow, up until the point when Wikileaks released emails that Russia hacked from Hillary. Then, and only then, Trump Tower Moscow was off. Trump Tower Moscow was a dream of Trump's for decades, but was totally ignored by those who matter until Trump won the presidency. Then, a Russian Oligarch offers to seal the deal in exchange for Trump changing US policy as it relates to Ukraine from one of opposing Russian actions there to one of non-interference.
That is just a taste. The full scale of Trump's use of residential property in Trump Tower projects to launder money stolen from the Russian state will come out; same with the golf courses built in times when not only would no bank build a golf course (i.e., 2008) but when no bank would lend to Trump. Same with the towers. Why, then, would DeutscheBank? How about Danske Bank? Money laundering.
Cohen... rofl... that was the beginning of the end.
Tweet away. Won't change anything.
-->
@Greyparrot
Who holds the FBI accountable for malfeasance?
I think we should all be able to agree, probably not people being investigated by the FBI.
-->
@Greyparrot
Morality defined:Trump has done nothing wrong. Don't listen to the CIA mockingbird media.
..."Of or concerned with the judgment of right or wrong of human action and character:
.....moral scrutiny; a moral quandary.
.....Teaching or exhibiting goodness or correctness of character and behavior: a moral lesson.
.....Conforming to standards of what is right or just in behavior; virtuous: a moral life."......
-->
@Ramshutu
Why not? Seems like those victims would be the people most motivated to expose malfeasance.
-->
@Greyparrot
Oh yeah, I forgot that you seem completely unable to give a sensible or rational response to anything
Perhaps we should give criminals control of how long they should be sentenced! Or put businesses in charges of how much they get taxed?
i forgot:
Orange man good.
Criticism bad.
Considering the possibility orange man is a criminal bad.
-->
@Ramshutu
Even criminals are allowed to file complaints of prison administration abuse.
-->
@Ramshutu
Also, you suck at memes, but you are a socialist Canadian, so you get a pass.
-->
@Ramshutu
Perhaps we should give criminals control of how long they should be sentenced! Or put businesses in charges of how much they get taxed?
Actually, yes, you should explore that
-->
@Greyparrot
Considering that no one in their right mind would think those being investigated by the FBI should be able to exercise power over their investigation, and given that the only people who can be forgiven for thinking that “complaints” are the same thing as “holding people accountable”, are 80 year old British women with dementia: it seems pretty self evident is that you’re just trying to say something/ anything to make it sound like there is a valid counter argument.
Orange man holy.
Criticism bad.
Rational argument bad.
-->
@linate
His nomination is actually Robert Mueller's old boss, more qualified than Jeff Sessions whom I considered a national liability. He is supposed to be one of the best in the business. William Barr represents ice cold law and order for the federal government, a hardliner for the rule of law.
-->
@Plisken
Ramsocialist is a radical left wing Authoritarian. There's no way he would trust everyday people with decisions like that.Actually, yes, you should explore that
-->
@Greyparrot
Wait, what?
I must have really hit a nerve if you decided to drop the pretext trolling and skipped straight to misrepresentation and insults!
Orange man holy.
Criticism bad.
Reality that doesn’t agree with me, bad.
-->
@Greyparrot
orange man good.
criticsm bad.
reality bad.
-->
@Ramshutu
THE BIGGEST COMPLIMENT YOU CAN GIVE TRUMP is to attack him personally. You can't attack him for starting wars like his predecessors because he hasn't started any. You can't attack him for a tanking economy like his predecessors because the economy is booming. You can't attack him for going on apology tours for the United States like his predecessors because all he does when he goes abroad is fight for us. You can't attack him for raising taxes like Obama did and Hillary would have done because he lowered them. You can't attack him for being soft on national defense and at our borders like his predecessors because we all know how he is with those. You can't attack him for being corrupt and rigging an election because he won DESPITE the election being rigged against him. You can't attack him for not being available to the press because he speaks with the press every single day. And speaking of the press, you can't attack him for not being patient because there is nobody alive with his amount of patience. Not a single one of us would be able to handle all the shit he has to deal with. You can't attack him for any of the actual important things that affect our daily lives because when it comes to those issues, he's doing a superb job. So if all people can attack him on is his personality, I'd say that's a win for him and all of us too. And as far as working for us, he's just barely gotten started. Side note: The reason Trump was elected in the first place was a message to the political and media establishments that we see right through their bullshit and lies, we aren't buying their bullshit and lies, and we won't put up with them anymore. It was a loud and clear message for them but they just don't get it still because they're not just continuing with the same behavior, they're doubling down. They are the epitome of stupid and will not be successful.
-->
@Greyparrot
Actually if you were paying attention, I wasnt actually insulting him personally - though I will now point out that he’s corrupt, and the most plausible explanation of all the facts is that he’s repeatedly broken the law and doesn’t have America’s best interests at heart.
Now, parroting out Fox News talking points the moment you need to defend orange man, is a bit odd. If you’re just going to throw out a bunch of inane nonsense whenever you are unable to defend what you believe, this type of site is probably not good for you.
Unfortunately for you, Trump is strong on borders, strong on defense, and fighting for America, and all the rest in the same way the Emperor is strong on Fashion.
on the campaign finance point. i think the precise issue is whether cohen at trump's direction made an illegal campaign contribution. but i think it's too vague of a law if what he did could be called that. he didn't intend to make a contribution, he intended to help trump avoid scandal.
i also think the obstruction of justice claims are probably too vague to be constitutional.
witness tampering with mueller might be viable.
-->
@linate
There's actually far more evidence of prosecutorial misconduct at this point.
-->
@linate
When the special counsel has stopped looking for actual hard evidence like a tape or a smoking gun, and has spent most of last year setting up multiple perjury traps to trap numerous people for lack of actual evidence, you know the justice system has failed the people.
Trump is never going to be impeached over a FBI manufactured perjury trap. Hell even when Clinton had hard evidence against him like the Dress, there was no impeachment over proven perjury. No chance in hell will a supermajority of the Senate impeach Trump- when 57 senators have a (R) by their name over perjury, especially one constructed by the FBI with no corroborating hard evidence.
It was already obstruction when he fired Comey.
"I just fired the head of the FBI. He was crazy, a real nut job."
"I faced great pressure because of Russia. That's taken off"
"When I decided [to fire Comey], I said to myself, I said, 'You know, this Russia thing with Trump and Russia is a made up story"
I don't know how you could interpret this in any otherway
-->
@dustryder
how? based on what?It was already obstruction when he fired Comey.
do you know more than
Harvard Law Professor Emeritus Alan Dershowitz?
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
There you go. The case for obstruction starts at page 85. A reply to Dershowitz's argument is at page 135
-->
@dustryder
yep straight from page 135
"Much evidence would need to be uncovered for a successful conspiracy chargeinvolving President Trump, Kushner, or other members of the Trump administration. It maynever be"
I'm not going to read all 135 but I'd be happy to look at specific pages, thanks.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Slide your gaze downwards on the page for the reply to Dershowitz's argument. You've read something unrelated.
-->
@dustryder
might be helpful if you quote it or something, do you mean this?
Alan Dershowitz, History, Precedent and James Comey’s Opening Statement Show thatTrump Did Not Obstruct Justice, Washington Examiner, Jun. 8, 2017, available at http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/alan-dershowitz-history-precedent-and-james-comeys-openingstatement-show-that-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/article/2625318
maybe you are misunderstanding, go back and read my first post to you and what I quoted from you, firing Comey wasn't obstruction and nothing on the page proves that it was.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
I see there's been some confusion. So from the PDF that I linked, on page 135, what you quoted had no relevance to Dershowitz's argument and was not what I intended you to read. That's why it read "conspiracy charge" rather than "obstruction charge" or similar. What I wanted you to read was the subsection that started on that page.
At any-rate the point I'm making is that Dershowitz's opinion is not a legal consensus, and that from a legal standpoint there is a good case to be made that Comey's firing was obstruction.