Cont: Mueller Investigation pt3

Status
Not open for further replies.
The earlier quote about Mueller being "the worst defense attorney", leaves out an important qualifier. He cannot abide defending scumbags he think to be guilty. Hence his preference to be prosecutor.
 
Minoosh said:
So does Trump's tweet blasting Jeff Sessions for indicting 2 Republicans so close to the election look at all like attempted obstruction of justice?
Click to expand...

How would that constitute obstruction? The behavior of an idiotic a-hole, certainly, but I'm not seeing how it could be considered obstruction. Can you clarify?
 
Emily's Cat said:
How would that constitute obstruction? The behavior of an idiotic a-hole, certainly, but I'm not seeing how it could be considered obstruction. Can you clarify?
Click to expand...
Further threatening the job of someone who must please the president. If he actually said, "Hey, Jeff, no indictments (of Republicans) until after the election, m'kay?" would that qualify?

I posed it as a question for a reason, but on reflection, lambasting your attorney general for pursuing justice vs. politicking for the GOP could clearly be seen as meant to have a chilling effect on the pursuit of justice. Especially when you have been publicly criticizing and humiliating that attorney general for not killing the Russia probe.

Although, as far as Sessions being under fire, I've got to say it could not happen to a nicer guy [/sarcasm].
 
Last edited:
Emily's Cat said:
Minoosh said:
So does Trump's tweet blasting Jeff Sessions for indicting 2 Republicans so close to the election look at all like attempted obstruction of justice?
Click to expand...
How would that constitute obstruction? The behavior of an idiotic a-hole, certainly, but I'm not seeing how it could be considered obstruction. Can you clarify?
Click to expand...
Attempted obstruction.

legal Definition of obstruction of justice
: the crime or act of willfully interfering with the process of justice and law especially by influencing, threatening, harming, or impeding a witness, potential witness, juror, or judicial or legal officer or by furnishing false information in or otherwise impeding an investigation or legal process.​

Trump attacks Jeff Sessions over House Republicans indicted for financial crimes
"Two long running, Obama era, investigations of two very popular Republican Congressmen were brought to a well publicized charge, just ahead of the Mid-Terms, by the Jeff Sessions Justice Department. Two easy wins now in doubt because there is not enough time. Good job Jeff......" Trump tweeted on Monday...

The tweets sparked immediate turmoil because they suggested that Trump would prefer the Justice Department put off acting on alleged crimes in the name of political expediency and election wins.
Click to expand...

'Just ahead of the Mid-Terms' is not enough time for what? And what has their popularity got to do with it? The answers are obvious - not enough time for damage control, and it could hurt Republicans in the elections. Only a blind partisan would think this doesn't look like attempted obstruction of justice.

But hey, plausible deniability, right? Trump was just being an a-hole! /gaslighting
 
Roger Ramjets said:
Attempted obstruction.

legal Definition of obstruction of justice
: the crime or act of willfully interfering with the process of justice and law especially by influencing, threatening, harming, or impeding a witness, potential witness, juror, or judicial or legal officer or by furnishing false information in or otherwise impeding an investigation or legal process.​
Trump attacks Jeff Sessions over House Republicans indicted for financial crimes

'Just ahead of the Mid-Terms' is not enough time for what? And what has their popularity got to do with it? The answers are obvious - not enough time for damage control, and it could hurt Republicans in the elections. Only a blind partisan would think this doesn't look like attempted obstruction of justice.

But hey, plausible deniability, right? Trump was just being an a-hole! /gaslighting
Click to expand...
Sorry, but as much as I despise Trump and everything about him (a day doesn't go by that I don't wish for him and his entire family to drop dead), the tweet doesn't constitute an attempt to obstruct justice. It is a complaint about Sessions not obstructing justice and is thus incredibly distasteful and inappropriate, but since the words were sent out after the fact they can't really be construed as obstructing or attempting to obstruct anything.

Now, if it could be found that Trump had previously asked Sessions for a delay, that would be an attempt to obstruct justice.
 
Mueller stating he'll accept written answers to questions, and won't ask about obstruction. This seems to me like he's made his obstruction case and wants to see what Trump's lawyers will say in the questions.
 
Babbylonian said:
Sorry, but as much as I despise Trump and everything about him (a day doesn't go by that I don't wish for him and his entire family to drop dead), the tweet doesn't constitute an attempt to obstruct justice. It is a complaint about Sessions not obstructing justice and is thus incredibly distasteful and inappropriate, but since the words were sent out after the fact they can't really be construed as obstructing or attempting to obstruct anything.
Click to expand...

I disagree. He's trying to influence the system into stopping the investigation.
 
Belz... said:
I disagree. He's trying to influence the system into stopping the investigation.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. But obstruction requires actual interference, and since Sessions is recused from the whole matter, badmouthing him doesn't actually interfere with the investigation. And you can't take such a broad interpretation of the statute that it interferes with 1st amendment rights.
 
Ziggurat said:
Perhaps. But obstruction requires actual interference, and since Sessions is recused from the whole matter, badmouthing him doesn't actually interfere with the investigation. And you can't take such a broad interpretation of the statute that it interferes with 1st amendment rights.
Click to expand...
You're confusing two issues. Sessions has recused himself from Mueller's investigation. The attempted obstruction being alleged in this particular line of conversation regards the indictments of two Republican representatives - Duncan Hunter (CA) for illegally using $250,000 of campaign money for personal expenses and Chris Collins (NY) for insider trading - Sessions has not recused himself from these investigations/prosecutions.
 
Babbylonian said:
the tweet doesn't constitute an attempt to obstruct justice. It is a complaint about Sessions not obstructing justice
Click to expand...
And the opposite of not is...? Complaining about someone not doing something is the same as pressuring them into doing it. Sessions now knows his job is on the line if he doesn't obstruct justice when Trump expects him to.
 
Belz... said:
I disagree. He's trying to influence the system into stopping the investigation.
Click to expand...
To me, that interpretation is a bit of a reach. Hunter and Collins will likely be described as "under indictment" in every opposition ad between now and the election. The damage is done and Trump is protesting against the damage. Problematic? Yes. Unethical? Absolutely. An indicator that Trump favors a totalitarian system? No doubt about it. A felony? I just don't think so.
 
Roger Ramjets said:
And the opposite of not is...? Complaining about someone not doing something is the same as pressuring them into doing it. Sessions now knows his job is on the line if he doesn't obstruct justice when Trump expects him to.
Click to expand...
I suppose if there are further indictments possible between now and the election, and Trump knows about it, you might have something. It would be nice, but then again there have already been Trump actions that I would consider impeachable and this Congress will simply never do it.
 
Babbylonian said:
To me, that interpretation is a bit of a reach. Hunter and Collins will likely be described as "under indictment" in every opposition ad between now and the election. The damage is done and Trump is protesting against the damage. Problematic? Yes. Unethical? Absolutely. An indicator that Trump favors a totalitarian system? No doubt about it. A felony? I just don't think so.
Click to expand...

Personally, I rate it as on the line, given that it could technically be passable in isolation. If one notes that it's part of a pattern of behavior, though, things become distinctly more problematic. If the reasoning included therein plays a role in the reasoning for what seems to be the inevitable firing of Sessions, it goes well past the line, not least because it would definitely be serving as a warning for any replacement.
 
Folk keep to the topic of this thread, not everything the POTUS does or says is relevant to the topic of this thread.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat
 
Roger Ramjets said:
And the opposite of not is...? Complaining about someone not doing something is the same as pressuring them into doing it. Sessions now knows his job is on the line if he doesn't obstruct justice when Trump expects him to.
Click to expand...

And if he does commit obstruction of justice at the behest of the Clown Prince of Washington, will the defence of "I was only following orders" fly?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom