President Trump has nothing to worry about with any obstruction of justice charge because destroying emails, bleach bitting, smashing hard drives with hammers doesn’t even constitute obstruction of justice.
Mueller’s goal is to bring down President Trump on obstruction of justice. That’s why he hired the lawyers who specialize in prosecutions using absurd and extreme definitions of “intent” and obstruction of justice. The President just made his case more precarious with a tweet.
MSNBC reporter Matt Miller said Trump’s latest tweet is an admission that he obstructed justice. Trump tweeted: “I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. He has pled guilty to those lies. It is a shame because his actions during the transition were lawful. There was nothing to hide!”
Miller claims that if Trump knew Flynn lied to the FBI before he fired Comey, then that proves the case for obstruction.
The President is imprecise and it gets him in trouble. The piranha are ready to feed.
The obstruction comes in because Comey said Trump told him to let it go and when he didn’t he was fired.
Comey testified that, during the Oval Office meeting, the president said: “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”
Miller and others contend that if Trump knew Flynn lied to the FBI but tried to get Comey to drop it, and fired him when he didn’t, it’s allegedly obstruction of justice.
-
The Importance of Prayer: How a Christian Gold Company Stands Out by Defending Americans’ Retirement
They do seem to forget it was Rod Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions who recommended Comey’s firing. It also should be mentioned that this is an extreme definition of obstruction of justice. It has never been defined this way.
Trump has made the situation more difficult for himself in things he said about the firing of Comey and with the tweet he sent out but it’s petty garbage. The tweet did complicate the issue unfortunately.
This is Miller’s tweet:
Oh my god, he just admitted to obstruction of justice. If Trump knew Flynn lied to the FBI when he asked Comey to let it go, then there is your case. https://t.co/c6Wtd0TfzW
— Matthew Miller (@matthewamiller) December 2, 2017
NBC News and other media have jumped on this . Their ABC fake news about Flynn’s testimony didn’t work out so they’re on to their next assault.
Barbara McQuade jumped on it. She is a former U.S. attorney and Democrat who stepped down at President Trump’s request. She told the Daily Beast “This tweet makes it clear that Trump knew at the time that he made his request to Comey to let the investigation go that Flynn had lied to the FBI, which is a criminal offense.”
Hillary’s and Obama’s people are tweeting it up.
So Trump says he knew Flynn lied to the FBI when he asked Comey to let go of the Flynn investigation. Good of him to keep commenting on the obstruction of justice investigation https://t.co/AzK1Ow1QUp
— Ben Rhodes (@brhodes) December 2, 2017
This is what we’ve been hearing for months.
Jim Comey leaked his memo – probably illegally – to get a special prosecutor to prove obstruction of justice. He admitted to that.
Comey has been very smug in his tweets. His latest one has been especially arrogant. His quote: Beautiful Long Island Sound from Westport, CT. To paraphrase the Buddha — Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun; the moon; and the truth.
That’s ‘truth’ according to a dirtbag, lying leaker and conniver.
Beautiful Long Island Sound from Westport, CT. To paraphrase the Buddha — Three things cannot… https://t.co/FFImOB8Wcq
— James Comey (@Comey) December 2, 2017
Liberal constitutional lawyer Jonathan Turley had the best comments regarding Comey’s tweet.
Comey’s quotation of the Bible omits “thou shalt not steal” FBI material.
It is unclear how Comey’s continued cryptic quotes somehow means that he is not commenting on the ongoing investigation.
https://t.co/33Ft3BuCUi— Jonathan Turley (@JonathanTurley) December 2, 2017
BUT MUELLER’S SO HONORABLE
According to a New York Times and Washington Post, special agent Peter Strzok was removed from the Russia investigation after his superiors discovered he and another agent on the team exchanged text messages “disparaging” President Donald Trump and “supporting” Hillary Clinton during last year’s election.
The media is portraying this as a case of Mueller proving his investigation is beyond reproach.
Robert Mueller had to have known Strzok’s views beforehand. In fact, he clearly knows the views of all the Democrats he hired to investigate Trump-Russia collusion.
Strzok was bashing Trump in email exchanges with agent Lisa Page. The two were engaged in an extramarital affair.
What we are supposed to believe is Mueller doesn’t want a perception of bias or impropriety to surround his investigation.
If that were true he wouldn’t have filled up his team with Democrats and the lead prosecutor wouldn’t be Andrew Weissman who prosecutes people who are totally innocent, even puts them in solitary for over a year. He destroyed an entire company with 82,000 employees – Arthur Anderson.
One of the attorneys involved in Arthur Anderson with Weissman is Michael Dreeben. He is on Mueller’s Russia team and has a history of attempting to put an overly broad definiton of obstruction of justice into case law at the expense of innocent people.
AN EXTREME INTERPRETATION OF OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
Michael Dreeban, has already argued for a ridiculously broad interpretation of obstruction of justice, one of the issues Trump is being investigated for after Mueller’s friend Jim Comey said he thought there might be a case. Esteemed liberal Professor of law Jonathan Turley writes:
Dreeben’s background also contains an interesting item that bears directly on the potential case against President Donald Trump. Dreeben argued in an unsuccessful appeal of the prosecution of Arthur Anderson where the Justice Department advanced a sweeping interpretation of obstruction of justice — an interpretation that I criticized as wildly overbroad.
The interpretation resulted in a unanimous rejection of the Supreme Court. Given the call for a charge of obstruction against Trump (and the view of some of us that there remains considerable statutory barriers to such a charge), Dreeben’s addition should be a concern to the Trump defense team.
After Dreeben and his team relentlessly and unconstitutionally pursued Arthur Anderson, one of the biggest accounting firms in the nation at the time, the case was overturned by the Supreme Court, but by then the company was ruined.
wpDiscuz
