Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by The E   » Fri Jun 09, 2017 3:51 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

robert132 wrote:Sorry, but simply firing the Director does not stop an FBI investigation, ergo no Obstruction.


That an attempt to influence an investigation was unsuccessful and based on a false understanding of the mechanisms of said investigation doesn't affect the charge of obstruction of justice.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by smr   » Fri Jun 09, 2017 8:30 pm

smr
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1522
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:18 pm

I guess Constitutional Law Experts like Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz (a liberal no less) says their is no case against Trump.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-08/alan-dershowitz-schools-cnn-panel-%E2%80%98it-simply-not-crime-president-exercise-his-consti

Now, can we put this crap to rest!


The E wrote:
robert132 wrote:Sorry, but simply firing the Director does not stop an FBI investigation, ergo no Obstruction.


That an attempt to influence an investigation was unsuccessful and based on a false understanding of the mechanisms of said investigation doesn't affect the charge of obstruction of justice.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by The E   » Sat Jun 10, 2017 3:22 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

The last time a US president exercised his power to shut down an FBI investigation, he was out of office soon afterwards. That sets a pretty strong precedent.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Eyal   » Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:59 am

Eyal
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:09 pm
Location: Israel

smr wrote:I guess Constitutional Law Experts like Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz (a liberal no less) says their is no case against Trump.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-06-08/alan-dershowitz-schools-cnn-panel-%E2%80%98it-simply-not-crime-president-exercise-his-consti

Now, can we put this crap to rest!


And other experts disagree

Several legal experts said the conversation could be construed as an act of obstruction. They said Trump's intent to interfere with the investigation could be inferred from his conduct, such as telling advisors like Jared Kushner and Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Comey's direct boss, to leave the room before the conversation with Comey.

“Asking others to leave the room could suggest the president was aware that there was something wrong with what he was doing,” [Andrew Wright, a professor at Savannah Law School] said.


What else might support an obstruction charge against Trump?

Laura Donohue, a professor at Georgetown University Law Center, said Trump's firing of Comey could also constitute obstruction of justice. Though the president has the authority to fire an FBI director, it would be a crime to do so in order to halt the Russia investigation, she said.

Comey's testimony suggested that was the president's intent, said Donohue. “He wanted to scuttle the investigation – it is hard to see it any other way,” she said.

Wright also said Trump's comment in a television interview soon after he fired Comey that he had the Russia issue in mind when he dismissed the FBI chief was evidence of his intent.


William Yoemans:

Trump had the authority to remove Comey, but he could not do it for the wrong reason. As Rosenstein’s memo — which is otherwise disturbingly incomplete as an assessment of Comey’s tenure and the consequences of his removal — detailed, there were good reasons to fire Comey. His repeated breaches of FBI and Department of Justice norms, including his usurpation of the powers of the Attorney General in July and his inexcusable insertion of the FBI into electoral politics through his letter to Congress eleven days before the election, provided ample grounds for his termination.

But, it is simply not credible that those actions motivated Trump, who had high praise for Comey during the campaign and into the early days of the administration. It appears from current reporting that Trump expressed displeasure with Comey only after Comey confirmed the FBI’s investigation into Russian meddling in the election and allegations of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.


In addition, as Eric Posner points out, Dershowitz's argument rests on the President having Consitutional authority to stop the investigation and/or fire the FBI director - or other investigators. However, if that's so, than COngress could not pass a law preventing the President from such firing, as that would overstep their Constitutional bounds. And yet, COngress did exactly that with the counsel provisions of the Ethics in Government Act (now defunct). Under those provisions, the President could not fire the independent counsel; the AG good but required good cause to do so. The provisions as a whole came before the Supreme Court in Morrison v Olson, at which point the Court upheld the constitutionality of the provisions as a whole (although they don't seem to have addressed the "firing issue" specifically).

In addition, leaving aside the legal definitions, this is almost exactly what got Nixon impeached. It should be remembered that obstruction of justice is a crime of intent, so it can consist of actions which would be innocious in a different context. And as for the phrasing of "I hope", which I've seen some Republican legislators use to argue that Trump didn;t commit obstruction, Us v McDonald and US v Bedoy both upheld obstruction of justice convictions where the defendent tries to use that phrasing.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by The E   » Sat Jun 10, 2017 2:56 pm

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

And even if we leave aside the question of whether or not what Trump did was obstruction of justice, consider this:

1. Comey testified that there was no doubt in his mind and the intelligence community at large that Russia interfered with the election
2. Comey testified that Trump was at no point concerned with that fact.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/postever ... 565a83dfe8
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by gcomeau   » Sat Jun 10, 2017 4:23 pm

gcomeau
Admiral

Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Dec 02, 2014 5:24 pm

Additionally...

https://lawfareblog.com/view-supreme-co ... -president


I mean ffs smr, if he WAS right you do understand,that he is arguing a president can simply declare his entire administration off limits to criminal investigation and do so secretly... right???

Is that actually what you think???
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by ksandgren   » Sat Jun 10, 2017 11:29 pm

ksandgren
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 6:54 pm
Location: Los Angeles, California

A little more of the election fraud we should be investigating:

EDWARDSVILLE, Ill. (AP) — An 88-year-old Illinois election judge has pleaded guilty to casting a vote as her late husband.
Audrey Cook entered the plea to attempted violation of election code, a misdemeanor, on Thursday in exchange for prosecutors agreeing to drop a felony perjury charge under the code, The Telegraph (http://bit.ly/2rUMQIa ) reported.
The original perjury charge alleged that Cook forged the name of the late Virtus "Vic" Cook on an absentee ballot while serving as an election judge in Alton, 20 miles (32 kilometers) north of St. Louis. The misdemeanor charge stated that she took her husband's mail ballot knowing he was deceased.
Cook pleaded guilty to an amended charge in which the words "to carry out the wishes of her husband" were added.
The longtime Republican acknowledged Thursday that she attempted to vote for Donald Trump on behalf of her husband in September because she knew he wanted Trump to become the president.
"Now they should investigate all the cemeteries in Chicago," Cook said after being charged just days before the election. She said she doesn't feel she did anything wrong because her husband would have voted the same if he survived.
"My husband was very sick, and we applied for absentee ballots for both of us," she said. "We got them a couple of days after he died, and I knew how he wanted to vote."
Madison County State's Attorney Tom Gibbons said Cook will be removed as an election judge.

Doesn't look like mass democratic fraud to me.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by smr   » Sun Jun 11, 2017 12:05 am

smr
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1522
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2011 7:18 pm

Perhaps, we are seeing why Trump wants to drain the swamp. No solid proof and yet we still have people on both sides of political spectrum trying to destroy him on nothing. If that is the case, roll out impeachment articles and send the case to the Senate!

My view is that the Democrats get slaughtered in the next election cycle. As one Senator put it, No one went to jail on the word "hope" said one time for obstruction! The Russian narrative has fallen apart and now the collusion narrative have fallen apart. Good luck with that charge...
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by Eyal   » Sun Jun 11, 2017 1:02 am

Eyal
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 3:09 pm
Location: Israel

smr wrote:Perhaps, we are seeing why Trump wants to drain the swamp. No solid proof and yet we still have people on both sides of political spectrum trying to destroy him on nothing.


Oh the irony...

As one Senator put it, No one went to jail on the word "hope" said one time for obstruction!


I gave you two examples in my previous post.

The Russian narrative has fallen apart and now the collusion narrative have fallen apart. Good luck with that charge...


AFAIK, the accusation is that people associated with Trump - Flynn, Manafort, and others - colluded with Russia, not Trump himself - and that "narrative" has not "fallen apart". We do know for a fact that a number of high-level people in the administration (e.g. Sessions and Kushner) lied about their contacts with Russia. You might also want to take note that Comey explicitly accused Russia of interfering with the US election.

And whether or not Trump had any collusion is immaterial to any obstruction of justice accusations. Remember that what got Nixon into trouble wasn't the break-in - there's no conclusive evidence he actually knew about it ahead of time, AFAIK - but the subsequent attempt to cover it up.
Top
Re: EXTRY! EXTRY! IMPEACHMENT IMMINENT!
Post by The E   » Sun Jun 11, 2017 5:02 am

The E
Admiral

Posts: 2683
Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:28 pm
Location: Meerbusch, Germany

smr wrote:My view is that the Democrats get slaughtered in the next election cycle.


Trump is a singularly unpopular president. Repealing the ACA is a singularly unpopular move, and the Republicans are doing their best to let everyone know just how little they actually care for what's best for the country by sticking to both.

The Democrats won't be "getting slaughtered". Quite the opposite.
Top

Return to Politics