Flynn, Comey, and Mueller: What Trump Knew and When He Knew It

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/07/31/what-trump-knew-and-when-he-knew-it/

Ooof. If Meuller does have this memo, and can prove that Trump knew about Flynns investigation, then he might have a real hook for Obstruction.

Should prove interesting as the mid-terms get closer.

 

So Mulehead is holding back this evidence until mid-terms?

 

What was the act of obstruction you think he committed here.

 

Doesn't matter.

Trump can fire Comey for any reason. If he didn't like his tie he could fire him for that. Comey served at the pleasure of the President.

Trump fired Comey on the written recommendation of Rosenstein.

Libwingers need to face reality.............RUSSIA! RUSSIA! RUSSIA! is long gone....................and Obstruction is going nowhere.

Time to join the real world.

 

Asking Comey to lay off of Flynn.

So? What does that have to do with Flynn?

 

Yeah, that's not obstruction.

Asking Comey if they can take it easy on Flynn in and of itself is not an act of obstruction.

 

No.

Nixon believed the same thing.

Obviously, given your ignorance of the very principles that govern a democracy, I will not get into big demonstrations about what it means to obstruct justice.

But Trump will be indicted for the same reasons that led Nixon to take a helicopter to flee the White House.

 

As the POTUS it can be construed as such. Power structures and all that.

 

Yes. Comey serves at the pleasure of the President. He needs no reason to fire him.

Please show me the statute that requires certain situations for a President to fire the FBI director.....

GO!

 

That means mueller is guilty of the very thing he is investigating.

 

There is no "construed". First of all, as others have said, the POTUS can't be charged with anything. The POTUS can only be impeached.

Secondly, "obstruction of justice" has a legal definition that must be satisfied before it can be what it is.

I mean the left is welcome to think of it that way if they want if it helps their emotional well-being, but the only place it will ever be obstruction of justice is in their feelings.

 

I don't know. The bar for obstruction of justice seems pretty high; at least for those in the swamp. If our justice system deemed deleting digital content pertinent to the Clinton email scandal did not rise high enough then Trump asking Comey to go easy on someone isn't really even noteworthy. I'm not saying I agree or disagree. I'm just saying the precedent has been set whether right or wrong so don't hold your breath waiting for the indictment against Trump by Mueller.

 

Looks like the liberal "collusion" relapse based on a 1 year old story of the Trump Tower meeting with a Russian lawyer is once again going into remission, while being seamlessly replaced with an "obstruction" relapse based on a one year old story about Trump's request to "go easy on Flynn". I can smell a Strormy relapse right around the corner LOL

Anyway, here is the definition of "obstruction of justice" and Trump's meek request hardly even begins to meet it:

Obstruction of justice is defined in the omnibus clause of 18 U.S.C. § 1503, which provides that "whoever . . . . corruptly or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, influences, obstructs, or impedes, or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede, the due administration of justice, shall be (guilty of an offense)."
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/obstruction_of_justice

 

Yet Comey Testified under Oath that Trump didn't ask nor hint to Comey to lay off Flynn. Moreover he told Comey any in his administration he would like the FBI to make it known.

So as Jonathon Turley the Lefts Active Constitutional attorney says. Mueller has a very weak case for Obstruction. Same thing from Alan Dershowitz another Leftist Constitutional attorney.

 

Indeed.

The only crime that was committed was the unmasking of Flynn in the first place.

 

They will be circling back around to Stormy soon.

 

Blithering Horseshit. Trump as Comey's supervisor had every right to consider whether or not to proceed with the Flynn investigation and when Comey wanted to, Comey has already testified under oath, Trump didn't order him to stop, even though as President, it would have been within his rights.

Daily Caller: Clueless Liberals Are Totally Opposed to Buying Oppo Research From Russians, Unless It's Hillary Clinton and the DNC Doing the Buying

Hillary's payment of US taxpayer dollars (yes, her employee Christopher Steele billed the FBI for his expenses in obtaining this information) to Russian FSB officers for dezinformazinya is not even worth talking about, whereas Trump Jr. merely holding a meeting with a Fusion client is treason?

 

Trump never said he didn't know about the Flynn railroading.

Did it end when Comey was fired?

The POTUS can fire ANY MEMBER OF HIS CABINET AT WILL, per the US Constitution...which includes the entire DOJ....

 

Ms Lynch et al should be called to respond to that.

 

Evidently, Stormy still circles the pole these days. Local news even reported her "performance" at a local strip joint when she was in town. Evidently, it was bad for business though...

 

Maybe on Flynn and/or Comey, but perhaps not on Stormy...

SNIP
"The danger here is that the Stormy Daniels matter could supply the obstruction case that has so far evaded Robert Mueller. I don't think the obstruction case or collusion case that Mueller has been pursuing has really materialized as far as we can see into a serious threat against the president, but an obstruction case would be easier with Stormy Daniels even though Giuliani says that this is a weak case under federal election laws," Turley said.
ENDSNIP

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/profes...that-a-porn-star-could-take-down-a-president/

So much obstruction, such little time.... I say Mueller should throw it ALL at the wall and see what sticks legally...most of it will.....

 

Identifying that the POTUS has broken the law, and forwarding it to Congress for impeachment consideration isn't the same as 'charging him'. I know he can't be 'charged' (as POTUS. Once he isn't, that field opens back up again)

That's on Comey then. Reince and McGahn and the transcript from the meeting seem to differ. I guess thats up to Meuller to sort out.

Eh. Trump does have every right to direct investigations by the FBI. The grey area is if/when the investigation includes said POTUS. Thats why the Judicial System has things like 'recusals' for such conflicts of interest.

Really though, the US is in uncharted legal waters. The only other precedent that even remotely offers any ideas is Nixon. I don't know how its going to turn out but it will shape things to come.

The DOJ isn't cabinet. The POTUS can only fire people that exist within the Executive Branch. And Not even the bureaucracy thanks to the Pendleton Act of 1883.

 

Yes, the DOJ is a Department of the Executive Branch.

 

By Breitbart NewsAugust 1, 2018

Turley: The Ball Hasn’t ‘Moved Materially Closer to Trump’ on Obstruction and Collusion – Other Issues Are ‘Threats’....


On Wednesday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley stated, “In terms of obstruction and collusion, I don’t think the ball has moved materially closer to Trump.” He added that the Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels controversies and the potential risk to Donald Trump Jr. are “the existential threats.” Turley said, “[A] victory in the Manafort trial is not necessarily a big victory for the investigation per se. It is not connected to the campaign. It’s a conventional prosecution. It doesn’t mean that he’s innocent, doesn’t mean he shouldn’t have been prosecuted, but it doesn’t say that much about the investigation. In terms of obstruction and collusion, I don’t think the ball has moved materially closer to Trump. I think the greatest dangers remain, as I’ve said before, on the margins, on the borders, coming from McDougal and Daniels controversies, coming from the risk that Donald Trump Jr. could be in, if anyone supports any of these accounts. Those have always, in my view, been the existential threats. And so, I think what I’m looking at primarily, is not a direct hit on obstruction or collusion, but whether some of these collateral issues are going to move closer.....snip~


http://www.dailypepe.com/2018/08/01...ction-and-collusion-other-issues-are-threats/

Perhaps not.

 

Yes, which is why Trump can appoint the 'head' of the branch. He can't fire the rank and file thanks to the Pendleton Act.