Lock them up! Please.
4
It is very frustrating to an attorney to hear all of this talk of "obstruction of justice" without a specifying which (of several) federal obstruction statues you have in mind and then analyzing each according to their minimum required elements. For example, the words of section 1505 require the obstruction to be in connection with a "proceeding" and no court has ever held that an FBI investigation is a proceeding. Section 1510 requires a quid pro quo bribery to be guilty of the statute. This was all very cogently set forth in this May, 2017 NYT OpEd piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/opinion/trumps-fbi-comey-statements-a...
When we learned that the Russians had intervened in our election in favor of Donald Trump, the now president's first reaction was that the whole thing was nothing but a hoax. The only way that Trump could have made a definite statement about whether his campaign had worked with the Russians was only if he knew that they had. He could not have known there was no involvement when he called it a hoax, so he had to know that there was involvement. The honest answer would have been that he didn't know.
See:
RevolutionOfReason.com
TheRogueRevolutionist.com
2
Misprision of felony. The end is near.
3
Watching Trump gleefully shred the Justice Department, the FBI and the CIA, I am reminded of this scene from the play, "The Man For All Seasons":
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
6
The Watergate grand jury left Nixon an unindicted co-conspirator. The articles of impeachment cited obstruction of justice.
1
Articles of impeachment may be brought forward, but do any concerned citizens think the facts or the detrimental consequences to our democracy will move old white men like Orin Hatch to decide in favor of preserving our tenuous democracy. It is a certainty that they will choose to enrich the already wealthy by destroying our environment for selfish gain and rape the economically disadvantaged so that their donors can purchase additional yachts.
6
December 5, 2017
To quote the Nixon era of kicking out of office for due cause:
"An attempt is already underway to revise history - to leave the impression that the former president had nothing to do with Watergate. But there is no doubt about his obstruction of justice after the Watergate break-in."
John J. Sirica
* brainyquote.com
JJA Manhattan, N.Y.
5
Why offer up these unsupportable rationalization like "The president can't obstruct justice?" Aren't we way past the need to excuse all this seditious cupidity? Why can't they just bring themselves to say "What are you going to do about it?" Republicans wouldn't do anything if Trump stood in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shot the Pope. And even if they did, Pence would pardon him. And can we please stop calling him "Mr. President?" That's a term of respect for the office and someone who has preserved its dignity. Donald Trump is a lying, amoral, cruel, greedy disgrace to the notion of public service who doesn't care in the least about the dignity of the office. He's only there for what it can do for him. That's what it means to say a president can't have a conflict of interest or commit an obstruction of justice. Calling Trump "Mr. President" should gag even the most hardened maggot. Let's stop the games and get on with the Republican/Trumpist coup. "There are no red states; there are no blue states; only the United States of America." Obama would be laughed off the stage if he said that today. What conceivable bond is their between Chuck Grassley who thinks only rich people know how to spend money wisely and us lesser creatures who he says spend all our money on booze, women and movies? Wasn't the repeal of the SALT income tax deduction an out and out attack by red state republicans on blue state democrats? Let's drop the pretense of any commonality in this country.
9
So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Sir Thomas More meets Mr. Trump on the Donald's way to trash, once again, the Justice Department, the FBI, the Congress and the CIA:
Sir Thomas More: And where would you hide, sir, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake!
1
"Yes, the President Can Obstruct Justice"
BUT OF COURSE, IF HE'S A DICTATOR!
5
I beg your pardon, I never promised you a rose garden.
Please forward this to Brett Stephens.
Dear Brett,
I am fairly recent reader and admirer of your columns in the NYT.
I happened to hear your interview on MSNBC this am (12.5.17).
You strongly rebuked your support for the Republican Party today after learning that Trump and the GOP had strongly thrown their support behind Roy Moore.
This is a party that shamelessly and selfishly backs a president who is destroying the environment and American values.
All of this is to further a strange and twisted ideology that wishes to destroy American society as it has evolved and put it back into one that is controlled by a small homogenous group of self righteous gun enthusiasts, bankers, land owners and mysogynists who answer to no one else.
My question is. What took you so long?
Regards,
Jeffery Semel. [email protected]
8
The man is a self-serving traitor. End of story.
12
The emperor is wearing no clothes. It fits him to a T.
State prosecutors, sharpen your pencils!
5
Never tell a lie.
That way you don't have to remember anything.
3
A President that obstructs justice must be impeached. This statement should be repeated at the end of each Editorial of NYT, like Cato the Elder's "Ceterum censeo Carthaginem delendam esse" -- Furthermore, (moreover) I consider that Carthage must be destroyed.
1
When will congress act? The case is clear now, knowing nothing more than we already do, that the President is a liar and a crook. Impeach. Now. What are you waiting for?
Oh yeah. You want to drown the government in a bathtub first.
6
Alan Dershowitz has turned into the new ambulance chaser for anything Trump.
5
Hey, ArtDeanAndy...
During ElectionTime, used to count how many times you all mentioned "Trump" on your web home page...
Usually, in the mid to high twenties...
At this moment, twenty-four...
The more things change...
Can the Executive branch obstruct justice? Of course, just ask Obama about the complete whitewashing of the investigation into Hillary's little email problem. State secrets wind up on the laptop of a child predator. Nothing to see here, move along.
4
Dear, the Times Editorial Board
I appreciate your efforts to keep the "guvmint" honest, really I do, and I mean it. But you are writing to the converted.
Heh. Do you think the GOP led Congress will do anything to jeopardize their agenda of transferring the wealth of this country from the poor and the middle class upwards? I mean, there's not much left but still they have to take away the last bit and make the lower 90% vassals of the super rich.
Then they will make us less healthy, never be able to retire, and turn the clock back on health to a Dickensian model. I await the day when we have open sewers so we can get the 19 Century diseases that we thought we had eradicated. The pilot program we have initiated with the Saudis in Yemen shows it works! Cholera? yes we can!
But where are the President and the GOP going to ship the folk who steal bread for their hungry families? Australia is out...maybe Venezuela, North Korea or Iran? We better learn Spanish, Korean or Farsi. "Hola mis compatriotasvenezolanos!" or "김정은 친애하는 친애하는 지도자" or even " سلام رهبر عزیز"
1
4 reasons why I lie
by DJ Trump
I lie because I can
I lie because it makes me feel important
I lie because a lot of people are stupid enough to believe me
Because I'm a compulsive liar, it's just my nature
8
Trump is a liar. Everyday, some new lie, some new disgrace. Mueller, keep it up, you are the only hope for the country.
7
Our president: sides with Nazis who hate Blacks when a young girl is killed, wants to build a walll to keep out Mexicans, takes sacred Native American lands away and thinks Pocahontas is a joke, bars people from other lands from visiting their grand relatives, and more.
But he jigs with Saudis (a country whose men were responsible for killing our thousands on 9/11) and protects the Russians (who are determined to ruin our democracatic elections and beyond).
Don’t tell us this man cannot be charged with obstructing justice. He’s not capable of even knowing what justice is.
5
Is there any possibility that NYT will tell its readers the true content of Flynn's 'lies'. That they were connected with an approach to the Russian ambassador to promote a strategy being pushed by Israel?
1
Courts do not need to decide if the President can be tried for obstruction of justice and colluding with Russians. Trump should be impeached if Mueller's grand jury indicts him. The process of impeachment is a trial on the evidence. And if the House impeaches Trump and the Senate convicts, Trump is gone.
And to insure justice is done, the America hating, Middle Class killing Republicans in congress have to be swept from office.
Vote in 2018. Fix congress first.
"Mr. Trump admitted that he knew Mr. Flynn had committed a federal crime at the time he fired Mr. Comey for refusing to stop investigating him." Indeed, and Mr. Trump should have seen it coming. "Two days after the election, Barack Obama delivered a face-to-face warning to Trump about the risk of keeping retired Gen. Michael Flynn around. ... Obama did his duty by trying to help his successor." (Michael D'Antonio, CNN) Or ... "It's a trap!" President Obama knew Mr. Trump could't take advice from *him*. Looks like the trap is springing nicely.
1
Trump: “I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI. " Had Trump been more careful with his words, such as, instead of "I had to", he said, "I was right". Impeachment for a slip? on Twitter? Compare this with Comey's (or Peter Strzok's) "extremely careless" with "grossly negligent", more carefully chosen words do not mean more honest. Since when has the nation's fate hang on a few words? No wonder there is no transcript of the FBI's interview of Hilary! They know words matter in prosecution---but when the FBI did it, that was no obstruction of justice.
Based on recent events, Trump would be better off with a good public defender.
I see a President in our future! Only question is by when?
It may appear that the president has "obstructed justice," but there is no conceivable circumstance under which it would matter if there is no underlying crime/wrongdoing that was being obstructed. Impeding an investigation into suspicious activity that turns out to be nothing amounts to exactly that: nothing. And the millions of people who continue to support the president will not stand idly by while his enemies attempt to impeach him on such specious grounds. If Mueller fails to uncover a "smoking gun" of Russian collusion prior to the election, this entire affair will be even less memorable than the Valerie Plame fiasco.
2
They all apply to Trump - and more. But this Congress will do nothing about it. We'll see where we are in about another year. But it's hard to see how if things keep going as they are that Trump will 'crack-up' before then. Attempting to change history that is documented by video and other witnesses is a new low and laying the groundwork for his supporters to rebel whenever he finally leaves the system by whatever means.
Hold the phone— "But with Saturday’s tweet, Mr. Trump admitted that he knew Mr. Flynn had committed a federal crime at the time he fired Mr. Comey for refusing to stop investigating him. To most people with a functioning prefrontal cortex, it sure sounds like Mr. Trump is admitting to “interfering or endeavoring to interfere with the conduct of investigations” and to “impeding the administration of justice.”"
As much as I would love to see this embarrassment of a president go down for obstructing justice, there's a leap here that I don't believe is safe to make. Given Trump's evident disregard for the truth and demonstrated willingness to bend it so as to frame himself in a positive light, it seems equally plausible that with this Tweet he is retroactively ascribing to himself the knowledge of Flynn's lying to the FBI. As a man who cannot bear the perception that anything has taken place in his house without his knowledge, it seems well within his character to pretend he knew about this at the time, even if he didn't.
I'm not saying one is true and the other isn't — I have no way of knowing for sure — but it is important that the Editorial Board not make assumptions. As the right continues to cry "fake news," reputable organizations like the Times need to put forward editorials that don't rely on supposition.
3
Any "conservatives", or those in the GOP, who take aim at Mueller now are showing their true colors—fear.
The WSJ editorial board is absolutely on the wrong side of history on this issue, but it makes sense when you think about Murdoch.
Trump takes any action against Mueller, he's done. It's bad enough that his pack of hideous dogs is already trying to destroy the credibility of a thoroughly professional investigation.
Unreal.
5
If the backlash in 2018 is not overwhelming and the Democrats don't take back at least one branch of government and a few state governorships it's game over.
3
It's simpler than you describe.
If an innocent person is accused of a wrongdoing, he/she would welcome an investigator with open arms to clear his/her good reputation.
2
David,
Apparently, you are not familiar with how the criminal justice system works. Once one is accused of criminal activity, the system (i.e., police and prosecutors) do all within their power to convict. They are not receptive to complaints that their investigation has been faulty and reached the wrong conclusion.
The innocent person, without a lawyer, would be foolish indeed to "welcome [the police] with open arms."
Peter Kelly
Palominas, Arizona
Until the Republican majority says differently Trump's power and that of a absolute monarch are indistinguishable. He will continue to hollow out the DOJ and the rest of the executive branch until no one is left but stooges and co-conspirators. His all-out war on the norms and limits of political power will continue at full speed. It is an open question whether the Republicans will still be able to rein him in by the time they decide to do so. It might be too late by then.
I think it entirely likely that the voter suppression measures that will be rolled out by 2018 will be entirely effective in preventing any flipping of the house or senate. By 2020 the virus will have so infected the judiciary that we will not be seeing any relief from the courts. Further voter suppression will guarantee Republican super majorities in both house and senate. Dissent may well be criminalized and it is likely we will see right wing militias formed to intimidate resistance.
7
I don't understand why people continue to mount false hopes that Trump will be removed from office. We seem to go through these waves of optimism with people actually convinced "he'll be gone by Thanksgiving". "Oh, well, he'll be gone Christmas or New Years".
First, the Russian collusion and obstruction of justice evidence and arguments are not compelling. Maybe something more will be uncovered, but that's not much to go on. Second, there is no way the Senate will ever convict Trump by a 2/3rds vote, absent something earth shattering happening. Look at Roy Moore; he's surviving.
The Dems would be better off finding ways to make a positive difference on policy issues. Assume Trump will serve-out one term as prez, then be gone. The Dems need to show more leadership, ideas, and economic competency before the 2020 elections.
4
We've heard this argument before: "It's not illegal if the president does it." That statement, of course, came from that other presidential paragon of truth, virtue and Constitutional scholarship, Richard Nixon.
Hopefully, the current presidency will end as "well" as Nixon's did.
The President can obstruct justice, but not by exercising his constitutional authority. He can fire who he pleases and pardon whoever he wishes. So far there has been zero proof of any disregard of the law. A lot of complaints about what he can't do, but no actual steps against those limitation.
1
Reflecting on the biology of evolution (and its existence) my professor said there are three tests: 1. Did it happen in the past? (fossil record) 2. Is it happening now? (DNA changes and influence on survival) and 3. Will it likely occur in the future?
All three applied to Trump are true (not biologically, but in illegality and unethicality He has lied prolifically in the past, continues lying, and will likely lie for the future. That qualifies as evidence for the existence and resolute practice of obstructing justice. But then we knew that, before the very first lying utterance of his oath of office.
1
While there is a legitimate debate over whether presidents can be indicted for obstruction of justice, in practice, it make little differences. Special prosecutors indicted neither Richard Nixon nor Bill Clinton. Instead they forward the results of their investigations to Congress, which used the reports to draft articles of impeachment. Robert Mueller will probably do the same if he decides his investigation provides sufficient evidence for impeachment.
2
"Donald Trump will suffer his own grim fate in the eyes of historians, but it will come with an asterisk: he is a profoundly damaged human being with no true understanding of his capacities, his emotions, his ignorance, his job, or the fundamentals of human decency."
─Vanity Fair
14
It doesn’t matter how impeachable the president is. With Ryan & McConnell, two cravens in a party that has now officially endorsed a pedophile, a party that made the idea of pedophilia even a debatable topic, Trump could sell out America to Russia on live TV in prime time and they’d still did an excuse to do nothing.
These horrible failures all have to be voted out in 2018...or as many as possible.
16
He’s guilty Vote Democratic in 2018 so this highly biased Republicon Congress has been retired and we can start undoing the damage this group of hucksters and grifters has imposed on our country.
6
Stop being cute Editors. You know quite well the FBI ALWAYS contends they were lied to. They can still deny recording interviews. Flynn was foolish not to have a lawyer present and record everything said. He did nothing wrong.
I don't like Drump. I dislike the cold coup against the electoral process and the Constitution the Liberal Deep State is waging, even less
2
You understand that Flynn pleaded guilty? Or maybe you don't understand that?
2
Trump's only excuse for lying: being mentally ill; and the GOP Senate knew
he could not help lying....then the Senate is guilty for letting Trump not being
dismissed as mentally unfit to be President: Amendment 25:Section 4 of
the US Constitution...Look it up Editors...and then re write this Opinion...
"When you vote, you only change the names of the Cabinet. When you shoot, you pull down governments, inaugurate new epochs, abolish old orders and set up new...nothing is evfr done in this world until men are prepared to kill one another if it is not done."
--George Bernard Shaw, MAJOR BARBARA
1
In the Nation that t rump and the republicans are trying to build someone doing what t rump and his so called people did would be taken out and shot. No trial. No impeachment. No doubt.
2
Forthcoming books about the Trump Administration: The Gang That Couldn't Lie Straight. Liar Inc.
Mr. Dowd - it is a sad day for the legal profession when you think you have to lie (about writing Trump's tweet) and peddle baldly wrong legal assertions (here) just to earn your pay. I hope it brings you nothing but illness and regret.
2
Why lie if you've done nothing wrong? Let's ask a Clinton.
This “what about?” argument is merely an attempt to divert attention and doesn’t change the facts here. Besides, both Clintons have been investigated until the cows came home.
1
So the POTUS can do nothing illegal including obstruction of justice, supporting pedophiles and collusion with a foreign state? I don't know about others but that sounds like the perfect definition of a dictatorship to me. When I heard that today, I started singing the words to an old Rock 'N Roll song: "I gotta get outa this place, if it's the last thing I ever do..."
3
When will the Editorial Board call for Trump's impeachment?
4
What a "tortured" argument Mr Loo puts forth.
With today's digital footprints and fingerprints, Mueller's team can easily determine where Trump and Dowd were and what device was logged into @realDonaldTrump at the time of the tweet about Flynn. Makes one wonder just how many dotards Trump will bring down with him?
On the other hand, as this train wreck of a presidency races closer and closer to the inevitable, I'm terrified by the thought that this administration will cook-up their own sort of Kristallnacht to divert our attention? Please, General Kelly, keep him away from the football.
2
Blame the GOP, which has fully embraced their dear leader. All so they can soak the poor and stuff the rich.
1
"You don't know how to lie. If you can't lie, you'll never go anywhere."
Richard M. Nixon
1
Bravo! A befitting reply to John Yoo and Saikrishna Prakash!!
"To most people with a functioning prefrontal cortex..."
Well, I guess that excludes Trump's most ardent supporters.
1
So, the trump administration is claiming "Divine Right"? Didn't the last King who claimed that, die by the guillotine?
The authors’ assertion that “Mr. Trump admitted that he knew Mr. Flynn had committed a federal crime at the time he fired Mr. Comey for refusing to stop investigating him” is factually incorrect. Trump wasn’t under investigation at the time he fired Comey. During his June 8, 2017 testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, former FBI Director JAMESD Comey testified that President Trump wasn’t under investigation at the time.
Senator James Risch asked, “I gather from all this that you’re willing to say now that while you were director the president of the United States was not under investigation, Is that a fair statement?
Comey responded, “That’s correct.”
Risch asked, “That’s a fact we can rely on?”
Comey replied, “Yes, sir.”
Trump fired Comey for refusing to say publically Trump wasn’t under investigation. He did not fire Comey to stop any investigation.
http://time.com/4810345/james-comey-testimony-real-time-transcript/
1
Except Michael Flynn’s and what sunshine that might reveal.
What about the concept that NO ONE is above the law?
1
Representative democracy was never designed to survive a citizenry that doesn't sustain it.
2
Pathological liars can't help themselves, regardless. Whether running the Trump Organization out of Trump Tower, or running the Executive Branch inside the Oval Office. Liars will lie, it's habit. To prove obstruction, you must prove intent and you can't seriously expect to prove intent in 140 characters or less. Good luck with that, Democrats!
Why lie when you've done nothing wrong?
We were subjected to such rationalizations within this very newspaper for Clinton's evolving truths regarding her email scandal. At each turn, it was none other than the NYT's own columnists (aka Clinton apologists) who gave us a bevvy of reasons why Clinton continued to lie and why it was no big deal and forgivable. Let's ditch the double standard, please.
Congress will do nothing as long as they are able to dismember our Republic. Nothing is too vile, nothing is too crooked as long as they can push through their agenda. All we can do is try to remain engaged and vote them out. Democrats must find reasons for ALL of us to vote the GOP out.
2
I believe that Trump, Flynn, etc. are willing to put themselves through this FBI humiliation because they genuinely wish to clear their names.
One lead investigator tweets against this President.
Mueller is now turning to post-elections contacts, because he apparently didn't land anything bigger than Papadopoulos.
ABC starts fake news, that NYT picks up and crashes the market.
Does anyone sensible believe anymore that this wild goose chase is not turning into a witch hunt?
Like many Obama and Hillary aides did, Flynn and others must plead the fifth and get on with their lives.
Hey Donald! Everybody on social media saw Russia interfering in the election; we just didn't know they were Russians. You are right the security agencies need some questioning but it is because they didn't pick up on it sooner! If they had, there's a good chance you wouldn't be in the position right now of seeing the collapse of your evil empire. So I can see why you are upset.
What an honorable patriotic President elect would have done was to say to the Russians: "Shut up about these sanctions! I didn't need your meddling! You don't mess with the United States government. The sanctions stay; they are well-deserved. Go ahead and close our consulates. Get back to me when you want to show some respect to our system of government."
1
Well, that functioning prefrontal cortex thingy could be a bit of a problem.
Remember the feeling we had when"Tricky Dick" was hiding something and wondering if and when the truth would come out? Now we have "Deceiving Don" who sends tweets out admitting to having to fire Comey because he "Lied to the VP and the FBI, thereby proving obstruction. Oh but wait, that happens to be the only tweet, ever, that was not written by deceiving Don. How convenient.
That line "functioning prefrontal cortex" is in the same vein as "basket of deplorable". When will so called elites realize that mocking the opposition gets them out to vote. Stop with the insults and report the news or give a informative editorial or you will be insulting Trumpsters for the next 7 plus years.
1
Trump seems to pick personal attorneys with the same judgment he uses to pick Cabinet heads. In this case, Dowd has been hired to destroy his client, I guess. I hope he succeeds.
Perhaps you do not understand this -- Trump and company lie as a matter of principal.
Woops, oldteacher, make that BRILLIANT!
As Alan Dershowitz, as liberal as a lawyer can be, has pointed out, in order for lying to be obstruction of justice, the lie has to be material. It is material if what was lied about involved the commission of a crime. There can be no obstruction if there is no pre-existing crime being prosecuted.
Flynn lied about speaking to the Russian ambassador, but it is no crime for an incoming administration to talk to a foreign diplomat. It would be funny if it weren’t so sad to see Trump haters try to dust off the Logan Act as their justification in calling it one. It was only used twice since it was passed in 1799, and with no results; the most recent time was in 1852. It is the essence of a dead law.
You have to hate someone with an irrational, seminal hatred to call them irrational, incompetent, treacherous, and a racist, Nazi monster, all with no evidence. (That Nazi claim is my favorite. All seven of Trump’s grandchildren are Jewish; Ivanka is a convert and his two sons are married to Jewish girls. Do you really think Trump wants to execute all of his own grandchildren?)
1
A lie can be material even if there is no underlying crime. Martha Stewart was convicted of lying to the FBI when she denied making a stock trade based upon a tip that the founder of the company was selling his stock. The Court ultimately ruled that selling stock based upon knowledge about how other investors are acting is not a crime so there was no "pre-existing crime" but there was a material lie.
Lara Trump (Eric's wife) is not Jewish. Vanessa Trump (Don's wife) has a Jewish father and a non-Jewish mother. Technically, because her mother's not Jewish, she's not Jewish. So only converted Ivanka's children are Jewish.
Ok. All together now. One, Two , Three:
"Lock him up!, Lock him up!, Lock him up!, Lock him up!, Lock him up!.........."
1
"This is an embarrassing and unpersuasive argument"
What's embarrassing is how childish and desperate left-leaning newspapers and liberal arguments have become, and that it's all so unpersuasive that Trump will likely end up with a second term. This newspaper, among others, is adding wood to the fire that makes the Trump balloon float ever so high.
It's difficult to associate with liberals anymore. Your tantrums are irresponsible but obviously you cannot see it.
1
We get closer to dictatorship daily. Don't expect a GOP-led congress to save us.
1
"...functioning prefrontal cortex..."
You've stumbled upon the answer, you know. Here's the disconnect. This phrase explains completely, perfectly, why Trumpies don't get it. In most cases, the only thing they ARE consistent about is the complete wack-ness of each and every one of their ideas--and the fact they all agree. That's creepy enough in itself.
It's pretty clear that a functioning prefrontal cortex is not only anathema to most Republicans, but in the case of Pumpkinhead's supporters it's a downright disqualifier. And I'm beginning to think it's viral in some way, or is that Manafort fella just feeling the effects of jet lag from all that flying to Russia and Turkey and all of Eastern Europe? Can you actually CATCH stupid?
I saw an interview with a Russian Ambassador the other day. He too seems not to register what is actually going on. he too focused on "there is no collusion" missing entirely that Mr Flynn is in trouble for lying about Russian contacts or that it is the lies the Trump team keeps telling to hide things they feel guilty about or know will show criminal activity and intent. It is a rather effective diversion for the mooks who blindly support the GOP. The GOP has adopted/implemented the Soviet Unions communist party methods and practices very well.
Maybe this will help:
"It's the Lies Stupid!"
2
If trump cant pardon himself, why be president?
You're on to something there! Yes indeed, why lie if you have nothing to hide? There must quite a pile of dirt to have to continue the lies, and spin it every which a way to attempt to conceal the truth, and which given the unending lies that truth must be something wily and wicked and likely bordering on what some suspect to be treasonous in cahoots with former Russian KGB operatives, and even one with the name of Putin perhaps? Yes, why lie if you have nothing to hide?
Sorry Trump, you cannot obstruct justice. We know how you have lied and cheated and sexually harassed women but on this one which is all about our Constitution, you cannot lie your way out of it.
1
John Dowd is the kind of lawyer a client ends up with after a lifetime of not paying his bills.
3
Love the illustration, I think you may have given the President a new nickname: Pinocchio
Trump sees Justice and the FBI as part of his kingdom.
He lies and misleads all the time. Its documented.
He sees himself as the law and above the law.
"High Crimes and Misdemeanors", Donald. Its whatever the Congress says it is.
We fought a revolutionary war to get away from a King and his fascism.
You are not the King or Emperor, and we all see your new clothes.
Naked Egomaniac.
2
Imagine, just two years ago, a law professor posing a hypothetical question about a candidate for president who won election to the American presidency with the help of Russian meddling in the campaign and who then fired the F.B.I. director for not agreeing to drop an investigation of the trusted aide who had spoken with the Russians during the campaign and after the election.
If the professor asked whether or not the actions of the president constituted obstruction of justice, every law student in the class would have answered “Yes.”
If the professor then had asked whether an American president, as the head of state, is immune from a charge of obstruction of justice, every student would have said, “Of course not. A president is not a king. Look at the Nixon case.”
Anyone who suggests a different answer regarding Donald Trump is being willfully stupid.
1
Why does he lie? Because he is mentally ill and cannot help himself, let alone the nation.
1
It is simply redundant to say that Trump lies. He lies about everything and, now, so does everyone around him. He cheats, too. So it is not a stretch to understand that he cheated during the election, and that now he and his corrupt cronies are all lying about it. Nothing new there.
What is "new" is the depths to which the Republican Party has sunk. Into the deepest filth. Trump seems to understand that they will do nothing whatsoever to stop him or even interfere with his patently-obvious immoralities. And, he appears to be right. He said he could shoot someone in Times Square and get away with it - he meant it with regard to his supporters (true there, also), but it also applies to the venal, pathetic Republican Congress and Administration.
"We" voluntarily elected a well-known liar, buffoon, cheat, con man, groper, ignoramus, and ethical-deviant. How did we end up with a Republican power structure so entirely devoid of any integrity?
1
The sky is green, up is down, I always tell the truth, you always don't.
1
Cannot believe Dowd. Was he with Trump at 9-14 on Saturday am when the tweet was sent? Did Trump first send him a draft to be "sloppily" rephrased? (And, if so, did Trump patiently wait for the response before he tweeted?) Was Dan Scavino there too?
Was this tweet so significant that someone had to step in and say "It wasn't Trump"?
It's the first time that's happened (and there have been so many tweets which have caused trouble), so it does feel as if Dowd, or whoever, saw THAT tweet and thought OMG!!!
A panic reaction which made things worse, as surely it wold have been better to just leave it and say it was another Trump tweet like all the rest, with bad grammar, misspelling etc.
Tic Tacs has a better shot at contracting uterine cancer than he does being impeached by Paul Ryan.
Not surprising since Trump pardoned a rogue sheriff from Arizona to endorsing an alleged child molester for the U.S. Senate. In his mind Trump and his allies think he is above the law. Long Live the King.
It is perfectly clear, Trump's attorney is now parroting the musings of Hitler, Mussolini, Pinochet, et al. In fact Trump flew all the way to Utah to shrink two national monuments so that developers can purchase what should have been rightfully privatized from inception. Yes, America is truly open for business.
Republicans aren't going to impeach Trump, why would they want to do that? Their paymasters, the oligarchs like Sheldon Adelson and the Koch brothers won't let them.
Apparently, Republicans have to destroy America to save it.
2
The allegation is that Flynn got the Russians to "cool their jets," rather than go ballistic, in response to the sanctions imposed by Congress on 12/18/16. Hard to see the criminality there. Did the Obama administration WANT Russia to counter-sanction us? But anyway, the Editorial Board goes way, way out on a limb in its claim that a conversation between the NSA-designee and the Russian ambassador is a violation of the Logan Act. What is the point of a transition team if it can transition? Good luck proving that as a criminal offense in court. Why did Flynn lie about it then? Because he's an idiot, or his lawyer is.
Dowd’s comments shouid concern every one of us who respect this country and its ruie of law. Did we not learn one single thing from the Nixon era?
“L’etat c’est moi.” — Louis XIV.
“I can do whatever I want.” — Donald Trump, through John Dowd.
Nope — not then, not now, and not here.
Impeach. It’s time.
1
The overriding question:
Did our electorate choose Trump or did Putin and/or another entity yet to be revealed give Trump the presidency.
Trump, a well-known "deal maker", could well have been in on the deal.
More than once Trump stated:
"This election is "rigged". He got the "rigged" part right.
And it was - in Trump's favor. Not in Hillary's favor, as he always implied.
Take note:
"Accuse the other side of that which you are guilty."
- Joseph Goebbels (Nazi Propaganda Minister)
The election was hacked. Anything can be hacked for that matter.
Consider that it all came down to 77,000 votes spread out over 3 states that swung the election to Trump.
Software/System Analysis child's play given today's Cyber capabilities.
Any interference by Trump and his operatives into the ongoing investigation into this matter will only prove to be the tipping of Trump's hand.
(Tweet away Trump, as you run scared.)
Case in point - the removal from office of FBI Director Comey.
Trump called Comey a "nut case" to a rapt group of Russian officials in an Oval Office meeting. Trump wallows well in hubris.
The plot will thicken in time as investigations continue.
The one and only job for our as yet Free Press is to keep its collective nose to the grindstone and seek to reveal collusion with a foreign entity.
This in turn can be deemed a treasonous act. It can also be classified as a "high crime" as in high crimes and misdemeanor.
Justice will be served by imposing the proper penalty.
2
The warped and twisted thinking and logic that accompany the lies we hear daily from Trump, his press secretary, Republican members of Congress and the conservative media are slowly subverting and undermining our democracy. The First Amendment grants freedom of speech. That speech should be based on facts and reality. Trump needs to be held responsible for his despicable actions, lies and stupidity.
2
Why do I keep hearing Cher singing "gypsy tramps and thieves"?
1
Re: "...Yes, the President Can Obstruct Justice..."
...Dah!
It's BOTH infuriating / grotesque that this, (so, called...), law, 'N, order Republican family_values_person would DARE make / allow their lawyer(s) to make such a lame 'responsibility escape' effort like this!
Mueller should take a bow / a ticker_tape_parade after he brings down these evil, opportunistic folks!
1
When impeachment proceedings proceed over this" hatchet job" Congress will vote not guilty on impeachment and President Trump will pardon all who have been convicted of anything in this "gotch in a lie" tragedy. There was no crime regarding Russia. There was no collusion. Trump wanted to chummy up to the Russians for Foreign Policy reasons. Whether you agree or not is not a reason to play "gotcha in a lie" games. Muller is a prosecutor. Loves his job. This is what he does. Like a chess game except more dangerous for the country. I am not a Trump fan. But he was elected President. And how he was elected is not up for discussion and if Muller tries to do that he is out of his league. And for you fear mongers---North Korea was going to be a BIG issue with or without Trump. There is only one question for the President (Trump or any other President. Do you want North Korea to be a Ballistic Nuclear power or not?
2
Where is Richard Luettgen's comment on this column? This is right up his alley:
'Meanwhile, as the evidence of both subterfuge and obstruction continues to grow, Mr. Trump’s tireless spinners and sophists are working to convince the American public that it’s all no big deal. This is an embarrassing and unpersuasive argument, but it’s not surprising. At this point, they have nothing else to work with.'
1
The fact is that Trump can't NOT lie. Is there anyone who can demand an official psychological evaluation?
6
The only hope for justice in this land is to vote this Republican Party out of Congress. It is depressing to see the many times they disregard the very Constitution under which they serve and the common decency of the land they supposedly love.
7
People with no legal training tend to read the law letter for letter and to oversimplify legal issues. The Logan Act does not apply to Flynn talking to Russia’s ambassador in order to delay the vote on the UN resolution or to have Moscow oppose its veto for the simple reason that said resolution was not a “measure of the United States” i.e. it did not officially emanate from the US ambassador at the UN, though it is thought that the US may have pulled the strings to make sure that it would pass. Therefore Flynn like any other citizen on the face of earth had the right to lobby the Russian ambassador or the ambassador of any other veto holder at the UN Security Council or the ambassador of any non-permanent member of said council to have them oppose their veto or vote against the resolution.
A “measure of the United States” cannot be broadly conceived as implying the will of the President of the United States to pull a face at the Prime Minister of Israel out of spite for the eight years that Netanyahu spent rebuffing and demeaning the White House. If Flynn had succeeded at convincing Moscow or any other veto holder to pull the plug on the resolution, it would have in no way hampered a measure of the United States because it was not one and because it was not binding, which means that its passage or non-passage was inconsequential, except for the ego of President Obama.
No less an authority than Jeffery Tobin from CNN has unequivocally stated that he believes that Flynn is in violation of the Logan law. It sounds like your contempt for the black president is getting in the way of thinking about the future of our country.
King Trump has repeatedly stated, for the benefit of his choir, that the investigations into his collusion with the Russians was a plot hatched by the Democrats, and that there was no such collusion. OK. Let us buy that for a moment. Now, if King Trump considers himself innocent, why is he so worried about the ongoing investigation? The investigation will discover what happened or did not happen. King Trump says it did not happen. Kings have been known to lie in the past. How will we know that the King was or was not wearing any clothes if he keeps hiding behind a curtain?
2
Sure, you're right legally. But politically, who exactly is going to take action against this president? The Republican Party has let and will let Trump off the hook no matter what he does. Really we are living in the early phase of a dictatorship. I am so sorry, but I can't imagine any legal knight in armor coming to rescue us and enforce legal/constitutional standards. Will anyone at the NY Times be surprised when the Trump administration orders the paper closed and padlocks the doors? And whose army will come to out to protest?
3
It's somewhat maddening that pundits, lawyers, politicians and others seem to focus so closely on obstruction when it's only one of several impeachable offenses. Lying under oath is another one. So is abuse of power--this one seems a no-brainer in 45's case.
4
In the 90s the republicans were the party of 'morality', no longer. Remember the Moral Majority? Now to be republican you must put aside morality, your common sense and your integrity.
4
Yesterday the RNC followed our corrupt President in endorsing Roy Moore, whom Trump forgives as a molester for right wing political gain. Trump can't obstruct when he asks Comey to forgive Flynn, oh, and he can pardon himself and no doubt he'll go (to pardon) Jared! Moderate Southern Conservatives like Lamar Alexander-- who hit the national spotlight when they came into office early to prevent a corrupt governor (Blanton) of the opposite party from exercising the pardons they had sold for cash in Tennessee -- need to step up and encourage impeachment. (Nixon impeachment redivivus?) Richard Shelby, do the same. You're not running again, and Trump just thew you under the bus. Show some spine, go further than Corker, stand up against the President who would be tyrant, or am I just dreaming of an integrity you might have claimed, but never actually had?
2
At the end of the day, Trump remains a public servant, beholden to the laws of the land. Mr. Dowd would have us believe he represents a king, above the law. Time to put the breaks on this lying tyrant and his toxic circle.
3
This country is so far up the creek without a paddle, that Trump, even if guilty will not face any impeachment charges. Who, among the Republicans in Congress would dare to call for impeachment hearings.
1
Nixon and, certainly, Clinton were both impeached for far less than what this president has done in his short time in office. Many on the left have called for Trump's impeachment almost from the beginning of his administration. I was not one of those. The time is now here. It's time to impeach.
5
He and his cronies are acting as if they won a sweeping mandate election instead of squeaking by on less than 100,000 votes across three states in the Electoral College and losing the popular vote by millions.
5
They will pay the price if and when the Democrats regain control. The move to require only a simple majority to pass legislation will come back to haunt them.
We all have the "right" to scram "Fire!" in a crowded auditorium and other nasty stuff, . . but we are liable for the consequences of the act.
By using his "right" to fire Comey and impede the investigation of Flynn, Trump committed another act in the charge of Obstruction or Justice.
1
The President has authority to oversee the actions of the executive branch including the adminstration of Justice. But he doesn't have the right to break the law. Moreover he has no right to operate outside of the system. He cannot tell a witness about to testify before a grand jury to lie under oath. If he is personally a witness to a crime he cannot lie about it. He cannot tamper with, hide or destroy physical evidence or order other people to do so. He cannot warn a criminal about to be indicted to flee the country. Etc.
3
What are the jurisdictions that Mr. Dowd has been granted the privilege, not the right, to practice law in? Like all attorneys, at the time of his admittance to the bars of those jurisdictions he took a solemn oath to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution, or words to that effect, in addition to the constitution and laws of those separate jurisdictions, including any states and the District of Columbia.
Mr. Dowd's opinion that a President, in this case his client in the most serious of federal and Congressional ongoing investigations, "cannot obstruct justice" is not only a blatant legal falsehood knowingly uttered by a highly experienced lawyer, but also has been stated by him to advance the purely personal interests of his client in those investigations, and in the realm of national public opinion. Such purposeful dissemination of this false opinion undermines the rule of law and our adherence to core democratic principles in our governmental institutions and throughout American society.
Under the above-stated circumstances, all of the jurisdictions in which Attorney Dowd has been admitted to practice law should, immediately, open inquiries concerning his fitness to continue to do so, in accordance with their respective bar disciplinary procedures. Anything less, would condone behavior that would harmfully, and in this specific national context dangerously, affect the country in all manner of respects. I write this comment as a citizen, and as a retired attorney.
The totality of any assumption Trump's intent was to obstruct relies upon whether he actually believed he is in jeopardy from an investigation. Everything so far suggests he has no worries about Mueller and feels there is nothing for Mueller to discover. It's required that the circle be closable for this op-ed to make sense. As for now the circle is open.
Trump Deranged Liberals already believe on scant data that Trump "is a traitor" etc. blah blah, so they automatically see obstruction of what they accept as his guilt. Nixon knew his own guilt and that it was a matter of time before he was caught, if an investigation continued. I see no such vibe out of Trump, I'm unconvinced Mueller will find dirt, so this notion of obstruction appears to be strongly political in origin.
The big chunk of meat in the obstruction sandwich here is, "I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI." But that simply means; in hindsight, Trump understands that the two instances of a lie was of LIKE KIND, which they are of course. When a presumption of guilt is based on biased interpretation of facts that have optional interpretation, you have a witch hunt, which this is for now.
We are witnessing Tale of Two USAs.
On one side, we have democratic party leadership that has successfully asked one of its most senior member of congress to resign over sexual misconduct.
On the other, we have republican party whose moral degradation seems to know no limits. The republicans are enabling perhaps the most corrupt, most inept, most hateful, and most untruthful president ever. He has amassed enough circumstantial evidence to get impeached, and yet, he is capable to continue unchallenged because his party had not a shred of courage to stand up to him.
3
I think Alan Dershowitz is sincere, yet at the same time I suspect the subject of Israel has influenced him, even if subconsciously. In his golden years, the subject that seems most important to him, understandably, is Israel. He's angry with Obama, and like Michael Oren -- and like others, including me -- he's worried about where the Democratic Party, as a whole, is headed vis-à-vis Israel. And he adores the fact that Trump has been and will continue to be fabulously pro-Israel (or, as the Left would put it, "pro-Netanyahu" -- not, though, that Mr. Pence wouldn't be). This business concerning the extent of the President's powers is rather arcane, but the argument that Prof. Dershowitz is pushing leads to a very odd, and very dangerous, place.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/12/trump-isnt-above-th...
Yes, every news media should lead with this simple question:
Why Lie, If There Is Nothing To Hide?
1
...and he's now wanting put together a private spy agency run by him & the CIA. Doesn't this remind anyone (all of his presidency) of history in which such leaders ruined their countries/kingdoms for their own purposes?
1
Republicans are robbing the corpse of a dead man lying in the street( America under the Republicans.)
Trump has no problem with lies. It's range of punishment that gets him. Trump-"Flynn lied and they destroyed his life". Yeah how about Flynn lied and he destroyed his reputation. Let's just breathe and put blame where it belongs. Blaming repercussions from lies to FBI is delusional.
Can a President obstruct justice? Yes, of course. Nixon proved that.
Can a President obstruct justice by his choice within his discretion in the exercise of his Constitutional powers as Chief Executive? No.
He was elected. He gets to do the job. If you don't like it, the remedy is to defeat him next time.
You can't re-litigate the election by challenge to each use of the powers won in the election. That is why elections are important.
Next time, run somebody who can defeat Trump, on a platform that will rally support.
2
I wonder how much the president's lawyer will receive for taking the bullet, i.e. claiming to be the writer of the tweet? Lawyers can't be impeached.
3
A pardon and lucrative post-retirement preaching ... er, speaking tours.
They can be disbarred, and that tweet if he wrote it is grounds for same.
Trump has something going for him on that front in that the tweet in question was composed of several coherent sentences. I don't think Trump has ever tweeted (or spoken) a coherent sentence on any topic ever.
1
But they can be disbarred.
1
Nixon used his law-breaking as a way to get elected, stay in power and intimidate ethical investigators...
Nixon used his law-breaking as a way to get elected, stay in power and intimidate ethical investigators... AND he got elected in the first place by colluding with a hostile FOREIGN power (Russia) to steal the office of president. AND he and his family are making $millions because of illegal and unethical business "deals" since he seized power.
2
Is "he" Nixon or Trump?
Trump as president is a constitutional crises in itself.
10
It's otherwise called Papal infallibility--God, I mean Trump, cannot be wrong. Ever. Ask Trump himself.
3
Now that Trump's legal team have all but acknowledged that that collusion between Team Trump and the Russians did occur, they have adopted a less than sound legal strategy saying that, as the nation's chief law enforcement official, he cannot be charged with obstruction. That is ludicrous, as Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton both found out.
I always have been proud to be an American; we are the world's longest-running, most successful democracy. One of the tenets that have helped us rise to that honor is our firm belief in the rule of law; no one, not even the chief executive is exempt from the rule of law, which makes Trump's ongoing behavior akin to that of a third-rate dictator in a 'banana republic.'
As the special counsel continues his relentless investigation into the Trump-Russia embroglio, we are enlightened daily by the information exposing the levels of rot within Team Trump. From subverting the foreign policy directives of the Obama Administration to lying to the FBI, to actively obstructing a lawful investigation into their activities, the Trump Administration is on target to be the most corrupt presidential administration in our nation's long-proud history.
While can only guess what else the special counsel's investigation will unearth; regardless, the investigation to date makes clear that Trump's well-deserved moniker should be 'the Kremlin candidate.'
4
"Why lie if you've done nothing wrong?" The same question could be asked of Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills, who, like General Flynn, also lied to the FBI, in the course of the investigation into Hillary Clinton's private email server. The difference is that they were never charged with anything, and Flynn was. This is why conservatives say that the FBI's investigative process in this case is politicized--because it is.
There's also the well-known problem of investigators falling back on "process crimes" in the absence of any real underlying crimes.
So allow me to ask another, (better) question: "If Trump administration officials have done something wrong, why only charge them for process crimes, instead of any actual underlying offenses?"
What you call "process crimes" are known to the rest of us as "crimes." Please note that Clinton was impeached for both Obstruction of Justice and Perjury, even though the underlying "crimes" were nothing of the sort.
1
Clinton committed perjury; Trump asked Comey to exercise prosecutorial discretion. Perjury is obstruction by a witness (including an accused) of the legal process. Prosecutorial discretion is the lawful exercise of discretion by a prosecutor. Clinton was an accused who lied. Trump is the chief United States law enforcement official who asked (but did not order) the FBI director to exercise discretion.
What's more, defendants, their attorneys, family, friends and others routinely ask prosecutors to exercise discretion. There is nothing illegal in making such a request.
Prosecutors routinely exercise discretion. Mueller exercised discretion when he agreed to allow Flynn to plead to perjury and to drop a myriad of other charges.
There is no difference between Trump's attempt to persuade Comey to exercise discretion and Mueller's actual exercise of discretion.
1
How do explain the fact that Trump fired the FBI director for not letting of Flynn investigation?
Yes, there may be such a thing as "prosecutorial discretion" if the discretion is truly up to the prosecutor. But if a powerful politician says "Please exercise prosecutorial discretion in my case or I will fire you," that looks a lot like obstruction of justice.
Except that Trump fired Comey soon after, and admitted that it was to quash the Russia investigation. Nixon had the CIA "ask" the FBI to back off the Watergate investigation. This, too, was Obstruction of Justice. Try again.
Puhlease... There are plenty of reasons to lie even if one doesn't think one's done something wrong. What planet do you live on? Maybe the planet where politicians look only at the substance of the issues, and wouldn't dream of exploiting them for political purposes? Where employers always take the time to research whether an applicant with a record was actually a victim of the justice system? Where "the best man or woman" really always wins? President Xi has a job for you!
All that said, why Trump has not been impeached yet is baffling and disheartening. What it demonstrates is that the business of Washington is the business of those interests, mostly corporate, where lying and cheating and harassing, aka, making "deals", is simply how business is done.
3
If Attorney Dowd is going to claim he wrote Trump's tweet, Dowd has no choice but to claim a president cannot obstruct justice. Otherwise, Dowd essentially concedes he has admitted his client -- Trump -- has committed a crime. This opens Dowd to a malpractice suit from Trump, disciplinary action from his state bar, or both.
2
Congress isn’t going to impeach President Trump for telling FBI Director James Comey he hoped Comey wouldn’t recommend charges against Michael Flynn. There would be grounds for obstruction of justice if Trump had followed up by firing Comey to stop the Flynn investigation, but the reason Trump fired Flynn has been well established. Trump fired Flynn because Comey refused to say publically what he was telling Trump and congressional leaders in private—that the president was not under investigation. Comey testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee that he refused to comply with the president’s request to publically announce that Trump wasn’t under investigation because he would have to issue a correction if Trump did come under investigation. Not many presidents would accept such an excuse. According to the Washington Post, Special Counsel Robert Muller has a first draft of the letter Trump wrote to tell Comey whey he was being fired. According to the Post, “it conveyed Trump’s displeasure that Comey would not say publicly what he had told the president three times privately: that the FBI’s probe into Russia’s interference in the 2016 election was not focused on him.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mueller-examining-trumps-draft-l...
Every day brings a new lie from the Trump team, along with a daily desecration of the political system by the reigning Republican party who control all three branches of the federal government. Many of us still hope that an independent judiciary and ongoing reportage like this from the New York Times will help to bring an end to Trump's corrupt regime, but the outlook remains grim.
5
The time has come. the Walrus said, when Power Corrupts and Absollute Power corrupts absolutely. And so it is assured one President of the United States can obstruct justice, can apparently commit any crime, pardon anyone including Himself and suffer no consequence. How the Mighty have risen! No mere mortal among mortals, no bumbling Wizard of Oz. But Ozymandias risen from the tabloids and the television screen -- apprentice unnecessary. Our Colossus bestrides a trembling, climate-challenged Earth, adored by
suppliant fans, aided and encouraged by greed-lusting politicians riding on His golden coat-tails. Unfathomable, undeterrable, unimpeachable -- the Terrible Juggernaut rolls on, vanquishing without mercy all compassionate fools who might dare challenge His Majesty. Absolute Power incarnate. Absolute Corruption chosen by The People. Look on, ye suckers and despair!
Doug Giebel, Big Sandy, Montana
3
With a legal defense dependent upon the supposition of the inviability of the Head of State one is left to wonder if Trump and Kim Jung-un employ the same legal firm.
1
1 Question: How many presidents in history have been charged with obstructing justice? Answer 0.
2 Question: How many presidents in history have had articles of impeachment passed for obstructing Justice? Answer 2.
3 Question: How many presidents have been removed from office for obstructing justice? Answer 0.
4 Question: How many Senators must vote to remove a president after articles of impeachment pass the House? Answer 67.
5 Question: What are the chances the Democrats end up with 67 Senators after the midterm elections? Answer 0
5 Question: What is the likelihood Trump will be removed by the Senate before his 8 years are up? Answer 0.
Should be a fun 8 years though.
2
You assume Trump will be re-elected, which probably will not be the case. He already lost the popular vote once, and he's become less popular since taking office.
User name checks out. Also, Nixon would have been impeached and removed from office of he hadn't resigned, and he would have been charged if Ford hadn't pardoned him.
1
Trump’s lawyers and aids are suggesting that Trump is above the law. The bankrupt and corrupted Republican Party shows signs of consolidating its support for Trump. Just look at Orinn Hatch and McConnell with their flip-flops today.
2
Dershowitz and Dowd confuse a factual defense for a legal defense. If I occupy no role in law enforcement or criminal justice and attempt to influence improperly someone with such a role, obstruction is easy to prove. If a sheriff, police chief, district attorney, or attorney general were to do the same, and the person is a subordinate, obstruction is harder to prove because the perp may claim that he was only doing his job. His job, of course, is not to redirect investigations into his wrongdoing or the wrongdoing of his family or staff, but a conviction will be harder to obtain due to the fact that issuing such assignments is within his job.
The same principle applies to Trump. It is silly to suggest that, as a matter of law, he is exempt from obstruction laws. The prosecutor will likely have to deal with the supervisory defense that is typically not available to a defendant. It can--and will be--done.
Things look gloomier by the day: the GOP continues to bow to Trump and undermines the rule of law by appointing "malleable" judges at breakneck pace who will do nothing when the President breaks the law. The normal checks and balances of good governance are looking increasingly vulnerable.
4
Mr Trump needs to be reminded of two things. First, that nobody is above the law, not even him. Second, that by undermining this principle he has violated the oath that he took to uphold the Constitution.
2
Maybe another solution is electing justice secretary, but picking .
We should take out WH and Congress totally out of the justice business. Put Justice sec, on the ballot, that may differ in terms of this level problem arise.
We cannot assume all presidents justice sec will have spines.
That "the president cannot obstruct justice," as Trump's attorney John Dowd has opined, may indeed come as news to Congress but we may rest totally assured that the news will be ignored by the party in control of it. The GOP's entirely cynical backsliding on Roy Moore's senatorial candidacy offers ample evidence unprincipled opportunism.
Nothing means anything to a Republican party with no other mission than to retain power in perpetuity.
3
This editorial seems to recognize that the President can appoint or remove an FBI director based on the FBI director's use of discretion in investigating or recommending prosecution, as long as the subject of the investigation is a "random no-name case." Exercising discretion in determining who to investigate and for whom criminal charges should be recommended is probably the core function of the FBI director. So it stands to reason that the President's decision to appoint or remove the FBI director would ordinarily be based upon the exercise of that discretion.
How close must the subject of investigation be to the President for the President to lose his legal authority to oversee the FBI director's discretion? And what legal authority are you relying upon to set those parameters? This editorial does not seriously attempt to answer these questions. Can a person be convicted of a crime when the parameters of that crime are not set by law, but by a smell test?
Bill Clinton was impeached by the House for something that was not an impeachable offense. The lesson from that should have been that we shouldn't tailor the crime to fit the person we don't like.
The claim that Flynn and Trump were trying to undermine the foreign policy of an outgoing administration as private citizens is absurd on the face of it.
Why all the lying, indeed? At least nine Trump operatives have held meetings with various Russian assets and every one of them lied about it. That can't be accidental. The lies are a coordinated effort to hide Russian involvement in the Trump campaign. That in itself is conspiracy.
But the real question is, will congressional Republicans continue to support the serial outrages of this administration? Will they move to impeach Donald if Mueller brings the evidence?
I suspect they will not. I suspect the Republicans want to win more than they want good government. Donald? Roy Moore? fine. We need the vote.
1
Not only is the president above the law, but also his cabinet, members of the executive branch, members of congress, corporate executives, bankers and rich individuals.
The law, in 21st Century America, is a weapon and a shield. It is deployed punitively against the poor and powerless, and protects the rich and powerful.
Nobody went to jail for torture, or for starting illegal wars, or for drone-based assassination, or for military adventurism, or for the manifold crimes of the banker class in relation to the real estate bubble (fraud, money laundering, tax evasion, etc.), or for political corruption, or electioneering fraud or breach of campaign finance rules.
Our jails are stocked with the poor, the working class and minorities. With debtors who can't afford fines. With defendents who can't afford legal representation.
2
Despite all their professed worship of the Constitution, this whole mess also makes it clear that the only part of the document Republicans really care about is the 2nd Amendment interpretation that all Americans need to be armed with the most deadly weaponry available so gun makers are as rich as possible.
By enabling Trump, the Republicans have proven that they are willing to cynically use the Constitution when it suits their purposes and throw it out the window when it does not.
2
We haven't even gone deep on the money-laundering yet, but Mueller is starting to look at Deutsche Bank's records. That's where we will probably find the real Trump-Russian connections.
1
Contrary to it's intention, this editorial (which proves president's can obstruct justice) enables Donald Trump rather than counters or corrects him. And that's because It's doing exactly what this White House wants us to do. Namely, be on the defensive; consumed defending truth, people, institutions which this White House denigrates and lies about. And that's in place of noticing what they are doing: the underhanded stuff they are up to. It's a smoke screen which allows them to tear apart the fabric of America while we're looking but not seeing.
If nothing else, this president is a master at distraction. He's also a master at control and creating, as well as. selling his own distorted version of reality--and attracting into his fold those with a similar no rules; anything goes mentality.
Thus, we must save ourselves and our country. We must begin by maintaining our focus on what the slight of hand is doing; what it's up to, and not on the constant diverse distractions toward which the finger is pointing. In other words, we must get off defense and remain on offense.
2
Taken from a wider lens, is the US afraid to end the cold war?
I think Pres. Trump had a wider vision on the future possibility of a productive US-Russia. What a shame to see it mired in this mess. I agree that it is nothing, even if some legal mistakes were made.
Your editorial confuses criminal law with the Constitution.
That articles of impeachment drawn up against Nixon and Clinton accused them of failure to faithfully execute the laws does not demonstrate that either could on the facts alledged have been convicted in court of the crime of obstruction of justice. The requirement of High Crimes and Misdemeanors in the Impeachment Clause is not confined to acts that fit the technical definitions of the criminal law; it also includes serious political offenses that undermine our Constitutional order.
I suspect your sloppy reasoning is designed to further the notion that a sitting President can be indicted for the specific crime of obstruction. This is both dubious as a principle of Constitutional law and of no help in focusing public discussion on the President' actions.
Why does it feel he is getting a pass?
It seems that the President's disregard for anything truthful is not pursued as aggressively as Trump pursued Obama's birth status or "birther" nonsense. Why are opponents not pursuing Trump on his lies, tax return non-disclosure, or even HIS birth location status as loudly as he did with Obama? Takes the gloves off even more that has been done to date.
1
This is a dishonest analysis (deliberately, in my opinion) of what Trump's lawyer and Alan Dershowitz are saying.
The president has complete constitutional authority to fire any member of the executive branch, like FBI director, and he is not obstructing justice by doing so.
The president can however obstruct justice if he lies under oath, for example. And the only remedy in that case is the impeachment route.
1
He is obstructing justice if he fires either director Comey of the FBI, or special prosecutor Mueller when they are investigating him.
If the president removes an FBI chief for the express purpose of quashing a particular investigation, as he admitted to, then he definitely can be committing obstruction of justice. Saying that it's not possible by definition is just wrong.
Well, at least Trump is showcasing the most inept of lawyers so that other potential clients know whom NOT to hire. Some of these lawyers working for Trump appear to be so clueless that they can't help but make public statements that undermine their own clients. I'm not even a lawyer, and this much is clear: Trump's lawyers have abysmal judgment.
Republicans won’t impeach and the base will support trump even if he shot somebody on the street
What a country
The longtime Republican push to destroy the public education system in this country (starting in earnest with Reagan) continues to pay them dividends!
This Trump/Dowd folderol is just another part of the whole political septic tank that is Trump's presidency. As you write, "Mr. Trump’s tireless spinners and sophists are working to convince the American public that it’s all no big deal." Trump will continue to discredit the FBI and scream about fake news and this whole affair will be drawn on and on.
There is no question about Trumps leadership: it is anti-American and rotten to the core. Where can a line be drawn? Now that's a question I would like to hear answered.
3
I suppose that we'll all have to wait until one or all of the republican 2016 election campaign are convicted of crimes before the president can pardon them.
Then he could pardon himself while sending out resumes for his next job.
This editorial has a confusing headline because it can be read to suggest that the President IS ALLOWED to obstruct justice.
Our two party system with "winner take all" results needs to be changed!!
We need to remember how we got here.
White voters, who make up 69% of the total, voted 58% for Trump and 37% for Clinton. Non-white voters, who make up 31% of the electorate, voted 74% for Clinton and 21% for Trump.
We cannot claim that white voters were conned by him. More plausible, even for NYT, is that these people voted Trump to maintain their white privilege. That is the bottom line. 63 million voted for him.
And just to be clear, these are not just economically troubled white voters. 63m people voted for this despicable man. There is a much bigger problem with the Country, and we gotta look at it in face and address it. How can we let the next generation inherit this nonsense?
2
Of course this is obstruction of justice. The founders, while needing to invest certain government officials with administrative and legal powers, had just fought off a KING when they revolted and created the United States of America!
They knew first hand what a PERSON who proclaimed himself to be the law could lead to...and they did not create a constitutional version of a KING, but rather a PRESIDENT...someone to protect the law, but not someone to BE the law.
This is NOT about party affiliation or winning and losing...this time the President in question ran as a Republican, but next time he or she could be a Democrat or other party affiliation...this is about what is AMERICAN...innocent until proven guilty, but NEVER above the law.
Any person who believes a President cannot be held to account is not considering the nation first...but only has concern with using the Presidential position as a means to an end...using an entire nation and its citizens to accomplish deeds in the dark of night and behind the secrecy of closed doors that would benefit the relative handful of those who would overthrow our government, who would overthrow our country.
The word for such action is treason.
1
Could it be that the President of the United States would be able to shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in New York in broad daylight, then assert that because he was the President, it was not illegal, or that if if it was illegal, that he could pardon himself? Tell me the difference between these actions and the actions of Josef Stalin.
Even though the President doesn't have to be charged with any black letter crime for articles of impeachment to be enacted, no check on his ego will happen until voters reject Republicans in the midterm elections. Nothing short of that means anything. Trump will not resign. He is incapable of shame. I, on the other hand, feel great shame in the collective American electorate. Please redeem yourself.
Looks like the beginning of the end to me.
Detailed analysis is superfluous. Trump thinks he is above ALL law and above the Constitution and is acting on that basis. We have an authoritarian would-be dictator in the Oval Office and a craven lickspittle Republican Congress that does not care except to funnel all rights to the donors and keep the money tap flowing.
Interesting gambit for an embattled president -- the Nixon defense. Republicans, please: Protect and defend the country, our constitution and your constituents. What will it take for you to act? Increasing signs of mental instability, delusional behavior and repeated breaks with reality? Continued lies that undermine and threaten our democracy daily? As we all know, this is just a start to the ever-lengthening list of transgressions and atrocities by Trump and his truth deniers. The whole world is watching and we will not forget.
It would help Trump and Republicans in Congress if Putin would address Congress on how he plans to Make America Great Again. There is a cynical belief in this country that Putin did not have this country's best interests at heart when he took control of the White House, that he, somehow, intended to undermine our economy, destroy our intelligence agencies, eliminate our trust in our authorities, and reveal how sexually degraded our leaders are. Some even accuse him of stripping us of our allies so that we have to emulate Russia's corrupt plutocracy. I do think we can thank Putin just how rotten and ignorant our government and our voters really are. America is nothing special.
1
Donald Trump looks big, but in fact he's just bloated. He has no character, no sympathy for other people, and he's never felt compelled to acknowledge a painful truth or work to figure out the truth ... about himself, the USA, or the world. He's managed with scams and lies for decades, cheated countless people, squirmed against shocked women, never felt remorse. Remember, in one of his "Real Donald" moments he expressed surprise that being president of the US turned out to be more difficult than running a family business focused on branding and golf.
It's hard to believe, but this man doesn't grasp that the judiciary from Connecticut to California has authority he can't erase, that the FBI, CIA, NSA employ professionals he can't dismiss, that state governments extending from the Atlantic to the Pacific are real, and that not everybody is his employee and owes him loyalty. He can't sssign us all to go fetch him a BigMac.
2018 is coming soon. Traditionally the majority party loses a bunch of Congressional seats to the opposition at the midterms. There's a good chance the balance in Congress will shift. And Robert Mueller is at work. By now even Trump apparently realizes he can't fire Mueller.
The 2016 election was hate-filled, and this has been an awful year. Trump and his cabinet members have hurt our nation.
But the ignorant gasbag, Donald Trump, is not king. Nor will he become king. Except in his dreams.
I quit. I really can't take it anymore
I officially resign for the USA to become a citizen of the Country of Educated People (who have their own teeth)
Maybe Trump could host a holiday TV show where he explains to children the following:
Pedophiles are our friends. They make great leaders
Sexual predators are our friends. They make great presidents
Taxes are for fools
Liars make great leaders
Military officers should never be questioned. They earned it through service.
Police should be able to hurt the citizenry at will. They earned it through service
That's enough for the first episode.
A criminal enterprise, filled with grifters and traitors, is running OUR government. Unless we say no next November we may lose our country.
So??? What will be done about it? Nothing, as usual.
It took 4 days for this administration's NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISOR to commit a felony.
4 days.
Soak that in.
5
The left just wants to impeach President Trump because he doesn't follow their rules. The left likes Presidents like Obama who promised to end the Iraq and Afghan wars but not only did he restart them but started new ones in Libya and Syria. Transition teams are allowed to talk to foreign governments and why Flynn didn't admit he mentioned the sanctions he can only answer. Does the NY Times expect new administrations to have no contacts with foreign governments until they are inaugurated?.
We will rue the day we allow this monster to get away with this crime.
1
The country suffers from a form of national amnesia. Nixon-trump. trump-Nixon. Lights don’t go on? Welcome to the dark ages. Nixon era 69 indictment 30 jail sentences. Duh!
1
#45's voter base cares little what the balance of the USA thinks of him. He is there saviour. When are the coal mines going to reopen? When is Trump Inc. going to bring their business interests back to the USA? Who is going to pay for the healthcare in the "red states"?
VOTE 2018 & 2020
Clean the swamp.
Can the swamp be cleaned in Alabama? Doubtful!!!
It is in fact true that Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln both exercised their powers on who should be prosecuted. So you'd better indict them too, and not just Trump or Nixon. I find it rather disingenuous of the NYT to be comparing Trump's legal arguments to Nixon's, when NYT's pathological obsession with Moscow now exceeds Nixon's (or even McCarthy's).
this is ridiculous. Dems and others crying "wolf!". Trump is a crass and vulgar man with the attention span of a 5 year old. but he has not obstructed justice. I agree with Alan Dershowitz (something I never thought I would say). So he added
"FBI" to his Saturday tweet about Flynn. It was news, Trump is far from precise.
He said to Comey, "I hope you can see you way clear ..." that is far from an order to drop a case, it could be interpreted more as , "I hope there's nothing there", but NOT an order to drop. And he has every right constitutionally to fire anyone who works for him. So can we drop all the screaming about obstruction and impeachment?
Why lie if you've done nothing wrong? Trump lives in a world without truths or facts. He lives in a world where there are "sides of the story". Those versions of reality fit into one of two categories for him: the side of the story that is flattering and helpful and the side that is not flattering or harmful to him. These versions of reality change on a moment to moment basis and are not parallel with objective reality. This is consistent with the president's psychopathology. From his erratic and capricious statements and tweets, he makes it evident that his world is a fantasyland. He weaves his non-reality as he goes along swerving and deflecting, igniting and subverting so that he can live to manipulate and pilfer and cajole the next day. He is a master manipulator who loves projection among all psychological self defense mechanisms. So we get "Fake news, Crooked Hilary" and an "FBI in tatters" when we know he is talking about himself and his administration. He has managed to con enough Americans as well as Fox "News" to have an ally which affords some level of protection. However, this emperor of behavior disorder wears no clothes.
69
This Republican Congress wouldn't impeach Trump if they found out he called Putin every night to give him the update nuclear codes.
3
Why lie if you have done "nothing wrong"? He enjoys it - it is fun to lie!
1
Glad the Times agrees that a President can obstruct justice. So, nothing to see here, move on.
I like watching The History Channel, and recently was treated to a long dissection of the rise and fall of Nazi Germany. A lot of the characters and events felt eerily familiar, and it wasn’t because I’d seen the clips many times before. Delusional thinking by charismatic leaders. Bizarre justifications for an array of crimes. Normally strong people burying their morals and individually due to fear or ambition. Ordinary people thinking their lives would be vastly improved by world domination or if ‘those people’ disappeared. And propaganda. Lots and lots of carefully scripted propaganda.
You can’t change history, in spite of efforts past and present to do so. But you can mold the future. So why are we destroying our own?
4
No serious person in the World wants something seriously to go wrong in the Business of the US Gov though it is not the best person available at the helm.Now Pres DT is the pres and his office wilds the most power a Nation's Leader anywhere will envy.It is possible to behave confident and dignified there is no need to bring HRC's name assert that she is " more at fault" and use it to shield Admir Flynn.When one applies logic it is not hard to observe that Admir Flynn didn't have quite a grasp of US Constitution or Law 101.During the 2016 Repub convention he roused the mob there via the chant " Lock Her up", in the US even some one who got caught red handed when snatching someones wallet gets the Miranda read 4 him it is not the locking up that comes 1st.Especially in that highly politically heated hour a chant like that (that is a reminder of the one made by the Spectator mob in Spartacus or other primitive era recreations) is an invitation to lynching.Admir Flynn and others r the ones who blundered here and there they r the ones who should face a fitting correctional measure dragging through mud a fine human being who gracefully conceded and with solid public service and humanitarian engagement record is unwise.A sizable part of the World ( most of ME,S.Sudan,Yemen,Syria,Iraq,etc) is a mess,NK tries to b the most irrational it has ever been,in the failed state Libya Humans r auctioned, etc. US's leading and consulting with major powers + rallying others is needed.TMD.
Given the cowardly make up of this Congress, he probably can't. That is subject to change and all we need is one house of Congress and this whole ridiculous display of incompetence can be brought to a halt.
1
"If the president does it, that means it is not illegal." -- RM Nixon, Aprill 1977, interview with David Frost
Of course, he has lots to hide and the Russia angle is the tip of the iceberg. He's corrupt and should be in jail.
1
What a swine, our vulgar liar in chief, trying to escape judgement by placing himself above the law. It is, by now, inconceivable that this dangerous and mentally deranged thug is innocent of collusion. Trump's presidency is a hoax of sorts, an unearned/stolen seat in the White House, from which he continues to spew venom, and adamant in reigning by fear, hate and division. How long should the public's patience be...before their complicity is raised by adopting Trump's abuse of power as the 'new normal'? Obviously, the entire republican party, and it's propaganda branch (Fox Noise), are guilty as charged, as enablers of Trump's graft. We are anxiously awaiting the special prosecutor to do his job, unimpeded by the constant tweets intent in obstructing his job. Justice is the aim, no more but no less either.
3
`Why lie if you’ve done nothing wrong?'
If you've forgotten how to tell the truth, there's little else you can do but lie.
Trump, Manafort and Flynn. We are not talking about obstruction of justice; we are talking about treason!
4
I have been living in a fantasy world,where the country that I was born & raised in , had a government for the people & by the people, & the President & the Congress & Senate were servants of all the people, not just the people of their Party.All of this was clearly stated in our holy constitution, which is holy to me.
I also believed that our forefathers feared organized religion, & made sure it was noted in our constitution that there would not be a State religion.
What happened to my fantasy, our President & his Party act like they are beyond the Law of the land, & anyone that doubts that or takes issue with the
President is unpatriotic & treasonous.Our Free Press is under attack, by the President & his Party. right is wrong & wrong is right.
What happened, where is the unity of the people who will stand up & support our Nation. Why are we so divided, & why have the low lives crept from under their rocks & openly state their hatred,& thousands follow them. What happened to my dream of an America that is benevolent & caring for our weak & our poor ? Where have we gone wrong, & why ?
4
Tyranny has a tipping point just like global warming — a threshold at which things that have been going out of balance finally “flip.” When tyranny reaches this point, a lot of things that had been leaning are suddenly turned completely upside down. George Orwell illuminated this in his novel, 1984, where the Ministry of Love was the department that tortured people. This inversion happened in Nazi Germany. If criminals gain control of the justice system, there is no end to the crimes they can commit and no one is safe from them. Obstruction of justice that goes unpunished even though it is self-evident would suggest that the US is on the edge of a tipping point. If that happens, I fear the US will reap the whirlwind. In my past I have read much to make me distrust the CIA. I haven’t read much about the FBI, they had some respect from me, but boy, these guys and their investigations and surveillance seem like the only thing saving our bacon right now. No — there are the journalists who have been doing a whole lot of the hard digging. And what’s coming out is appalling. Thanks so much for this editorial. Trump believes he can lie blatantly and people will believe him. In the face of such subversion of truth, the critical context must be kept before the public eye.
1
And...
Yes, Virginia - There is a Santa Clause (sic)...
"...VIRGINIA, your little friends are wrong. They have been affected by the skepticism of a skeptical age. They do not believe except they see. They think that nothing can be which is not comprehensible by their little minds. All minds, Virginia, whether they be men’s or children’s, are little...
"...Yes, VIRGINIA, there is a [president TRUMP]. He exists as certainly as love and generosity and devotion exist, and you know that they abound and give to your life its highest beauty and joy. Alas! how dreary would be the world if there were no [president TRUMPs]. It would be as dreary as if there were no [president TRUMPs]...
"...There would be no childlike faith then, no poetry, no romance to make tolerable this existence. We should have no enjoyment, except in sense and sight. The eternal light with which childhood fills the world would be extinguished...
...Not believe in [president TRUMP]! You might as well not believe in fairies! You might get your papa to hire men to watch in all the chimneys on Christmas Eve to catch {president TRUMP], but even if they did not see Santa Claus coming down, what would that prove? Nobody sees [president TRUMP], but that is no sign that there is no {president TRUMP]. The most real things in the world are those that neither children nor men can see. Did you ever see fairies dancing on the lawn? Of course not, but that’s no proof that they are not there...
But - I digress...
Wow, to quote Trump. Trump is even trying to turn his ignorance of the Constitution into an asset.
The saddest thing is that the Republican Party has already shown the world how it will respond to any evidence of Trump's criminality. They will ignore it. If they can embrace a child molester, they can embrace a traitor. All that matters is if the guy wears the gang colors. Crips for Crips; Bloods for Bloods. The rules of a street gang are not the rules of Democracy. You don't fire the Boss for improprieties like "obstructing justice." You don't impeach the Boss for high crimes and misdemeanors. In a street gang, every day the Boss survives is another day on top of the heap. Mob boss Donald Trump is not going to be brought down by his own crew. He's changed the rules of American politics to the level of warring street gangs, in which victory means nothing more than staying out of jail.
4
To make matters worse, now Trump has implicated Pence.
Trump has admitted he fired Comey to get him out of the Russia investigation AND that Trump and the transition team knew about Flyn's lies to the FBI when he was fired. So.. that means PENCE was lying to the American People and PENCE KNEW HE WAS LYING.
Lock who up????
2
Great, Carlo Giambaressi's illustration to "Yes, the President Can Obstruct Justice! A ladder of Pinocchio noses - worthy of Walt Disney's "Fantasia"! The litany of Trump's misdeeds - recounted in today's Editorial Boards op-ed, is staggering. Awful enough to impose impeachment, replacement and removal of Donald Trump from our 45th Presidency. People lie. Trump is a liar who has stolen our democracy under "alternative facts", false pretenses, and the fallen Roman Empire's tactics of giving the people, the hoi polloi - his colossally ignorant loyalists - lots of bread and circuses from Day One of his sprint for our presidency. Trump's obstruction of justice - notwithstanding his cabal's denials - is a very big deal. Like that ladder of Pinocchios his people are climbing.
1
What to say? He never, ever should have been elected in the first place. The lying racist sexist immoral con man was there in plain view from the start. I will never understand how anyone could have voted for this person who is simply vile on both personal and political levels. It's going to be a long path for Americans who voted for Trump to regain trust and respect from those of us who didn't.
1
An habitual liar will lie without a logical reason to do so. The truth is never quite good enough... it always needs to be pumped up. The serial liar finds it impossible to be truthful about anything. That's exactly what we have in the oval office, folks.
1
Shut him up and lock him up, please!! For our nations (and the worlds) sovereignty, and more importantly our sanity, credibility, integrity, and hope for a plausible future we can endure.
1
Donald Trump, who never served in government, evaded military service and employed an army of cheesy lawyers to sue his opponents in New York real estate, has no clue about the law.
Trump is again bellyaching that the "corrupt" F.B.I. and "his" Justice Department are ignoring his demands they put Hillary Clinton in prison. We all thought his threat to her in the 3rd presidential debate - that if he was president, "you'd be in prison" was just more garbage Trump campaign blather.
Not so. This is the same Trump who hinted to his deplorable followers that perhaps a member of the NRA would assassinate Hillary Clinton.
We gasp now to see he will not stop trying to exculpate himself by handing his crazy followers a bigger "villain."
This is madness and evil. Trump must be removed from office. We have never before seen such villainy in the Oval Office - a President of the United States obsessed with the prosecution and destruction of his former political opponent as a way of denigrating the investigation into his criminal behavior.
If the villain Donald Trump is allowed to remain in office, this democracy is on it's last legs.
It's taken only 11 months for Donald Trump to destroy the United States of America as we know it.
1
It's a shame that Monstrous Mitch, Eddie Munster Ryan, and the Republic Party are so intoxicated with their political power,
and
completely ignore any patriotism (no one expects principles or morality).
Do they believe that Right Reverend Dimmesdale Pence will not sign their legislation?
Do they believe that the National Socialist Trumpers will vote for a Democrat?
Shame Shame Shame
I suspect the rest of the country is as sick and tired of this President's shenanigans as I am. I am exhausted from following this rollercoaster ride from the first tweet of the morning to the last news story before I go to bed. I hope it ends one way. Trump and as many of his cronies as possible IN JAIL!
1
Right on all fronts. It's too bad none of this will matter because were talking about relying on the GOP-controlled Congress to impeach Trump. They will never do that, no matter how damning the evidence. They will just deny it and move on to their next windfall for their donors. Game over.
So if the president does it, then it's legal, does that mean he can have his political opponents legally executed? I guess if Duterte can do it, why not Trump?
1
It seems that the Party of the Kochs has, at long last, found its soulmate in the team of Donald Trump and psychopathic sidekicks.
Let the destruction of all that makes life worth living begin.
1
Climbing ever higher on the lies of others - great graphic.
One thing is crystal clear - NO ONE Tweets for trump. That Dowd would fall on trump's long lying nose (sword) for such a foolish act means he drank too much of the trump Kool-Aid.
Typical of a lawyer claiming such a ridiculous incriminating Tweet, John Dowd's statement that trump can't obstruct justice because he is trump, is Grossly Negligent, incompetent and anti-Constitutional - i.e. no one, not even a trump, is above the law in our country and any high school student (should) knows this - indeed, every naturalized American certainly knows this. Disbar and lock him up.
By the same perverse logic, as commander in chief he can torture anyone, nuke anyone, ... As chief political officer too, he can lock up his opponents and tell journalists what to say and publish ...
If trump is indeed the chief law enforcement officer, then he needs to recuse himself from interfering in any investigation of himself.
Did Pence also know Flynn lied to the FBI before going on the Sunday shows?
The entire administration is working on the basis of so many lies, they no longer know what is true anymore. Mueller's job to indict for lying should be easier because of this.
Trumplicans will always divert to the "e-mail" thing. Yea, where are all of Jared's e-mails?!
1
So where is the NYT going with this? Up on its high horse, spinning its legal arguments, drawing the aprobrium and tut-tuts of its liberal elitist readership, day after day. The fact is there is not a shred of evidence of conspiracy, complicity, collusion, whatever you want to call it, on the part of the Trump campaign in any Russian interference in the US presidential election. plus the misinformation Trump himself was spreading, openly throughout his campaign was greater than anything the Russians could have done. The attacks on Trump based on ties between his campaign and Russian actions during the election are politically motivated, to their very core, and are based on the belief that Trump is unfit for office This is no different than the attempts on the part of conservatives to undermine and thwart everything President Obama tried to do. You might say Trump is hindering the investigation of his campaign actions; on the other hand, you might say the NYT is sensationalizing and exaggerating every shred of evidence that emerges from the investigation, assigning criminal intent to innocent conversations, finding a lie in every fauilure to remember minute details of what were no doubt conversations thought to be insignifiocant at the time they occurred. There will be no impeachment of Donald Trump, and any attempt at it could literally provoke an uprising. Trump was elected POTUS, America is a democracy. Accept it. What is the NYT trying to do, incite a civil war?
Maybe someone should ask Mr. Trump at his next press availability if he is sure John Dowd is working in his best interests?
In the meantime, let us go easy on the constant editorializing and opinionizing and let Mr. Mueller and the Congressional investigators complete their job. Oh yes, the journalists should be tracking down every piece of evidence (not news, evidence) and every source to make sure we get the full story, but all with a little discretion and a lot lot lot less breathlessness and emotion.
And, like the Nixon story, we will find out ho bad the manipulations and deceit were, years later. I think we scratch the surface now and it's bleeding.
Trump can do whatever in "h" he wants and there's nobody to stop him; especially, the "editorial" pages of America's leading newspapers.
Attorney Dowd could be disbarred and charged by Mueller if he finds out he did, in fact not write the Tweet, and then lied about it. It appears Trump's attorneys are a grifters.
Nixon: It's not illegal when the President does it.
Trump: I AM the Law.
We shall see about THAT, Donald. BIGLY.
1
I fear that most Republican voters no longer have a functioning prefrontal cortex thanks to the alt news universe they live in. And Republicans leaders, right wing news and the Trump administration count on it and excel at exploiting it. Until enough Democratic voters show up at the polls and put the majority of these liars and grifters to bed, the destruction of our democracy will proceed apace.
5
Only if The President commits a crime such as bribery or witness tampering. Otherwise he is excising his constitutional right by dismissing Comey.
The liberal MSM has gone from the Logan Act and Emoulments to "collusion" and now obstruction.
It's over, you lost.
Mr Trump and his lawyer Mr Dowd are shameless. They both now have admitted to obstruction of justice and BOTH Trump and Dowd should be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If Dowd thinks the American public will believe he sent that silly Tweet knowing this president's inane tweeting addiction, then he has a surprise in store. Say good-bye to your law license Mr Dowd. Have a nice time before the next Congress during your impeachment proceedings Mr Trump.
2
WE THE PEOPLE must DEMAND stricter laws that would allow us to remove anyone who tries to destroy democracy in America - and the world - in a much simpler way. Petition by the people? Most of my "conservative" friends who voted for The Con Don rue the day and would remove him. He is the most unpopular presidential pretender since Richard Nixon was impeached.
Meantime, OUR job is to stop he and his Robber Baron/Radical anti-christ Religionist brethren at every turn. Right now.
2
I don't know much about Twitter, but I understand that the character-limit for tweets was recently increased. I think this was a good idea, and I hope the limit will be raised even further. After all, giving Trump more characters to express his thoughts, such as they are, is like giving a man more rope to hang himself with.
2
Presidents cannot obstruct justice? I guess that bankers cannot embezzle? Cops cannot murder? Lobbyists cannot bribe? CEO's cannot be fired without golden parachtes? Preachers cannot preach without "Seeds"? Doctors cannot heal without a stock market bubble? And middle aged white men cannot buy a quart of milk at the 7-11 without a .45 automatic strapped to their hips. Some free country we have!
3
The Trump GOP truly has devolved into a radical anti-American hate group. They collude with America’s enemy to hack an election, repeatedly undermine the sitting president’s policies (not on only Russia, but another notable example includes the GOP Senate love letter to Iran’s ayatollahs), and lie repeatedly about it with no pushback. This same party now is fully backing a senatorial candidate for Alabama senator who is a repeat sexual harasser and child molester.
This is what the GOP has become.
4
What needs to be said here isn't evaluating the statements, putting them in context, and connecting all the dots. We have Robert Mueller for that. And I am sure he will. And I am certain the fish stinks from the head on down. But, more importantly, the Republicans and the base don't care about any of it. This Congress will NEVER impeach Trump. Their prayers are being answered. They are paying their donors back big time. They will get everything on their Christmas list and nothing is going to get in their way. They will do nothing about Roy Moore. They will do nothing about Trump. They will stop making any statements about any of this. And the base concurs. They have embraced a pedophile to bring them out of the desert. They stand behind a liar and sex abuser without even a glimmer of guilt. The lying sinners in America, from their perspective, are Democrats. Republicans are lining up on Fifth Avenue with a gun to shoot whomever they please. And their supporters keep handing them the bullets. They are nothing more than racist, gun loving , pedophile rationalizing, liar embracing people who will watch this country go to its grave. GO GET REGISTERED AMERICA. That is the only thing that will make these people squirm.
2
Why all the lying? Two reasons. (1) Trump does have something really bad to hide. (2) But, also, Trump is a pathological liar, who lies continuously about everything big and small -- a phenomenon we have not seen in the Presidency before or perhaps even in Congress.
3
Of course Trump lies - he can't just shut up, and he's so scatter-brained he can't keep his stories straight. One might suggest (just a layman's view) that he is out of touch with reality - but then, he's a Republican (unless he's not).
3
Listening to Trump, his lawyers, and his enablers is tantamount to the theater of the absurd. Surreal. Sickening. The nadir of our democracy. And yet Trump is delusional in that he seems to actually believe that many Americans are buying his lies. He's living in his own virtual reality world. My guess is that before he gets impeached or resigns, someone in his family will commit him to a fancy mental institution or have him under observation confined to Mar Lago.
2
The President is the font of nothing - he is a servant of and defined by the Constitution. Thanks to 'We The People's' laziness and stupidity, we have already permitted the past few presidents to lead us down the path to autocracy. It is truly frightening that so many Times readers seem to feel our current beloved leader is totally justified in saying "Lestat c'est moi."
This is civics 101. Separation of powers. Read the Constitution. The only remedy is impeachment and removal. POTUS can pardon himself? Hello?
1
Love the illustration
1
No mention that the case was opened by a corrupt biased Agent who unlawfully protected Clinton.
1
Dear Editorial Board: Why dwell on Trump's fabrications, over exaggerations, total evasions and outright lies when the self confessed outlaw is only occupying the Oval Office pandering to Republicans and Republican pedophiles because he was looking at another bankruptcy in the family thanks to Jared and because Barack insulted him at the Correspondent's Dinner. Is it too late for the NFL to let him have his franchise and help the world out of this mess?
Wait, are we still taking legal advice from John “torture memo” Yoo?
1
So your constitution was drafted to prevent Tyrannical rule?
Oops!
"Why lie if you’ve done nothing wrong?"
Well see, that's where you show that you still don't get this fake president. His answer to that is: "Why not?" Sociopaths lie the way most normal people breathe. This guy lies because that's his nature. It's that simple. Don't waste your time trying to ferret out this weasel's motivations, trying to place him on the spectrum of normal human motivations. You won't find him. He's not there. He's subhuman. For such as him, lying is its own motivation.
2
"No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar." A. Lincoln.
1
By now it should be clear to anyone who is paying attention that there is NO chance of the current Congress doing anything to stop Trump's violations of truth, law, common sense, or fairness. It doesn't matter what Mr. Mueller discovers -- the GOP controlled Congress will not act on it. There is only one hope: The 2018 election in November. The focus of the Democratic Party and the mainstream media (besides Fox) needs to be to do everything possible to regain control of at least the House, Only then will there be meaningful progress in stopping Trump.
5
I agree, the left should run on Anti-Trump and nothing else. The entire platform should be "hey were not Trump". No need for policy goals the American people want, just straight up NeverTrump.
No need to form economic goals that make the entire country rethink their perception of Democrats as corporate shrills.
No need to reach back out to the working class who voted against you in droves, black, white, women & men because of the way you cozied up to corporate donors.
No need to embrace the progressive wing of your party, and more importantly change the platform to reflect there wants.
No need to elect a new president to the DNC that unites the party, and doesn't remind the progressives they're just here for votes.
No need to apologize to all of the Bernie supporters your party stole the last primary from.
Just keep wagging your finger at Trump with your high falutin moral indignation.
The law is what the Supreme Court says it is.
I have little doubt that Trump has at least three and maybe five votes in his pocket. This Republican administration is what the Republican elites have been lusting for, a power play to hurt the very poor and elevate the super rich to their true godly status.
Trump isn't Nixon. Nixon wasn't a Russian stooge, installed to traitorously destroy America from the inside. Sure, Nixon really was a crook, but he was all American.
Hugh Massengill, Eugene Oregon
8
Not sure the 2nd nixon reference adds much value
but an interesting article
2
I am getting very tired of the phrase "no one is above the law". Baloney. Donald Trump is. I hope that Mueller proves me wrong. Soon. Half the country is in real despair. The other half is complicit and blind.
14
I expect Trump will deny having authored any tweets that are inconvenient. Do you remember last week when his attorney, Dowd claimed to have authored a tweet and Trump said he knew nothing about anyone else tweeting from his account?
6
Lies eventually catch up with liars. In this case, not a moment too soon for the wellbeing of the United States of America and the world at large.
4
In paragraph 7 or 8 you state that Trump told Comey "I hope you can see your way....to letting Flynn go." You do not mention that we only have Comey's word for that statement (I do not doubt it myself, but I would not call that very good evidence}. And I think you should have mentioned the fact that it was not a recording, but a note made by Comey after the meeting.
1
Mary - you are right - everything that folks say against Trump is false or fake news and everything he says is the truth. Hear how silly that sounds?
Whom to believe, Trump or Comey? Definitely not the serial liar.
By now it is obvious that every one from top to bottom knew about Flynn and that include "good Christian" Mike Pence. Pence was the head of the transition team and he is clueless, give me a break!
6
The House of Representatives, under Speaker Paul Ryan, will never vote any article of impeachment against Donald Trump. Book it.
Now, let's suppose for a moment that I'm wrong and the House comes to its senses because the evidence against Trump waterproof and the case went to the Senate for a trial. After muscling through a lie and a theft of a Tax Cuts and Jobs Act on strict party lines last week, what rational person believes that, all things being equal--a Republican majority in the Senate--they would vote to convict a Republican president of a felony?
We aren't talking Howard Baker here. We're talking Mitch McConnell, John Cornyn, Charles Grassley, the most steadfast defenders of this badly-soiled presidency. Oh, and if Roy Moore is elected, does one think that he wouldn't owe Trump a favor?
John Dowd, once Special Counsel to the Commissioner of Baseball in the matter of Pete Rose, enjoyed a tremendous reputation as a painstaking attorney who sought the truth. In the employ of Trump, he has sought to undermine the Constitution's precise meanings and distort the language and intellectual instruments whereby a president is removed from office.
Trump is not the problem; it's the battery of attorneys who will parse every word and phrase, desperate for a loophole through which the 45th president may avoid facing the ultimate disgrace. Richard Nixon resigned; Bill Clinton was impeached but not removed.
Trump needs to be kicked out of office. Republicans say " Oh, no!"
6
Democracy is forever flawed by allowing a President avenues of obstruction without consequence. Unfortunately, voter are invested in the process of sticking by their elected official and this evidence is overwhelming with Trump. The aftermath of the Trump years will be a silly reckoning trying to bubblegum together new laws in an attempt to repair (maleness) and the Presidency. The aftermath years will be as ugly and peril-prone as today. The Putin style arguments regarding this vs their system is endless. Democracy requires an understanding of fact vs fanciful fabrication. Fox News is winning.
2
The President's constitutional obligation is "to make sure that the laws are faithfully executed." The Constitution does not add "unless the President decides to ignore the laws." If Trump thinks that the President cannot obstruct justice and violate the law, why did he claim that Obama illegally tapped him? If Obama had said that "the President cannot obstruct justice," the Republican lapdog leadership would have been mad dogs barking their heads off.
7
Illegal wiretapping is a crime. Exercise of prosecutorial discretion by the president, and by extension his law enforcement officers and prosecutors, is a right. Commission of a crime, as Bill Clinton did when he committed perjury, is obstruction of justice. The exercise of prosecutorial discretion is not unless the exercise was corrupt. Mueller would have to prove that Trump's suggestion to Comey was corrupt because the prosecution of Comey was linked to a crime such as conspiracy with Russia to throw the election. Mueller may, in time, offer proof of such a conspiracy but none of the leaks from his team to date suggest that Mueller has such evidence.
Nixon: It's not illegal when the President does it.
Trump: I AM the Law.
Thanks, GOP.
4
One of the best editorials, thank you.
5
It’s hard for me to believe the American people will tolerate a President who believes he’s above the law, a claim usually made by tyrants and dictators. Where exactly does a mindset like that lead? Could Trump simply ignore a conviction for impeachable offenses?
5
He did obstruct justice.
Will he get away with it ?
Yes he will.
Sorry. Get over it.
1
As a psychotherapist who has treated many mentally ill clients and as the sibling of a mentally ill brother, I have learned all too well that rational, reasonable arguments can never persuade those who remain stubbornly irrational and unreasonable. Yes, of course, the President can obstruct justice. But try convincing Trump's delusional and paranoid base of supporters of that fact. Try convincing them of facts, in general! Try convincing the partisan plutocrats of the GOP, who turn a blinded-by-greed eye to their standard-bearer's utter indecency. We now occupy a bizarro land where we are daily told that what we see and hear and know to be true is something else entirely. This is insane.
6
If Trump believed any of his own hype about his legal security, it raises an obvious question about why he berated Jeff Sessions for recusing himself...
5
I remember a Mel Brooks film which portrayed the King of France. As the king continues to practice his excesses, he looks at the camera and proclaims "It is good to be the king".
I believe, and also fear, that is the mentality we are seeing in Trump and his ship of fools in the west wing.
Trump, to my knowledge, has never admitted wrongdoing even when confronted with overwhelming evidence (shady deals in the casino business and the sham "university" are two that come to mind).
Trump and his courtiers may possibly believe he can do no wrong, so, it is good to be the king, or president, in his and their twisted versions of obeying the law.
3
What a ridiculous editorial.
First, Clinton never should have been impeached. That was a political circus from beginning to end, and when push came to shove, the call wasn't close in the Senate, precisely because there was way more sizzle than steak.
Nixon surely would have been both impeached and removed from office because the evidence against him--that he knew of and had actively participated in a cover-up of serious criminal offenses--was overwhelming. For the NYT to even mention the Vietnam stuff here, stuff that never figured in his demise, simply underscores how thin the reeds are to which the newspaper clings. It's a kitchen-sink argument that doesn't hold water no matter how many things are thrown out.
Let Mueller do his job and then we'll see. You don't impeach a president on nibbling-around-the-edges stuff like ill-advised tweets. The inconvenient truth remains: Trump never should have been elected because he is, well, Trump. He is president not because of anything the Russians did, but because the Democrats nominated a deeply flawed candidate who ran an awful campaign. That's inescapable, no matter how much we all wish that Trump simply would go away.
5
False assertion that "people lie when they have done something wrong". Clearly President Trump lies all the time whether something is wrong or right. His "condition" is not evidence of a bad act, it is evidence of his "sad" behavior. I am not pro -Trump, I am anti- get distracted. This PTBarnum Presidency is all about distraction and entertainment. Yes there is a problem here, but don't get diverted by a simple slogan like "children lie when the are wrong" - it is not direct evidence.
To claim the president cannot obstruct justice, i.e., that he is above the law, would turn our democracy into a dictatorship. Claiming otherwise is propaganda worthy of the Soviet Union or the Chinese. Read the Constitution and the Federalists Papers. A democracy cannot exist with an uninformed citizenry.
4
Any child could tell you the answer: People lie when they know they’ve done something wrong.
Normally I would agree, but in Trump's case the lying is pathological. He lies whether he needs to or not. It could be a sick way out as a defense. "Your honor, have you ever known him not to lie?" "I see your point".
1
Donald Trump will be impeached, and our long national nightmare will end. But it will take at least another year, because much of the Republican base is still in denial about Trump's criminality and the Republican leadership are amoral cowards who care only about re-election.
6
Propounding a different point of view is not, per se, obstruction of justice.
1
It's startling how inaccurate and intentionally misleading this editorial is.
It's perfectly clear that the allegations of "obstruction of justice" pertain to lying about conduct that was PERFECTLY LEGAL. There is NO evidence that Flynn committed ANY substantive wrongdoing, ONLY that he lied about perfectly legal conduct.
And the question about why he would lie is disingenuous and partisan. He would lie because he believed that Trump's enemies, including the New York Times, were engaged in a political witch hunt to invent charges about Russia that had no substance in order to undermine Trump's presidency and block his agenda. He lied in a wrong-headed attempt to block that witch hunt.
The New York Times editorial board's feverish desperation to "get Trump" by any means possible is palpable. We've already seen journalists from CNN and ABC ruin their careers following this fever, and it seems the New York Times will be next.
Through all this, Trump has stayed the course. He has just won massive victories before the SCOTUS and in Congress, and his enemies are tearing their hair out in frustration. Their desperation will be their undoing.
1
This is quite funny. Can you explain why everyone on Trump's team lied and continues to lie?
The behavior of Donald Trump and his senior administrative team simply shows that actions matter far more than words. The extreme arrogance of these white males confirms that they are used to doing whatever they want in the business world. In that world, when they do something wrong, they buy their way out. But fortunately, there still are limits to how much influence money buys in our government. Trump and his cohorts came into office ignorant of how government works, thinking they could do whatever they please and say whatever they want. With Flynn pleading guilty of lying to the FBI, it’s clear these men think they are above the law, and it’s also clear who should be locked up. Sadly, punishing wrong doers never repairs the damage they have done. But maybe we voters have learned some lessons.
4
If the President obstructs justice and Congress refuses to hear it, does it make a sound?
4
Everyone can obstruct justice and get away with it if powerful enough. This applies both to domestic and foreign policy: Western leaders can embark on wars of choice, literally with impunity, while tinpot African dictators and Serbian 'losers' are paraded before the Hague. In the U.S., money buys lawyers, access, the best tax accountants and other privileges denied to the hard working poor.
And the sad truth is that Trump has begun 'winning' again, not for the U.S., not for the environment, not for justice and equality, not for curbing Islamic Terrorism .... but definitely for himself and for his zealous tribe of white supremacists who have swallowed his propaganda hook, line and sinker. Poetic Justice will occur when they realize they had been duped all along.
Who tweeted what is a sideshow to the nightmare that will continue as long as the GOP dominates both Houses. It's going to be a very long 2018.
2
"No man is above the law" is the established fact all Senators, Congressmen and career civil servants must consider when examining Trump's actions and obstruction of justice. Only crazy John Dowd is claiming Trump can't obstruct justice because he is the president and the president can't obstruct justice. Of course he's the president's lawyer and as with all Trump supporters will attempt to convince the nation that black is white and up is down in their efforts to support Donald Trump. The president does have the right to his own opinion but is empowered to "administer" justice, not impede it.
Chuck Grassley has stated that people don't invest in the markets because they spend their money on "women, booze or the movies." The president's lawyer claiming Trump is above the law, Grassley's ridiculous remark about investment and even Judge Moore's denial of numerous sexual assault charges that have been confirmed by other credible people at the time of the events are being minimized and normalized by an implicit congress and will end democracy as we know it. We will be in an authoritative state without those in power ever being put in the position of being held accountable. This is exactly what they wanted and the majority of the people are no longer represented. We are moving toward tyranny at a dizzying pace and the country is being raped by these people who took an oath to protect the constitution from enemies from inside and out. Democracy is about to die in the US
1
No need to add to the many insightful comments except to note once again that the GOP has sunk to such a low level that many of us are aghast at this new stink of the swamp. Children playing King of the Hill and na, na boo, boo is what we, sadly, see.
4
It seems obvious that Trump will attempt to fire Mueller. Will the Republicans stand up for the Unites States of America, or roll overnight for a carnival-barker-tyrant? Looks like the latter.
1
The question answers itself: The administration lies because they have committed criminal acts. The time has come for decisive action. Congress needs to impeach this "president" for obstruction of justice and violations of the emoluments clauses. He very likely also committed conspiracy and treason through his interactions with the Russian state, but let Mueller's indictments handle those crimes. For now, he simply must be removed from office immediately.
3
So much for American Exceptionalism... apparently we are just as susceptible to corruption as any other unexceptional nation.
Russia - 1
USA - O
Personally I can't wait to see what transpires during the upcoming midterm election.
2
Democrats and the news media will have very long memories with the respect to the wrong doings of the administration and their facilitators at the RNC and in Congress.
Recall the election of 1974 when the GOP was thrown out post Watergate.
History repeats.
How much 'evidence' do we need to reach the obvious conclusion - Nixon was guilty of crimes against the Constitution/Country - however, he was not, repeat not, a 'loose cannon', not a 'pathological liar'. He was not, daily systematically brain washing Americans as Trump is doing. Granted Tweet had not yet been hatched, but the media was available and ready if he had chosen to do so. Nixon did not alienate allies, did not attempt to rearrange the government to suit his personal needs. Trump is an extreme danger to the country and the world. 'Nuf said?'
1
Clinton was of course impeached for, among other things, obstruction of justice, but the Democrats in the Senate refused to convict him. I don’t recall exactly, but I expect the New York Times applauded that result.
Clinton was impeached for having consensual sex with an adult staffer and lying about it. Nothing illegal about either. Immoral and an abuse of his position as President but no illegal. OTOH Flynn lied about having clandestine contacts with Russia in an attempt to have Russia assist in Trumps election. It speaks volumes about the immorality if the Conservative Right that you can't see the differnce.
Perhaps this is the "I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue" Defense.
1
You know Mueller has him dead to right when his barking dogs assert his conduct couldn't possibly constitute a crime despite the fact that the same charge was brought in the articles of impeachment drawn against Nixon and Clinton.
I can only hope that the 2018 midterm elections will bring in a tsunami of Democrats who will happily test this administration's latest attempt at obfuscation.
2
It is also highly likely that Reagan, Bush Sr, and Kissinger - as private citizens at the time - conspired against US foreign policy by ensuring the delay of the release of the American hostages in Iran until Reagan was inaugurated, in exchange for American military hardward channeled through Israel. See "October Surprise" by Gary Sick, among other testimony.
1
Yes, people lie when they know the have done something wrong. And they cover up and obstruct investigations. While a true believer in justice and the well being of democratic society would welcome and abet any and all investigations in wrong doing, this administration has done just the opposite. They do it because they know they have done something wrong. ...sad...very sad.
2
How much longer does our country have to be held hostage to this "so-called" president and his administration of destruction? They have now reached a new low in attempting to destroy the rule of law, by inferring the president is above the law. They are attempting to turn our country into Russia ruled by the rich and powerful, who continue to rob the populace for their own enrichment, where the people have no recourse. Putin got his puppet Trump to do his bidding and we have paid grandly for their treasonous collusion with the likes of this KGB thug. Our standing and reputation in the world has fallen, our planet is in peril, our allies forsaken and our enemies emboldened, while at home our people left to fend for themselves after natural disasters, health insurance stolen from them, and taxes increased while regulations for everything decreased to assist the robber barons in taking all they can get for as long as they can get it. Yes, the President can obstruct justice and has deconstructed our democracy too. Please noble leaders of our blessed nation, do what you can to "let righteousness exalt our nation" once again, so that justice is served and evil doesn't run rampant. The day of reckoning will come for these traitors to truth and justice.
2
Does anyone believe a lawyer composed a tweet dictated by Mr. Trump that posted at 9:14 a.m. on a Saturday -- when at 8:55 a.m., Trump addressed the media outside the white house, then boarded a plane that took off at 9:00 a.m. for his day trip to New York?
Clearly, it's yet another Trump blunder:
The tweet sounded like an admission stated in a deliberate manner, then spun afterward because it's literally "I admit I've obstructed justice." "I did it."
Which is why ethics experts say the president's tweeting himself into inevitable conviction having deliberately confessed his schemes.
Few of us knew back in February Flynn lied to the FBI. That wasn't even an issue then. What was said was Flynn lied to the vice president so he had to go.
1
Every word out Trump’s mouth is a lie and his statement about firing Flynn is likely 2 lies. I doubt Flynn lied to Pence. Pence is just a better liar (he thinks) had most people snowed. And I would imagine the 2nd phrase is also a lie. He never fired Flynn for any other reason than to save his own tail. My opinion is Trump thinks if he denies talking to Comey and revises history, he’ll be safe. He just digs himself into a deeper hole every time he talks. You know, tangled webs, etc
1
A humble question - when you headline, "Yes, the President Can Obstruct Justice" - do you mean, yes, the President has every right to obstruct justice, or do you mean, yes, the President does not get to interfere with legal proceedings, so when he does it is considered an improper/illegal obstruction of justice?
Does Mr. Trump have a properly functioning pre-frontal cortex?
Neurology consultation, MRI scan, spinal tap.
25th Amendment case?
Why lie if you have done nothing wrong? Many reasons. You may not want someone to know the truth, for example. Many people who have done nothing wrong lie for that reason. In this particular case, Michael Flynn may have thought that FBI does not need to know the details of his conversation with the Russian ambassador. And since he did not know that his phone conversations were recorded he may have figured that there was little risk in concealing that information from FBI. The reason he wanted to conceal those details are quite obvious too - the "Russian collusion" witch hunt was already in full swing and he did not want to throw extra fuel into that fire when any contact with any Russian was presented by the press as a form of treason. There is nothing wrong with that - privacy is something everyone needs, values and tries to protect. A much better question would be who and why recorded Flynn's conversations? An even better one is why did FBI question Flynn on contents of his conversation with Kislyak when they already had a full transcript of it and knew that there was nothing illegal in it? The only conceivable reason for that questioning is someone's desire to trap Flynn into lying in order to charge him with a crime. Who made that decision and why? Is it not a clear sign of conspiracy against the President within FBI? Why does nobody investigate that conspiracy?
1
But this is very good that Trump's lawyer believes that "a president cannot obstruct justice." It shows that lawyer Dowd has an "alternative-law" understanding of the law.
Sure wouldn't want to be his client.
1
What he means is you can’t take his tweets and stretch them into something they aren’t.
The liberal media spends far too much time dissecting Trump’s tweets, then processing them into headlines, conspiracy theories, and opinions. Worthy of a chuckle at best, scorn at worst. Real reporting only, please. Tweets, anyone can follow. Don’t need the NYT for that.
1
Trump's tweets are political statements by the President of the United States not some 6th grader. They are the same as official press releases. Whatever the President says in any media from the spoken word to tweets is political news. It is ad, no frightening that people like you who attack the media for reporting what the president of the United States says. I'm sure it it were a Democrat as President, you would be howling at the top of your voice.
It's mind-boggling that Dowd would take credit for Trump's tweet about why he fired Comey.
If he actually did draft the tweet (and that takes a truckload of salt or sugar to swallow), then he's just as incompetent as the president. He should be the next to hear, "you're fired".
What's also mind-boggling is that so many are willing to overlook this extreme incompetence. It's truly a comedy of errors.
1
"I am not a crook!" -- Nixon
"I didn't collude or obstruct!" -- Trump
The difference? No one in Congress has the moral fortitude to hold Trump responsible.
#IMPEACH!
1
Why lie, why not lie, isn't his personality build on it? And just that's on stake.
If he fails, if a impeachement is to come, than al he has çreated will collapse, his dynastie, his family, his name. The names Trump and Kuschner won't be worth a penny besides the unavoidable memoires.
If Trump falls, many will, perhaps to many.
Impeachment and/or article 25 are just NOT going to happen.
The Republicans are cowards. During the primary it was dump trump. Even during the election some Republicans stated they could never vote for trump.
Same thing with Moore. Moore had done this terrible thing with underage girls. Must get rid of him. If he gets elected the republicans will not seat him. Now the republicans are supporting him.
Like trump once said he could shoot a man (or woman) in Time's Square in broad day light and nothing would happen to him.
Even the few senators who were opposed to the tax bill caved under pressure.
And nothing will change in 2018 or 2020.
We might as well all get used to it. Sadly.
Everyone who tries to serve Trump will rue the day they signed up for a job in this administration, for everyone Trump touches turns into not gold but rather garbage. If Trump faces impeachment then surely Dowd faces disbarment. While disbarment is not applicable for Huckabee Sanders, good old-fashioned tar and feathering and riding out of town on a rail seems appropriate.
No one, faced with a professional interrogator, will not "lie" at some point. Such a charge should be largely meaningless to any thinking person. Read up on what it is like to be interrogated by the feds at Popehat
https://www.popehat.com/2017/12/04/everybody-lies-fbi-edition/#comment-1...
The Special Prosecutor must justify his expenditures and you are seeing the result. The question we should ask is "is that all you've got"?
1
Special prosecutors are not obligated "to justify their expenditures" in any formal way. They do often report on their findings, at the end of an investigation, including in some cases explaining a finding that there was no criminal activity or charges justified.
It is premature to ask "Is that all you've got" when Muller is clearly in the middle of an investigation and several defendants have been indicted but minimal pretrial motions have taken place. However, a guilty plea in which a former National Security Adviser has admitted to concealing secret negotiations with a foreign government, is a pretty significant result. At a minimum, this will protect the country from his being appointed to a high government post again.
Hoping the government shuts down until the mid-terms.
As President Obama pointed out, presidents can exercise “prosecutorial discretion.” In August 2013, Obama directed Attorney General Eric Holder to instruct assistant U.S. attorneys no to prosecute low-level drug offenders. Obama also ordered ICE to stop arresting unauthorized immigrants whose only crime was violating U.S. immigration laws. As the person responsible for enforcing the nation’s laws, President Trump also can exercise prosecutorial discretion. Had he wanted, he could have directed the Justice Department not to prosecute Michael Flynn. Congress is not going to impeach Trump merely because he told James Comey he hoped the FBI wouldn’t recommend Flynn be indicted.
1
To the NYT question: "Why lie if you've done nothing wrong?"
When it comes to Trump, the domain of right and wrong is beside the point.
along with the domain of true and false, real and fake.
Trump is a feel-good junkie. His every move, every breath, every tweet, has one aim: the fix that maintains his ego.
Why are we still talking about him and what he says and tweets as if his words had referents? They don't.
And what's the stuff that keeps him going? Greed.
Period.
One minute he's moaning, the next shooting up, and the next going aaaahhhhh.
Trump's "No collusion, no collusion: 'Methinks he doth protest too much.'
1
Trump came to the White House with a very peculiar set of notions of presidential powers and has subsequently attempted to surround himself with a group of enablers of that personal vision. These are not supporters but scoundrels who would usurp and expropriate our government to their own dastardly good. The poor saps who voted for Trump thought he had included them in this takeover. There will be a day of reckoning. One can understand why Flynn wants to serve a minimal time in prison for his transgressions and I can accept that if what he has to say will put Kushner in prison along side him. Like father like son, Kushner's father can give him some pointers on how to survive a prison term. Oh wait! I almost forgot, Trump will pardon them all.
Considering that the president has just endorsed a known child molester, and the RNC followed close on his heels, I don't see impeachment on the horizon.
It's tough to be assaulted every day by the ever increasing destructive news that come off of the untiring twitter fingers of the president.
But hope also comes along. The news that Mueller has subpoenaed Deutsche Bank for the financial records of the trumps is very heartening.
I guess It was always about "follow the money".
While I agree that Obstruction of Justice was literally the first charge of impeachment against both Nixon and Clinton, the Editorial Board fails to take into account time and recent history.
This isn't the 20th century anymore and America has proven in the 21st century that the President of the United States can lie the country into an aggressive war, the worst war crime imaginable, brag about other war crimes like torture on TV, and not be held accountable. At all.
If this isn't a 'legal' precedent for the President to do whatever he wants, I don't know what is.
If a President can invade countries, kidnap people via extraordinary renditions to black sites for some good ole John Yoo-approved torture, he surely should be allowed to do some measly obstruction of justice, and some genitalia-grabbing while at it, too.
If a President can drone bomb multiple countries with a 9:1 ratio of innocent civilians to alleged terrorists, it would seem a little lying here and there is par for the course.
If a President refuses to prosecute war crimes and war criminals of the previous administration, itself a war crime, “impeding the administration of justice” seems part of the job description.
"For some historical perspective" the Nuremberg Tribunal "once again proves useful."
"Meanwhile" the political elites and the media "are working to convince the American public that it’s all no big deal. This is an embarrassing and unpersuasive argument, but it’s not surprising"
The sytem is broken
2
Yes, the President Can Obstruct Justice. Obama did it for eight years.
As to those "tireless spinners and sophists" in cahoots with the White House roaring mouse, there was another guy in history whose inner circle never saw the flames they were doomed to go down in.
Some of their jobs: Minister of Economics, Foreign Minister, Minister of Armaments and War Production, Chief of Defense, Private Secretary, Minister of the Economical Four-Year Plan, Minister of the Interior.
Are Trump's loyal gangbangers thinking clearly about what their future holds?
Nixon's crew broke into the Democratic headquarters in Washington. Bill Clinton was impeached over covering up a consensual sex act. Trump is being investigated for seditious acts that undermine the most sacred aspects of our national trust. If, as his lawyer says, he can not obstruct justice because of the position he holds, then there is no justice left to defend. Fold up the tents and start over on another continent because the American experiment has, not only failed, it has ended. I don't wish to be apocalyptic but with the Presidency in the hands of a madman, the Congress in the hands of cowards and the Judiciary in the hands of partisan theocrats, can that forth horseman be far behind.
1
I cannot wait until THIS long national nightmare is over.
2
The most laughable assertion to date was that by Kellyanne Conway, suggesting that Trump always consults counsel before he tweets. Although "pled" is an acceptable past tense of "plead" in American English, lawyers use the more correct "pleaded." And everyone knows by now that Trump is his own worst enemy when it comes to his early morning tweetstorms. I feel somewhat sorry for Dowd, who is now in Mueller's crosshairs as a witness and faces almost certain disbarment for lying about that tweet -- but his is not the only reputation ruined by proximity to a congenital liar in the Oval Office.
3
"..., then why all the lying?"
Donald Trump, President of the US, is a well documented liar. He lies about five times a day. He lies about items consequential and inane. He lies in obvious lies, for example claiming he won't benefit from the tax cut being rammed through Congress. He lies about his lies. Remember that originally there was no contact with the Russians, then there was one contact with the Russians, then minor contact, then insignificant contact, the guilty pleas.
Again, why all the lying? I would like to see an explanation of his pathology. Has he just been lying about his "deals" so long he's separated from reality? He's particularly adept at sensing the emotional needs of his followers for a person untethered from reality.
Trump's spinners and sophists have won over his diehard supporters--- no matter what, as we see.
Can the USA survive 3 more years of this deceitful, unstable and treacherous president without impeaching him? If he can survive in office, what precedent will this set for future lying, autocratic exploiters?
Any future autocrats will be financed and marketed to voters by the corporate super rich---whose mega donations our own Supreme Court legalized as 1st amendment protected free speech. They will flood the media with campaign ads to manipulate voters. Do Americans know that other democracies ban or sharply regulate privately paid campaign ads, which here are our biggest election expense, needing billionaire sponsors? And our media profits off them.
We the People simply can't compete financially in our elections to protect ourselves. We can’t influence the lawmakers we stand in line to elect from the nominees offered to us. Does our democracy have the weapons to fight our radicals masquerading as apostles of moral superiority?
I recall Flynn's "firing" differently.
Because Flynn wasn't "fired."
Trump allowed both Flynn and Manafort to resign, presumably because he's so big of a coward he can't actually do the personal act of his catchphrase, "you're fired," unless it's reality TV.
But the larger points are that:
1. even though Manafort was found to be dirty, Trump let him resign, continued to speak well of him, and even temporarily replaced him with Manafort's deputy, Rick Gates, who has also since been arrested.
2. even though Flynn was bad news -- and Trump was even admonished of this by President Obama -- Trump let him resign, continues STILL to speak well of him, and his only complaints of the situation are that somebody leaked to the press that Flynn was dirty and that Flynn got a raw deal.
Vice President Pence is also at the heart of this chain of lies. How could Pence not know that Flynn had lied to the FBI? Sally Yates told WH Counsel in detail that Flynn was compromised, and Pence was head of the transition team overseeing the whole deplorable crowd, including Kushner, Sessions, et. al. He was informed, and yet, went before the American people over and over and lied, lied, lied. This is a corrupt and dark-minded administration where everyone lies. Isn't it so Sarah Huckabee Sanders?
1
The strongest issue with the Nixon hearings was his Obama trick of using the I.R.S. to persecute his political enemies. Mr. Obama had to have learned a lot from Nixon, because he truly weaponized the I.R.S., the State Department, the Department of Justice, and the EPA to attack American employers and the political Right.
If any of this tripe sticks to President Trump, then Mr. Obama can be pulled off some billionaire's boat and tried for running civil fines paid by companies into Democratic Party-aligned progressive organizations.
LOCK HIM UP!
(they’re right, it feels great to say that!)
2
We all understand what murder is. Obstruction of justice not so much.
NY Times columnists seem to think that issues like this are clear. Nixon obstructed justice. He was impeached. Trump looks similar.
But NY Times pundits live in a bubble. They don't talk with Trump supporters. They have little understanding of how Trump voters think.
They might trip Trump up on a badly worded law, the Logan Act, which lawyers themselves can't seem to understand, or trick him into a lie, and then impeach him.
But what is the likely outcome. Impeachment in the House is perhaps doable, but you need a 2/3 vote in the Senate to convict. If you don't succeed, you have a hobbled president, but also have set a precedent.
The next time a Democrat becomes president, there will be a movement from the right to impeach via trickery and subterfuge, just like Trump has been impeached.
The result is the death of democracy as we know it.
Perhaps democracy is already dead.
The NY Times and its sanctimonious pundits must take some of the blame for this destruction.
It took us hundreds of years to replace the divine right of kings with a legal system which had some semblance of fairness.
Yet feminists have decided that the end justifies the means. So we destroyed Bill Cosby in the media. There was no due process. Now there is a rush to judge other men who may have accidentally touched women.
It is the NY Times which has become the purveyor of hate speech. It is responsible for Trump.
Why Lie? There is an alternative explanation. Trump and the GOP have discovered that a credulous public will accept any kind of lie, no matter how outrageous and obvious, as long as its amplified by a chorus of propaganda and well-funded and focused media that repeat the lies often enough. Sales 101.
Big and small, it's as easy as breathing for this crew. Moreover, it wins elections as long as it is brazen enough to beg being called insane. For this band of well heeled ruffians, if they aren't lying they are screaming about others with who actually respect the truth eg. Mitch McConnell's casual change of heart on the Gross Old Pervert. Stay tuned for the moment Truthless mutates to Ruthless.
l
Doesn't the President's lawyer Mr. Dowd realize the President is not the chief law enforcement officer of the nation (an assertion he made in his weak attempt to exclude Trump from the law ). Confusing the Commander-in-chief with the Attorney General is beyond stupidity for a man who previously worked at the U.S. Department of Justice. (Perhaps he needs to read the Judiciary Act of 1789 penned by George Washington). But all of the free-flowing attempts to clean up "this" mess stems from this President's insatiable need to prove he knows more than anyone else and knows FIRST- before anyone else: Mr Mueller's job is getting easier by the day.
We are a nation of laws. A president asserting he is above the law is the last refuge of a scoundrel. As Richard Nixon proved.
1
Trump foolishly declared to the Russians his intent for firing Comey, and intent is the hook upon which hangs any legal case for obstruction of justice. At this point, a conscientious congress (perhaps in 2019?) already has sufficient evidence to impeach Trump and would do so expeditiously.
"There was nothing to hide!” Coming from Trump this statement is a tawdry burlesque as he continues to keep his tax returns (with likely Russian money laundering) more fiercely guarded than Fort Knox.
1
What a silly debate, especially when we could just ask the president and surely an answer such as: "I am one of the greatest obstructors of justice in history. Some say the greatest" would be inevitable.
1
Trump's attorney seems to have taken to heart what Oliver Wendell Holmes said about folks in his profession: "Lawyers spend a great deal of their time shoveling smoke." Only in this case, there is a dumpster fire in the oval office.
Trump obstructed justice many times and he is a dishonest reactionary who is giving other plutocrats gifts they don't need or deserve. He is also a danger to the planet and the environment in the US.
Yet the Dec 22 conversation between Flynn and the Russian ambassador seems to indicate that Israel was interfering with US policy. Flynn called Kislyak, prompted by Kushner, Netanyahu's friend. Of course Netanyahu is not good for Israel or US Jews and is a known meddler in US politics (he addressed Congress uninvited by Obama). Israel wanted to stop a UN resolution and was trying to use the incoming Trump administration to that effect. There should therefore be an Israel-gate too. Netanyahu is the Israeli Trump and he too is embroiled in various court cases about dishonesty.
Now it is quite likely that Trump could be impeached even if collusion with Russia is not proved or even did not happen for obstruction of justice is enough. Then Pence would take over and Trumpism would simply continue without the ignoramus playing at being president. Some victory!
Nixon famously negotiated with a foreign power (South Vietnam) behind Johnson's back to kill Humphrey and got away with it. Reagan also famously negotiated with another foreign power (Iran) so that American hostages would not be released before the election and was never denounced for it during his two terms.
The real issue here is not really the Logan Act. It would be better to get rid of Trumpism at the next elections.
What if Mr. Flynn did not lie to Herr Pence ? The conspiracy widens. In what order would they be impeached?
I have to admit I'm rather enjoying watching trump squirm and flail and the investigation gets closer and closer. What a tangled web we weave.......
Trump’s infamous tweet included the term “pled”, which doesn’t sound like something written by a lawyer.
18 U.S. Code § 1001 - Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, WHOEVER, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
"WHOEVER" includes the POTUS.
If Donny the Dunce lies to another Federal official, he can be accused of violating 18 USC 1001. If that act was done to obstruct an investigation, the obstruction of justice may be on the table.
Dowd's argument is complete nonsense. When Nixon said that if the POTUS does it, "it is not illegal," he was wrong too.
I think they should throw the book at Donny.
1
John Dowd apparently does not know much about constitutional democracy and the rule of law.
He doesn't realize that the government of America is governed by these principles.
His absurd statements would be appropriate only for an absolute monarchy governing under the divine right of kings.
1
Day after day the Trump presidency tests the moral fibre of this country. Sadly, by and large the GOP and a third of our fellow Americans have been found wanting. What can you say when the president and GOP leadership endorse an accused child molester? Our democratic institutions are failing from internal rot more than external interference and sadly, no crime short of murder will cause the GOP to impeach Trump.
I hope that Dowd will now be questioned by Mueller's team. It will be interesting to see if he repeats the lie that he drafted the tweet (while facing a felony conviction and loss of his licence to practice law). I suspect that, like little Jeff Sessions, he will suddenly develop amnesia.
Forget Richard Nixon. Trump is drawing upon far more ancient legal and parochial tradition to justify his rights and immunities, traditions that church and states agreed upon to their mutual benefit...
(Wikipedia) "The divine right of kings, divine right, or God's mandate is a political and religious doctrine of royal and political legitimacy. It asserts that a monarch is subject to no earthly authority, deriving the right to rule directly from the will of God. The king is thus not subject to the will of his people, the aristocracy, or any other estate of the realm. It implies that only God can judge an unjust king and that any attempt to depose, dethrone or restrict his powers runs contrary to the will of God and may constitute a sacrilegious act. It is often expressed in the phrase "by the Grace of God", attached to the titles of a reigning monarch."
The only leap of faith required here is that Trump is or considers himself royalty and hence deserving of the spoils. But this is well established precedent among America's wealthiest. QED.
3
The president is the chief tax collector, chief law enforcement officer and commander in chief of the military. The president also holds the power to pardon.
As is the case with every person, the president can obstruct justice by committing perjury as a witness or defendant, but he has the right, as do all federal prosecuting attorneys, to exercise prosecutorial discretion. Other law enforcement officers, such as FBI agents, have discretionary power as to who to pursue for potential criminal violation. The president, as chief law enforcement officer, has that power as well.
Mueller exercised prosecutorial discretion in choosing to allow Flynn to plead to perjury and to not prosecute Flynn on a myriad of other potential charges. Comey exercised discretion as a law enforcement officer not to pursue charges against Hillary Clinton.
Unlike Bill Clinton, Trump did not commit perjury. Trump asked Comey to exercise discretion with respect to Flynn, and was within his authority to do so.
and please, let's not forget that we are only seeing the tip of the iceberg so far. The obstruction and all the lies are covering up whatever the guy really did.
A few obvious points:
Papadopalous is singing..he did not just end up in London with some Russian linked professor who happened to have Kremlin connections. Someone put the two together in the first place. Who?
Manafort..he wasn't some rogue, he was Trumps campaign manager. How did he get that job?
Flynn..How did he and Trump connect in the first place? Why the tight bond?
Russian policy..why did it change?
Kushner, Sessions, Pence...lies and more lies.
Trump's bankrupcies , buildings sold to Russians, small separation from money launderers, Russian pageants, not showing his taxes. What gives?
We are nowhere near the beginning of this. I get why we are talking about obstruction, but there is much more to this story on many levels. Please hold.
4
Trump may be guilty but this Congress is not likely to enforce the law.
4
Two problems with this piece. 1. It conflates the crime of obstruction of justice, which has a statutory definition, with impeachment, which is largely a political process (I don't believe the constitution defines "high crimes and misdemeanors." That congress previously impeached presidents for something it called "obstruction of justice" does not mean that a president can be criminally prosecuted for obstruction of justice as defined in various statutes. There's been a lot of talk in the press by laymen and legal experts alike claiming that what Trump has done is a crime, and there have been rebuttals, notably by Alan Dershowitz. That's what Dowd was referring to. Otherwise you'd have to believe he meant "the president can't be impeached," which no one with a "functioning prefrontal cortex" would believe.
2. The article argues that, because Trump knew Flynn had committed a crime by lying to the FBI, his urging Comey to let Flynn go was beyond his presidential authority as chief law enforcement officer. But law enforcement officers and prosecutors exercise discretion all the time. Failing to prosecute--or instructing a subordinate not to prosecute--someone who has committed a crime is not automatically obstruction. If Trump felt the investigation was politically motivated, or that Flynn's past service warranted giving him a break, asking Comey to back off is ordinary prosecutorial discretion.
Nixon and Clinton were thought to be guilty of things like telling witness to lie or intimidating them. Those would be crimes independently of any special "obstruction" charge based on statute. There is no statute of obstruction that the President can obstruct. He is subject to statutory law, but the statute about obstruction is impossible to apply on its own because the President has been granted plenary powers in certain areas by the Constitution. He is the chief law enforcement officer of the country, because he was elected to be that. Absent violating the law in other respects, he is free to hire and fire people leading his executive agencies, and to direct them as he so wishes.
What all of this means is that the Russian collusion delusion has fallen through as an actionable issue. There is no evidence and thus no rationale for Mueller's investigation. So those whose rabid hatred of Trump had rendered them insensitive to the legal and constitutional (and political) implications of their relentless obsession with annulling an election, have to switch their rationale yet once again.
@Stephen: No evidence of wrongdoing? Guess you have either been watching a lot of Fox News - which, as I understand it, is currently targeting female public school teachers in sex scandals (two of their favorite targets: women and public schools, what bliss for Fox) - or else you are simply refusing to open your eyes and read. The Times began publishing articles about Trump's crimes and misdemeanors in his private life long before he was elected. He is clearly a man with no moral compass, who thinks that he can buy, bribe, or bully his way out of any difficulty, and who believes that laws should apply to everyone except him.
Anyone who read the Manafort articles in the summer of 2016 knew that Trump would inevitably wind up in hot water, politically. He is as corrupt as they come, as his contempt for rule of law is on full display here.
1
You can present your evidence any time, Allison.
Trump's private crimes, real or imagined, have no pertinence to his holding office, now that the election has happened. Apparently, a lot of people think that his crimes are no worse than those of Hillary or Obama.
This editorial makes a crystal-clear case against the President. The rule of law must be paramount in our liberal democracy, whose continued existence is not guaranteed unless we are willing to see past personal allegiances and political sympathies and let justice prevail.
3
The evidence is in: this man's purpose is to dismantle American institutions and safeguards, and open the USA's Going Out of Business firesale.
7
Fact: Russia interferes with the election. Fact: Trump campaign benefits from Russian interference.
Fact: Obama administration finds out about Russian intereference and punishes Russia with sanctions.
Now why would the Trump transition team even discuss removing the sanctions with actual members of the Russian government (i.e.: Ambassador Sergey Kislyak) if they didn't have to? The most likely answer is that they DID have to as part of a tit-for-tat. If that tit-for-tat was payback for Russian election intereference, in coordination with the Trump campaign in order to get Trump elected, then that would be cause for impeachment. There is much at stake here for the Pretender-in-Chief.
The mere suggestion that Trump has the constitutional authority to interfere with or shut down an investigation into his own (potentially criminal, if not treasonous) conduct is patently absurd.
2
yes, we are laying down logical conclusion but GOP congress does not follow any logic. in fact, GOP logic and actions are empowering the president to do more harm to the country's image. In addition, we are loosing all grounds of ethics, moral, dignity, and civility to our children especiailly girls.
The Democratic Party has to turn away from its own quagmire, of trying to
stay in power by identity politics and reach all of us by destroying the myth that Republicans are helping the majority of Americans. Better to be living in Europe.
2
802+ years ago the Magna Carta enshrined that no one is above the law. Many of its principles were incorporated into Amendments to the US Constitution and provided associated guarantees that are part of our laws today. It was forced upon King John because of his abuses of power.
The assertion by Messrs. Dershowitz and Dowd, specifically that a president cannot be legally accountable for a felony crime, is both ludicrous and a clear and present danger to our bedrock principles of democracy.
Conferring such immunity on any president erodes the principle that we are all equally subject to the rule of law; bestowing such a gift on this president would be a declaration that fascism is now the official order of the day.
2
I sometimes have a problem with what represent impeachable offences and what does not. For example, the Congress considered President Clinton’s lies about sexual indiscretions in the White House to have been serious enough to have brought him to the very brink of impeachment.
On the other hand, it is now clear that George W. Bush lied the US into what seems now an endless war in Iraq with tales about uranium from Niger and connections between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaida that they knew to be untrue, yet despite the consequences of these lies, even Nancy Pelosi would not deem them to be worthy of impeachment. I can’t understand such logic.
I assume that Mr. Dowd will soon be asked to appear for questioning by the Mueller investigators, considering the evidential importance of the latest potentially incriminating tweet for his client, Trump, re an obstruction of justice charge. This lawyer certainly has deposited himself in a Pandora's box. He could end up as a witness in any later criminal case against his own client, necessitating withdrawal of his legal representation of Trump. If Dowd is not truthful with F.B.I. investigators, well, he and Flynn will be sharing a similar fate.
As for Mr. Dowd's legally bizarre assertion that Trump is immune from being charged with obstruction, I wonder whether the poor guy has simply been overwhelmed and absolutely exhausted by representing someone who has to rank as one of the worst clients any lawyer could ever have.
2
Impeachment, like grieving, is a process. Mueller will file a report to Congress, Congress will "read" the report and then, as part of the process, either act on it, or archive it. Right now, archiving the findings of the Russian investigation looks like the most realistic option, given how the thieves in this branch of government are happy as can be with the short-fingered vulgarian in the White House.
Two things may play out:
1-Full Trump dictatorship
2-Storming of the White House.
And these two, as history tells us, are not mutually exclusive.
Miniscule compared to what republican reps in congress and senators are guilty of.
Can people PLEASE stop saying "they need Trump to sign their tax bill ... "
This is 100% false.
Pence, Ryan, or whichever REPUBLICAN they will get to replace him will also sign any bill tossed on his or her desk.
Acting like they NEED him to pass legislation is not only 100% wrong, it gives him way more credit than he deserves.
One reason why Republicans stomach him is because they truly bought in to the Grover Norquist "working digits" doctrine.
So either they don't care if he's President, or he has some very powerful dirt on them, but they do not need him to pass bills.
Please stop acting so dim.
I really don’t think impeachment is the answer. Who would become our next President? Right! His Lacky Pense. It would also let the Republican Party off the hook.
My solution? Let the voters show their destain by removing as many Republicans as possible in 2018. Do you think that just might send a message to the remaining Republicans?
Removing Trump won’t correct the political course that our nations voters decided on in November of last year. The Democratic Party also has to share at least some of responsibility for what happened. I think the word is “Apathy”.
We need a new leader, and quite frankly, I don’t care if that leader is a so-called Republican, Democrat or Independent. I just want a real leader. Who was the last real leader of the US? I’d love your comments. I’ll start it off; Lincoln & Bill Clinton.
1
President is not a King. President is not the law. President must not break the laws. President must be the protector of our Constitution and must never violate it. Trump violated the trust of the people, violated the laws and the Constitution. Trump is not the defender of our country. Trump is the preeminent threat to our country. Trump is the clear and imminent danger. Trump must be ousted immediately.
4
The story of Haldeman's treasonous actions is disillusioning - even to one who has lived in the DC area and seen a lot. When integrity and principles are important in our lives, it is more difficult for us to comprehend how seemingly classy (well-dressed ??) people can go so wrong. How sad that this kind of behavior from Trump's gang wouldn't surprise us at all. O tempora! O mores!
For those who thought it would be a nice joke
to elect a flame-thrower president,
it may seem less funny when we have to put
this smoldering wreck of a country back together.
Trump has damaged the oval office,
our standing in the world,
the rule of law,
the rights of women,
ethnic and religious minorities,
the truth,
our democracy.
In short, everything good and decent about our country.
The longer he stays,
the harder it will be to clean up
the disaster he has been.
Don't wait around for someone else
to save us from this nightmare.
Get out in the street,
stand up in the senate,
find your feet in the church,
wherever you may have leverage.
This cannot stand.
5
I think we are wasting our time unless we focus on all gubernatorial elctions as well as all elections in 2018. It does not matter if Trump thiks hhe is above law, the fact is Trump does not respect any law that hinders making money or helps white folks. Also, the Republicans may make noises about Moore and Trump but al they care about is their regressive agenda - they have been at it since Johnson passes the voting rights act, Medicare and Medicaid. Nixon had "southern strategy (...racist anti-black) and Reagan had War on Poor. We can go even further back when Republicans opposed Social Security and they still do. at the same time, let us not forget that the racist southern states helped elect Roosevelt, Kennedy and Johnson until the civil rights law was passed in 1965.
Re constitution, is there a provisionby which we can recall states' electoral college? May be we should have recal campaign in PA, MI and WI and nuilify the election. Impeaching Trump is not a good choice because Pence will be worse. He is more dogmatic and with clean image. and easily get reelected in 2020.
"Chief law enforcement officer...." Thomas Jefferson shared this understated misconception of the office. He went after Aaron Burr himself, declaring him guilty before trial to Congress, and then directing the prosecution from the White House. It took John Marshall to confront that and establish that this is a government of laws, not men.
1
I notice with amusement that these complaints are coming from people who, with their sanctuary cities, are encouraging millions to defy the law.
Just add Trump to the list!
Eleven million breaking the law. Or eleven million and one breaking the law. Who is going to notice the difference?
1
There is no reason to for Trump et al to make this argument unless 1) Trump did obstruct justice and 2) Mueller has the proof.
4
The venue for impeachment is Congress which means that impeachment depends on the GOP.
In America, the party of a sitting president will not move for impeachment, so it seems that Mr. President et al will get away with anything and everything. Despite the Mickey Mouse arguments of Trump's legal team.
The noise around the Trump/Flynn scandal is so loud that we have not had the time to reflect on the subject matter which is explained elsewhere in the NYT referring to Trump and the Logan Act.
Since the objective of the transition team's meeting with Russia was to undermine Obama's policy towards Israel by allowing a vote in the UN, does that means that the Russian affair is a Russian/Israel affair? Did the initiative come from a clueless Trump team or from Israel itself? The implications have no end.
1
Sadly, the GOP led Congress and Senate wouldn't convict Trump even if they wanted to. Trump could submit a videotaped confession while holding a 'smoking gun' tying himself to the Russia Collision case and they still wouldn't impeach Trump. For he is a convenient vehicle for their depraved agenda. They already pushed through a scam of a tax bill and now they chomping at the bit to defund Medicare, Social Security, and Obamacare by 2018. Once they do that then and only then will they throw their sacrificial lamb of a president to Mueller. Then they will have a person they wanted all this time as president, Mike Pence.
My prediction:
Trump will fire Mueller and pardon Flynn and any others under indictment.
The republicans in congress will say "gee whiz, he shouldn't have done that".
Hannity and Limbaugh will call Trump a hero.
The 45% of Americans who think the democrats want to take away their guns, their churches and give their money to people who don't look like them will accept that Trump has done the right thing.
The rest of America will sigh, shrug it's shoulders and go on with life.
Trump will be re-elected.
After all, Bush pardoned Scooter Libby under similar circumstances, and no one even remembers.
It's not illegal to lie to the Vice President, but it is an offense to lie to the FBI. That is the charge Flynn pled guilty to, and if Trump says he knew this criminal offence was committed by Flynn and tried to get Comey to let it go - he was obstructing justice.
Given all the exposed lies by Trump and associates to date about ties to Russians, it's getting pretty difficult for most people to bother sticking in that "alleged" qualifier. You're technically correct, but as you imply the POTUS has made precise wording passe ... a typically careless Trump move. He's no snowflake and I'm sure he will graciously forgive others for copying his preferred approach to communication.
2
When heads of state try to pretend that they embody the law, it is usually a signal that those around him must check his overweening hubris. King John was hauled in front of his nobles and made to understand that he ruled only because they supported him. Since then, the Magna Carta has represented the foundation of Anglo-American law. A ruler may only govern with the consent of the governed.
These days the governed are objecting, loudly and persistently. This president needs to be reminded that he did not win a popular mandate. He is in office only because of the Electoral College, an institution designed solely to prevent non-slave states from legislating for slave states. He should tread more carefully, or he is going to find himself out of office sooner than he expects. Arrogance and lies will only get him so far.
1
I noticed in the article that 1974 was supposedly the first year the House drafted articles of impeachment, but it is my understanding that the first time was against Andrew Johnson in 1868?
It is a giant leap of faith that the firing of Gen. Flynn was an attempt to shut down the F.B.I.’s inquiry into President Trump’s campaign connections with Russian officials. At this point, there is only flimsy evidence of $100,000 of possible Russian Facebook ads, half of which came out after the election. Saying to James Comey, who was then the F.B.I. director, in a private Oval Office meeting, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go,” may not have been totally appropriate but is not equivalent to an order. Obama before the 2012 election told the Russians,”I’ll have more flexibility.” Also not totally appropriate but there were no accusations of “collusion.” This is a tempest in a teapot and one year after the election, it is time to let it go.
2
No U.S. President has ever been impeached, convicted and subsequently removed from office. Not Andrew Johnson, not Richard Nixon, and not Bill Clinton. Johnson was defeated in the next election by Ulysses S. Grant. Nixon resigned. Clinton saw out his second term in office. With the GOP in control (however marginal) in all three levels of government, it is unlikely that Trump will be impeached, convicted and removed from office before the end of his first term, but if he were, he would be the first. In the meantime, he has two years to do as much damage to this country as he can, and/or stage a coup, and/or make this country a once-proud satellite of Putin's Russia.
1
Madison wrote: “There can be no liberty ... if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and executive powers” (Federalist 47).
Trump’s actions threaten our liberty.
1
I truly believed the worst was over when Nixon resigned.
1
I thought Nixon was the worst President ever, and then Reagan got elected. I thought Reagan was the worst President ever, and then mini-Bush got elected. I thought mini-Bush was the worst President ever and then Trump got elected.
1
Donald Trump thinks he is smarter than the legal system
Donald Trump thinks he can beat the legal system Donald Trump thinks he can convince the public he is telling the truth
And everyone else is not
Despite any facts
Since when did we become a monarchy? Last time I checked- no citizen of the United States, including the president, is above the law. If the man, who would like to be king, obstructed justice - which it increasingly looks like he did - he must be held accountable. Sorry, Mr. Dowd, even the highest ranking law enforcement official in the country is not above the law of the land per the Constitution!
1
Trump transition advisor K. T. McFarland in an email - "Russia, which has thrown the U.S. election to him."
Yes, the President can obstruct justice. And then cover it up and lie about it.
2
Is the President a citizen? Of course. And thus, the same laws apply to the President as they do to the rest of us.
3
1. The Constitution does not appoint the President as "chief law enforcement officer." It gives him powers as executives, but these are not absolute. Congress may decide which executives he can appoint only with their consent.
2. The Constitution does state e the President has immunity from prosecution, much less than superiority to any other law. By contrast, the Constitution gives members of Congress protection (except in cases of treason) from arrest in going to and from Congress and immunizes members of Congress from statements made during debates.
3. Congres, not the President has the right to establish rules and regulations, as well as laws, to govern. The Constitution's bars against certain types criminal law enforcement is found Article II, indicating an expectation that Congress is the ultimate source of criminal law
4. Almost immediately after the Constitution was passed, it was amended with the Bill of Rights, most of which is aimed at preventing abusive use at criminal power. The Bill of Rights gives the final power to determine charges to juries (i.e., individual citizens). The Bill of Rights does not distinguish between the President and Congress in law enforcement.
In short, the Constitution does not give the President by express language or division of powers any constitutional immunity or extraordinary rights as a law enforcement officer.
"The Constitution does state e the President has immunity from prosecution"
Where? I just reread article 3 and did not see this.
"... that it’s all no big deal" Of course it's a big deal! The Chief Executive of the United States is accused, and I believe, soon to be convicted of obstruction of justice, impeachable offenses relating to the Logan Act and other offenses not yet revealed by the Mueller investigations...not to mention those being carried out on the state level by New York and New Jersey into Trump's business dealings. This is a train wreck of an administration and to see it in any other manner is simply ludicrous. Add to this the craven actions...or in-actions on the part of what passes for Congress these days and you have a national scandal of stupendous proportions. The continued deconstruction of the government, the deliberate lies coming from White House officials and department chiefs...what period in our history comes close to the abrogation of moral, ethical and political values than this?
The extent of legal malpractice in the US boggles the mind. Dyslexia stalks the profession.
Here we have Nixon's Plumbers Revisited; "Whatever the President orders is legal."
1
This President is establishing a pattern of Corruption including but not solely Obstruction of Justice. People feel it but it can be clearly articulated! Horray for free speech.
So, to recap: he cannot break the law but if he does, he can pardon himself. I want to live in his completely fictional, make-it-up-as-I-go, no-consequences life where facts are "based on his feelings." Oh, wait: we are and it's a nightmare.
Two questions have perplexed those of us obsessed with Russiagate. Why would Flynn lie if his efforts were legitimate? Why did Trump try so hard to get Flynn of the hook? Recent email revelations shed light on both questions and lay the ground work for even more serious obstruction of justice charges. We now know that Flynn was instructed to make the Russia contacts to deal with two issues: retaliation for the new Obama sanctions, and to veto the UN sanction of Israeli settlements. We also know that the Trump team wanted a back channel for its Russia dealings so US intelligence wold not know about the communications.
Good soldier Flynn may have been following orders to keep the nature of the calls secret. Following that directive got Flynn in hot water with he FBI. Trump may have felt,obligated to bailout a loyal functionary who was in hot water for following orders.
If Flynn was instructed to keep the true nature of the Russia contact concealed, the obstruction of justice case is far more serious and would implicate all those who dispatched Flynn on his mission.
1
Let's answer this question reductio ad absurdum. The president invites congressional leaders to the White House and, let's see, imprisons them there or harms them in some way. They're missing. FBI tries to investigate but is blocked by the country's chief enforcement officer. After all, he can control any federal law enforcement he wants.
We will lose our democracy not by an overnight coup. Not by any one overt act.
We will lose it by the drip drip drip of an erosion of our rights. By the slow incremental assumption of powers by an authoritarian president and a Congress willing to hold her nose and look the other way.
By the normalization of the relentless outrages by a president with what appears to be a stark personality disorder who is addicted to the daily newsfeed starring him.
Trump became the president due to in part a perfect political storm. The Ship of State is now in the eye of that storm. And Alabama is poised to elect a man who has assaulted teenage girls with the full support of the RNC.
Drip, drip, drip.
1
If the president can obstruct justice, he is free to obstruct the law, any law. How nice for a man like Trump. He has no ethics, no morals no sense of justice or fairness. Is that what the Constitution and Democracy are all about?
2
It's sad, but with the state of things, I honestly doubt if anyone in this country actually cares anymore.
Not true. Millions of women and men around the world joined the women's march objecting to the inauguration of Donald Trump on January 21st.
Is it time to start the popcorn maker? I will be delighted to see these guys fall. If only their punishment could be lifelong minimum wage jobs and abject poverty.
1
Where is the investigation on collusion of Trump campaign with Russia during the presidential election going? Please focus on it.
If there was any collusion, Trump’s acts and sayings can be interpreted as obstruction of justice. Otherwise, they are just ways of defending himself and his team, aggressively but legitimately and understandably.
Prove the collusion first, then talk about obstruction next. If you say obstruction first, people suspect that you failed to find anything on collusion and are trying to distract people from that fact and they might believe that you are fake news.
Find it very interesting that the man who tried to justify the legality of torture has an opinion on obstruction of justice. Some would say that you did the same, in spirit, regarding 70 years of international law.
We don’t need perfect people to comment. However, there should be a low bar. Please stop.
Except...indictments for obstruction have already been levied on presidents twice (Nixon committee vote and Clinton House Vote)....and no constitutional challenge was forthcoming...or even argued.
This is just Al baby looking to help dig Trump out of this tweet hole from Saturday.
The power to pardon is not absolute...and the sole exemption to its absoluteness.. is related to impeachment.
"The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment."
If you cant pardon yourself of others in the food chain of an impeachment investigation....obstruction is very much a possibility.
Let's also all remember that in Watergate there were very real crimes and that "obstruction of justice" was part of President Nixon's attempt to cover them up--the break-in and money laundering. It's clear that the pattern of lying by Michael Flynn and every other person involved in denying their numerous contacts with Russian officials and operatives from Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, Jeff Sessions, to Donald Trump Jr. indicates, as with Watergate, that there was something more serious and sinister that is being covered up. We have the smoke and stench of coverup and the clear obstruction by the president from pressuring then FBI Director James Comey to halt the Flynn investigation, and then firing him as well as his pressure on key Congressional allies including the very overt attempt by former campaign official Rep. Devin Nunes to end the House investigation, but the actual crime underlying it all is still unknown. We can only speculate what that was from a quid pro quo for Russia's undermining the Clinton campaign in return for sanctions relief or even the appointment of Michael Flynn and Rex Tillerson, payback for Russian money illegally laundered to Trump enterprises or even the campaign itself, or the infamous "kompromat" contained in the still unconfirmed, but not discredited dossier of Christopher Steele. This is the task of Special Counsel Robert Mueller that will make or break the Trump presidency.
If anyone is above the law, no one is safe under the law.
1
With apologies to Elvis, Let's see the king's tax returns. Let's see if any of his pass-through entities borrowed dirty Russian money via Deutsche Bank.
If not, I owe the king two Big Macs and a chocolate shake. If, however, the king is on the receiving end of Russian money.... My, my, what have we here...
"The evidence of both subterfuge and obstruction continues to grow" only in the minds of those who have already concluded that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians to elected. Your oft-repeated claim that the intelligence agencies have concluded the Russians meddled in the election is irrelevant: who would doubt it? But collusion to sway the election? So far no evidence of that. But thank you for keeping this one on the opinion page, unlike most of the "reporting" of the self-identified "hack," Glenn Thrush.
Potus cannot be indicted nor can he obstruct justice. Read the Constitution. We have co-equal branches of government. Congress only recourse is impeachment. The President can pardon himself so why would that same constitution allow him to be indicted? Hello?
Like a troubled child throwing a tantrum after being scolded, Trump reacts to the disclosure of Flynn's perjury--and his (or his lawyer's: which is the adult equivalent of, "Teacher, my dog ate my homework, . . .") fumbled attempt to tweet some distance between himself and Flynn backfiring in his face--by signing away over a million square acres of protected national park lands in Utah to Big Oil prospectors for fracking, which is much worse and more harmful than laying down some pipeline. This petty little man-child, who, if he feels sleighted because people might see him for his true actions and character--or lack thereof--will throw a tantrum by not merely messing up his room, but by tearing down the entire house. It is quite scary that some people find him "funny," as he is portrayed and talked about on late night TV. He is no joke. He uses "real news" by creating it, and throwing it out to the media much like the way submarines use counter-measures to try and deflect a torpedo that is tracking down on its tail. Living in Seoul, Korea, I dread to think what action he will throw down as a counter-measure in the event he becomes the subject of impeachment proceedings, or is indicted and prosecuted for his lying and collusion. Perhaps it is time to come home, but this America I see today, it looks unfamiliar in so many ways.
Please put the "legal" argument aside because is a purely political appeal to the base so that Congress will refrain from bringing up articles of impeachment. It is extremely dangerous as a precedent-setting move to test the boundaries of our entire system of government. Shame on traitors like Dershowitz, the Trump administration, and if they acquiesce, Congress too. We are at a frightening tipping point of abandoning all we have fought for from our founding.
1
“engaged personally, and through his subordinates and agents, in a course of conduct or scheme designed to delay, impede, cover up and conceal the existence of evidence and testimony.” If we are to judge our presidents by the commonly used criterion of current community standards, we recently survived - not to say enjoyed - 8 years of another president who liked to say there is not a shred of evidence that you can see. We could not see the evidence because his people totally stonewalled and refused to turn over documents to Congress. At least President Trump does not say "I have a pen and a phone and l'etat, c'est moi and I will govern in defiance of Congress."
The President and those in his administration are under the mistaken impression that he has impunity simply because he holds the most powerful office in the land. His misdeed and abuse of that power will bring him down.
1
Friendly reminder: Republicans control the House of Representatives.
No, this president cannot obstruct the justice, This president is the obstruction.
Unless Republicans suddenly discover their souls, or unless Democrats can inspire 2018 voters to get off the sofa and actually vote (they don't have a good track record in that respect, and Republicans are doing all they can to prevent it) it seems we have to rely on Nature Herself to remove Trump. How can a 71-yr old human being so tormented by inner demons as to rage at everything Good and True survive for long until his very body says "No more".
Given the political mileau -- the absolute corruption of the Republican Party and the fatally feckless Democratic Party -- my hope is with Nature.
As Democrats watch their collusion conspiracy theory slowly go up in smoke, they're desperate for anything to get rid of Trump now they're on to obstruction of justice. Exactly how did Trump "obstruct" justice? He had every right to fire flakey Comey, who now appears to have allowed partisan FBI agents to "investigate" Hilary Clinton. And if he fired Flynn because he lied to everyone - including the FBI - so what? Should he have let him stay? As far as Trump transition officials hoping to salvage a relationship with Russia that Obama and Clinton destroyed - gee, that's what they were supposed to do.
One of the truly fascinating aspects of Mr Mueller's relentless investigation of Trump's potential culpability is to juxtapose the commentary of the NYT and that of the WSJ, both the editorial and the readers' comments.
Just as someone once said, when you have facts on your side, you argue the facts. When you don't have facts on your side, you argue the law or you besmirch your accusers.
The NYT, like Mr Mueller, has facts on its side. The commentary here is for the most part willing to deal with the facts. A certain amount of gloating to be sure, but the facts are the facts.
The WSJ, like Mr Trump has no facts on its side. The commentary there is for the most part name-calling and a lot of "he said, she said."
There's probably a moral in there somewhere. Maybe it has to do with what happens to editors who are in the pay of Mr Murdoch and turn what was once a great newspaper into the National Enquirer wrapped in a pinstriped suit.
But the comments are the fascinating aspect to it all.
"Why lie if you’ve done nothing wrong?" is a naive question. At least one answer is, because it would be politically harmful to state the truth.
Why, indeed, lie when you've done nothing wrong?
But there are insinuations that Flynn may have been cutting many (ethical, legal?) corners in a brazen effort to use his position to feather his own nest.
The talk shows at both ends of the political spectrum go on and on trying to spin gold out of flax. This can be dangerous.
Peter Kelly
Palominas, Arizona
Don't expect anything better than feigned momentary outrage from this GOP congress. Happy to rewrite the rule book whenever its expedient, from Roy Moore to taxes, they've demonstrated there isn't an honorable creature among them.
It is extremely disturbing when a leader of a country asserts he is above the law. That means he is thinking of himself as a dictator, and not as a president of a democratic nation. If you have the vaguest sensation of being a free citizen in a nation ruled by laws, then you know that Trump has to go.
1
Here's the point on all this. It don't matter a hoot what Trump does, says, obstructs or not according to whomever wishes to define anything using any sentence construct, logical or illogical. As long as the republican party is OK with anything he does, he'll be president for the next 7 years. Trump cannot be force out of office until the republican party starts to loose seats to the democrats.
Actually I take it all back, Trump will be president as long as the donor class sees fit that he should stay president. This in turn will make the republicans put up with anything he does, even endorse a child molester for the senate.
Nice job of laying out exactly how criminal this administration is. Trump has obstructed justice, and continues to have evolving reasons for taking the actions he has taken against Flynn, Yates, and Comey. Enough is enough.
They are not just lying about improper communications, clearly. Why not release your tax returns Mr. President, what are you afraid of? Surely not people knowing that your "net worth" is a hoax, everyone already knows that.
I’m torn between a desir trump for Tru to be forced out of office ASAP for the sake of our national security and a desire for v to remain in office at least until the 2018 elections to motivate Democrats to win. There are way more Democrats out there than die-hard Trump fans. Democrats just don’t vote in midterms. When we vote we win!
The Constitution assumes the electorate knows what's best for the country. Now it runs into Trump...
Wasn't it Walter Scott that said. "what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive". Ah Trump, the bad gift that keeps undermining all that is good and decent. The latest absurdity the US population has to endure is the Bart Simpson 'dog ate my homework' nonsense about someone else writing badly spelled Tweets. There is hope though, in the great words of a far more worthwhile New Yorker, Lou Reed, "There's no Mafia lawyer to fight in your corner" Mr Trump, the US Justice system will do its job. What's done in the dark will be brought to the light...
1. The SCP lies because, like the scorpion, it is in his nature.
2. Lawyers who lie to obstruct the course of justice are also subject to the course of justice. I wonder what Mr. Dowd would say if he were put under oath; would he invoke the 5th Amendment?
I am daily terrified that Trump will get away with all of it and more. That no one will be prosecuted or spend any significant time in jail. That the GOP will deconstruct the governmental protections put in place over the last 70+ years. That we, the citizens, will be unable to stop the deliberate behavior of the thugs that are in charge and that, ultimately, the United States will be an unrecognizable wreckage for generations to come. Or worse, that the crazy-man-in-chief will start WWIII and we will all go up in smoke.
Since The New York Times is one of the few mainstream papers left, I commend the paper for its strong stance and for publishing actual verifiable FACTS during this time. I cannot imagine what would happen if the paper closed its doors. Please, keep on keeping on, NYT. The free press is our only hope.
The last sentence says it all about how these people operate. When they have no honest, rational basis for what they're doing, they lie and deflect. The very act of doing so betrays their hidden agenda. Hideous.
"Any child could tell you the answer: People lie when they know they’ve done something wrong."
You are citing forms of normal behavior, not accounting for those people two or more standard deviations out of sync. What we have in the guy in the WH is a combination of pathological and compulsive liar, a combination of someone who lies to get what they want and someone who has little or no control over what they are saying. Sometimes he recognizes his behavior, sometimes he does not. There are other mental pathologies at play, but there is only so that can be discussed in a short space.
One can cite our founding documents, our written and unwritten constitution, all day long. That is not going to matter for the behaviors we see at the head of our country. Because he is not willing (or able?) to admit guilt, it is hard to know whether he always recognizes his lies as such. And round and round we go.
Wasn't it WalterScott that said. "what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive". Ah Trump, the bad gift that keeps undermining all that is good and decent. The latest absurdity the US population has to endure is the Bart Simpson 'dog ate my homework' nonsense about someone else writing badly spelled Tweets. There is hope though, in the great words of a far more worthwhile New Yorker, Lou Reed, "There's no Mafia lawyer to fight in your corner" Mr Trump, the US Justice system will do its job. What's done in the dark will be brought to the light...
I did not vote for Mr. Trump, but the NY times is living in an alternate universe. Yes, Mr. Flynn lied to the FBI but it was about something completely normal although politically sensitive - a sounding out of podt-election Russian positions over key national security issues. Trump, as usual, has been a bull in a china shop but the underlying issue is completely innocuous. Not so what Hillary did - her campaign actively and viciously colluded with the Russians to produce the fraudulent Trump dossier and has lied about it. What Trump supposedly did, Hillary actually did do. The NY Times and progressives are propagating a terrible myth even worse than Trump himself. They are forfeiting the moral standing to bring the country back to its senses from Trump's real excesses on judges and the environment and so many other issues.
Right now I truly miss no drama Obama. We were truly blessed to have a president who is a constitutional lawyer and respected that his policies must stand up to judicial review. I'm also thankful for the foresight that our imperfect founders showed in setting up 3 equal branches of government to ensure that our country didn't fall due to tyrannical behavior from anyone branch.
We really need to let Mr Mueller conduct his investigation. Unnecessary speculation only supports the fears that many Trump supporters have that the cards are stacked against their president and the crazy liberal elites will say or do anything to remove him from office. Mr Mueller will present his case when he's ready, we must be patient.
As always Trump's tweets were designed as a distraction. Today our darling president signed off on a plan to shrink two national monuments, one by 80% and the other by 45%. He did so without any dialogue with Native Americans who have pushed for decades to protect sacred sites. Instead of having a conversation about how we the people feel about this change, the news is yet again trying to decipher Trump's tweets. He's not as stupid as people think he is.
83
In order for the three branches to work we truly need the Dems to take back the House in 2018. That is my prayer.
1
Ami, the 3 branches are almost under complete illigitimate control of the Republican party. The Judicial branch is being worked on right now to give them complete control. we are very, very close to a complete Fascist state. We as a country if we are to survive MUST, MUST vote out of every office in the land any and every Republican everywhere in the Country in 2018 and 2020 and in every special election everywhere. Your children and grandchildren's lives depend on this !
3
There was no conversation with our Indigenous Peoples, because he and his ilk do not consider them "people." White Supremacy is the only goal.
The President is not above the law. Period. This is a core principle of our democracy. He may have limited power to oversee investigations, with emphasis on limited.
7
Has the news ever been more distracting? I remember that I, like many Americans, was able to follow the Watergate investigation and the hearings . Now, when Trump gets caught in a lie, its hard to keep track of the lies due to the sheer number of them. He further distracts with outrageous tweets and his media outlets blast out accusations against the Clintons or the antifa movement. As the writer pointed out, children lie when they get caught. They also start pointing fingers at those who committed, or purportedly committed, wrongdoings in the past. A classic third grade playground strategy that carries an admission of guilt.
10
To keep the frog from
Exiting the frying pan
Keep the heat on low.
10
Comey, in his testimony, said that the president could " start or stop any investigation he wanted to." He said that the constitution granted all executive power to the president, and anyone working in the executive branch held only delgated power. If Comey,as head of the FBI, could start or stop an investigation, then so could the president.Apparently the New York Times editorial board disagrees with the former head of the FBI on this. The justice that was supposedly obstructed was a violation of the Logan act, a law not successfully used in over 200 years. Mike Flynn was not charged with violation of the Logan Act. Mr. Trump's removal from office would require 19 Republican votes in the Senate. Even if the Democrats take the Senate next year, they would need 16 or more. Who are those Republicans? I know how much you all want this, but I just don't see it going anywhere.
3
The fact that the Logan Act hasn't yet been used is irrelevant: that law been on the books ripening just for this perfect opportunity. The fact that Flynn hasn't yet been charged with a violation of the Logan Act is similarly beside the point: in exchange for being so charged, Flynn has agreed to sing against Trump, Don Jr, Jared, and maybe even Ivanka. And just wait 'til the fascisti tax bill goes through and see how many Democrats take the place of Republicans in Congress. As with all things, good will ultimately prevail.
Mike Flynn was not charged with anything more important because he is singing his head off. Its a plea deal. There are bigger birds going to the oven.
With the knowledge of this information, every day that passes is another day where Congress is abdicating their responsibility to the American people, who elected them, to uphold the Constitution of the United States .
13
If the Constitution survives Donald Trump and trumpism, and I'm not yet convinced that it will, it will prove yet again to be the most amazing document ever produced.
9
The only thing greater than Alan Dershowitz's legal mind is his enormous ego. He insists that the President by definition of his powers cannot obstruct justice, but the bedrock of constitutional law, the chief reason for separation of powers, is to prevent the President from doing anything he pleases with complete impunity. Dershowitz's supposition implies the President is infallible. But infallibility is the domain of no human being, including Donald Trump (though he would beg to differ). We have reached the tipping point of a constitutional crisis. Even a GOP controlled congress must not stick it head in the sand. Justice must be served.
11
Once again, what happened to the concept of a tri-partite form of government?
5
Professor Dershowitz disagrees with you. Is he a sophist or a spinner? Both, I'd say. I learned in ninth grade civics that we are a nation of laws and that no one--even the president--is above the law. Beyond that, it is not at all unusual for public officials to be prosecuted for abusing or misusing their constitutional or statutory powers, or for exercising them in bad faith. Trump allegedly used the Presidency to intimidate or pressure Mr. Comey to drop an investigation of his own possible wrongdoing. That is just as much an obstruction of the investigation as the destruction or withholding of physical evidence.
5
Actually, a President can obstruct justice so long as Congress refuses to carry out its obligations under the Constitution: impeachment.
Given the symbiotic relationship between the current slate of morally, ethically and financially corrupt Congressional Republicans and their morally, ethically and financially corrupt President (whose election was a result of collusion with a enemy state), the only way to enforce the rule of law is to vote Congressional Republicans and President out of office.
It is up to us, the American people, to enforce the law.
13
This claim is Clintonian in its audacity. It may also be legally correct as it relates to "obstruction" but it doesn't mean Mr. Trump is immune from other lawbreaking.
1
Good gawd, must we?! Why do you people *insist* on beating a dead horse? :/
My client did not say what he said. I said what he said. This is America and I have every right to claim that I said something that no one can prove I didn't say. But, if he had said what I actually said, he would have had every right to say, um, it, or anything else he did or did not say. Is that clear?
4
Presidents frequently comment on FBI investigations. In April 2016, while the FBI was investigating Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information, President Obama publicly stated he thought Hillary Clinton should not be punished, even though he agreed she had carelessly handled classified information. "I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America’s national security,” he said. “Now what I’ve also said is that — and she has acknowledged — that there’s a carelessness, in terms of managing emails, that she has owned, and she recognizes. But I also think it is important to keep this in perspective. This is somebody who has served her country for four years as secretary of state, and did an outstanding job. And no one has suggested that in some ways, as a consequence of how she’s handled emails, that that detracted from her excellent ability to carry out her duties." FBI Director James Comey had to know President Obama hope he would recommend Hillary not be prosecuted. President Trump said much the same thing when he told Comey he hoped Michael Flynn would be let go. Like Clinton, Flynn had a distinguish record of service to America.
1
Mr. Case - There was nothing wrong with Obama commenting on Hillary Clinton because she was never accused of a crime. The difference is Hillary Clinton wasn't accused of a crime while General Flynn has taken a plea deal for lying to the F.B.I. in exchange for his co-operation with Mr. Mueller's investigation of the Trump administration. Flynn likely faced being charged on multiple counts and facing a long time in prison including not registering as a foreign agent of Turkey, money laundering and obstruction of justice. Working out a plea agreement with him that would let him off easy and allow his son to walk apparently took months. There is a strong possibility General Flynn is a traitor to this country. Hillary Clinton, the former Secretary of State, lives at her home in Chappaqua, New York after years of honorable public service.
As President Obama pointed out, Hillary had publically admitted guilt at the time he said she shouldn’t be punished because of her prior service to the nation. At the time President Trump spoke in defense of Flynn, Flynn hadn’t been charged and hadn’t admitted guilt. Trump has never said Flynn shouldn’t be charged for crimes arising from his work as a lobbyist.
For someone who is supposedly not guilty of anything and knows nothing, Donald Trump is casting a lot of shade these days. Not only in his attempts to hide behind everything amd everyone, but by his firing of anyone and everyone who might go down with a boom.
Example A: Mike Flynn.
It's bad enough that Trump ignored all warnings about this guy and elevated him quickly through the ranks while effectively compromising this nation's security, but when he then tried to pressure James Comey into granting a soft landing for him, this president went way above and beyond the law in order to protect himself -- and if that isn't a case of obstruction, what is?
If anything, this is just another hallmark of Trump's behaviour and tendency to hold himself above the law when he should at least, as president, be setting good example by obeying it.
Obviously both he, and his personal lawyer, John Dowd, never got that memo.
5
I thought we live in a country where no one is above the law, even the President of the country. Someone must let Trump know that to be a fact. Because someone else commits a crime it doesn't make the crime legal for him to commit.
4
I surmise that Trump's presence provides the catalyst and the momentum needed for long-overdue change, as described in today's NYT: "Women Line Up to Run for Office, Harnessing Their Outrage at Trump". His election - and not the man himself - is the crises that transformative change requires.
I hope he will stick around long enough to inspire it.......
2
You should have added that Nixon, after his resignation and in an interview with David Frost, said that "it is not illegal if the President does it." That statement was received with astonished incredulity. He was declaring that the President is a dictator who is above the law. And that is exactly what the Trump team is claiming. And they are claiming that because they know Trump has committed crimes.
5
Maybe I fell asleep in civics class when this came up, but I thought the Attorney General... For better or worse, one Jefferson B. Sessions at this time... Is the top law enforcement official in the US government. Yes, the president appoints the AG and the senate approves him or her, but that does not mean the president has the final legal say on anything. In fact, the Department of Justice is ‘supposed’ to be independent of the executive and congress.
Apparently Mr. Dowd missed that civics class entirely.
3
Non-lawyers should not attempt to interpret fine points of law. It's as if the Editorial Board had tried to perform delicate surgery. Here's where they went wrong:
There are two separate meanings for obstruction of justice. One is contained in our criminal statutes, most commonly charged under 18 USC Section 1503. Entirely separate is an impeachment obstruction charge within the meaning of the term "high crimes and misdemeanors" in the Constitution. A statutory charge must conform to the extensive interpretation of the statute in court precedent. An impeachment obstruction is not bound by any statutory interpretation. Rather, it is defined by the language of the Constitution as interpreted by the courts, which is to say that it is defined by the meaning of "high crimes and misdemeanors" in Article II, Section IV.
No US court has interpreted the impeachment clause, but the common law is clear that "high crimes and misdemeanors" refers to wrongdoing of countless sorts, not confined to criminal statutes.
Clearly, when Mr. Dowd stated that the President couldn't be charged with obstruction, he was talking about the statutory sort. Mr. Dowd is highly-skilled and does not make elementary mistakes. As for the Board, it is talking about impeachment obstruction and all it had to say was that Trump's suspected obstruction clearly entails wrongdoing within the meaning of the impeachment clause of the Constitution. Anything else is superfluous and irrelevant.
I agree with you on the distinction.
The question is why the President’s defenders are bringing this issue up.
I believe they are trying to justify the shut down of the Mueller investigation. After all, if the President can’t be indicted, why have a criminal investigation?
1
So the title of chief law enforcement officer (where does that come from, by the way?) is now to come with a license to obstruct the application of the law not just to the said chief enforcement officer but to anyone. The chief can do what he wants. So the local police chief can instruct junior officers not to investigate the police chief? So the President can fix anyone's parking tickets if he so pleases? Silly us. We thought no one was above the law. It turns out some people are, and that the chief law enforcement officer is chief among them.
We already know that tRump doesn’t understand the legal system or Constitution. Too bad his legal advisor doesn’t either And thinks tRump is above the law.
1
The fact that this argument is even being put forth by Dershowitz & Dowd & the President's defenders strikes me as insulting and arrogant, to say the very least. Of course the President can commit obstruction of justice. If we say he can't, we've just granted him the powers of a king & our Constitution says "all men are created equal." The President isn't ABOVE THE LAW. He is our embodiment of it - our representative of our unique American democracy & that means that he must not only follow the laws exactly as the common folk of this country, but he must exemplify why they must do so, also. To say he can't be guilty of something that anyone else can, because of his exalted station is to ignore the whole purpose of the role of the Presidency, and to nullify all our democratic values. If that's how we're going to play the game, we may as well burn it all down because there are no rules anymore.
3
The Editorial convincingly summarizes the case for Trump's impeachment on the grounds of Obstruction of Justice.
But I still cannot get my head around the fact that Dubya, Cheney and Rumsfeld escaped life sentences for crimes that were infinitely worse than matters relating to collusion with Russia. Which is worse:
1. Obstructors of Justice
or
2. War Criminals as defined by the Nuremberg Principles?
1
On Sunday I heard Daniel Ellsberg speak about the history of U.S. government plans for the use of nuclear weapons- from official documents Ellsberg secretly photocopied in the 1970s. Official documents from the 1960s estimated the cost of limited nuclear war with Russia with warheads at that time at 600 million lives.
Ellsberg said experts currently estimate war between 2 nuclear powers like the U.S. & N. Korea would leave at least a billion dead. This includes casualties from nuclear winter, when freezing temperatures & famine caused by smoke from nuclear fires filling the world's atmosphere would cause a 70% diminution in sunlight.
Ellsberg noted Lindsey Graham's recent comments that pre-emptive war w/ N. Korea "is becoming more likely as their technology matures... you need to get ready for a very serious response from the United States." Graham has advised Americans living in S. Korea to return home.
Ellsberg - who knows as much about nuclear war as any living person - is horrified by the Trump administration's aggressive stance toward N. Korea.
He also thinks Kim is probably more stable than Trump. As far as we know, there's no U.S. diplomatic effort to avoid war on the Korean peninsula.
I wonder how much Trump's outrageous comments & twitter campaigns are attempts to distract us while Trump, his advisors, the Defense Dept. & military command prepare for war against N. Korea.
Does Lindsey Graham know something we don't?
3
The President is not above the law. His get out of jail free card is valid only while he serves as President. Mr. Mueller is obviously very familiar with Monopoly. Mr. Trump may not have much real estate or money left at the end of this board game.
1
This doesn't even make sense. If Trump were the 'chief law enforcement officer', then what is Supreme Court for exactly? The office of President is not, in fact, the office of the Supreme Dictator of the Universe. The judiciary has always, and hopefully will always, be entirely separate in order to uphold the law in an unbiased manner - because no one (not even the President) is above the law.
Amateurs.
1
I guess the same body that decided that corporations are citizens can decide the president cannot obstruct justice.
We shall see.
Doesn't even matter. Congress can define "high crimes and misdemeanors any way it wants." Of course, that requires a Congress that isn't corrupt.
1
I will not hold my breath waiting for Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan to start impeachment proceedings. Trump owns them and they know it. Just look at Roy Moore - Mitch McConnell says he needs to drop out of the race. Trump supports Roy Moore. Now Mitch McConnell is in love with Roy Moore.
The only chance for impeachment is for voters to turn the House and Senate Democrat in 2018.
3
Thanks to Richard Nixon, I am a Democrat today. Because of Nixon's shenanigans I spent 8 months 15 kilometers from the Cambodian border. During those 8 months the unit I was assigned to crossed that border and engaged the North Vietnamese. It was when, days after the invasion began and the worst of the fighting was over, I saw Nixon on Armed Forces Viet-Nam television saying that, as of that moment, he had ordered our army into Cambodia to shorten the war that I became a lifelong Democrat. Nixon waited to see how the encounter would go before he told America what he had done, lying to them, pretending his order was just then being carried out.
Now to Trump. Compared to Trump, Nixon was a choirboy. His marriage to Pat was lifelong. He was veteran of WWII, a naval officer. He is responsible for America engaging China with diplomacy, not bombs. He resigned the Presidency to save America from what he knew was a losing fight, for both himself and a nation he truly did love. Trump is on marriage #3 with no guarantee there won't be a #4. Trump had heel spurs, he says. America is preparing for nuclear war with Korea. That is Trump's voice on the Access Hollywood tape.
My father could not abide a liar, and that included his children. We learned at an early age that punishment for an infraction of family rules dramatically escalated when a lie was involved.
Donald Trump must learn that lesson.
6
There is no hesitation anymore, trump is all in on gutting the laws and protections of this country. Trump and his enablers are consolidating power among an oligarchical class and undermining the free press and the courts. We have a limited time before sites like NYTimes and message boards are shut down by a revamped Sedition Act. While there is still time, we must act.
In the late 60's and early 70's, many citizens thought they were at war with the government of the United States. That time is quickly approaching again. Now is the time to network, to know whom you can trust. If we can flip Congress or the Senate next year we might have a chance, but trump and his cohort are already trying to limit who can vote. Soon there will be a litmus test to see if you are allowed to cast a ballot.
The free and open elections in the United States, light very light of our freedom, is a sputtering candle, ready to go out. The question is, with a nod to Dylan Thomas: Will you go gentle into that good night...Or will you rage, rage against the dying of the light.
While I think firing Comey is impeachable the rest seems like an over reaction. Maybe I am getting cynical but signaling the Russians than you will back off in a couple months doesn't seem to be on the same par of impeachable offense. They had won the election and would have the power on a few weeks. That is a far cry from the crimes against humanity that Nixon pulled, stopping a potential peace agreement to get yourself elected.
And so it happened, in the last month of 2017, the last nail in the coffin of our Democracy was pounded home. Only eleven months to implement the plan so obvious on his way down the golden stair and opened his mouth. Now where are the crowds who should be screaming in protest at this state of affairs? Shopping! Passive acquiescence mixed with active support. When the Chief Executive is above the law, he is the law and he has become the Dictator. I tremble to think what the New Year will usher in. It won't be pretty.
One of the most insidious aspects of this episode…the idea that a Trump tweet may not actually be from the mind of Trump himself… potential plausible deniability?
Donald Trump is only Emperor in his own mind.
No one is above the law. In our system of law, people who are impacted personally by an investigation are constrained from participating in it. That's why Jeff Sessions (correctly) recused himself: there is a conflict of interest because he is personally involved.
How much more conflict of interest can there be than a man being the arbiter of his own guilt or innocence? This is what is implied by the arguments of lawyers like Dershowitz and Dowd. They say the President is the chief law enforcement officer, therefore he can decide whether a legal investigation should continue or not. If that investigation is about the President, that's a huge conflict of interest, and cannot stand in American law. It is a pretty (weak) piece of sophistry, but it fails in the first test for impartiality.
1
According to Alan Dershowitz, obstruction of justice by a sitting President is defined as the President telling others to lie. Nixon faced obstruction of justice charges because he was involved in the cover-up during Watergate - cover-up is equivalent to a lie or lying. According to Jeffrey Toobin, obstruction of justice charges should also take into account the intent of the person being accused. Dershowitz did not agree. These two lawyers cannot even agree.
1
President is the chief enforcer of law doesn't mean he is above the law and take liberty with it while indulging in unlawful actions. For, the US is a rule governed democracy, not the person governed monarchy or autocracy. The system of checks and balances was consciously devised by the founding fathers to avert the misuse of power by any one organ of the government, as the Trump presidency is regularly doing today, making a mockery of constitutional democracy and ruining the republic.
4
The President’s defenders are so concerned about the Mueller investigation that they are trying to convince the American people that the investigation should be shut down.
The latest attack is the Dowd/Yoo/Dershowitz argument that since the President can’t obstruct or be indicted for obstruction, we might as well shut down the investigation. This is known as the Ostrich Defense: Let’s just ignore the possibility of wrongdoing.
The louder the squealing, the closer to the truth we are getting.
The American people deserve to know the breadth and extent of the Russian attack on our democracy. We deserve to know why the lies and the deceit. And we deserve to know how our government intends to protect our democracy.
3
Yes, as any preschooler instinctively knows, "People lie when they know they’ve done something wrong."
But a further "wrong" done to us is the daily bludgeoning of any and all factual truth that surrounds us. They are criminal, the specific lies Trump and his associates have told. Worse still, and perhaps more deeply damaging, have been the assaults on truth his excuses have perpetrated. I wish we could put him in jail for the latter.
4
The obvious problem with impeachment is that because of cowardice of many house members who, privately most likely would love to show Mr. Trump the door, won't because of their own self-interest. They don't want to go against his "base" because it would jeopardize their position of power, prestige, and financial security. They would put their perceived self-interests ahead of what's good for the country and continue to allow this assault on democracy. As a long standing democrat, I was seriously considering supporting a moderate Republican for President last year. I was stunned that this country elected someone who promised the world and said he'd deliver it tomorrow. He simply does not care for average Americans, the rule of law, or any restrictions to his and only his view of how this country is supposed to work.
3
Everything in this piece is accurate except its assumption that the GOP-led Congress, now fully off the rails, would do anything close to impeachment, let alone convict him. To me, the Trump nightmare has been more about the inaction, enabling and depressing rationalization by GOP leaders, and I believe this will remain the centerpiece when Mueller finishes he's, even with a nicely wrapped package that would otherwise put Trump on the street, if not in jail.
3
When I was growing up, I was taught that the bedrock of our legal system, and indeed the point of our legal system, was that no one was above the law. This was the intent of our founding fathers, who were rejecting the divine right of kings and their high position above those they ruled.
Nixon said, "When the president does it, it's not illegal", and was proved wrong. That must also be the case with Mr. Trump, and it's alarming that his lawyers are even floating the idea that it isn't.
Of course, with this current incarnation of the SCOTUS - right-wing hacks put in place by right-wing hacks - anything is possible, and the Republicans in the House and Senate long ago gave up any pretense of being "American" over "Republican". If they combine to give Trump a pass, there will be a genuine Constitutional crisis.
3
And what will come of this? Potentially nothing as long as the GOP majority in Congress persists. And if a constitutional crisis matured while congress and SCOTUS are controlled by the GOP? The outcome could literally destroy this country. November 6, 2018, is 335 days away. We can’t be blamed for a little hand-wringing, but if we don’t then put our hands to labor for non-GOP candidates, we’re going to have deserved whatever we get.
4
"Trump admitted that he knew Mr. Flynn had committed a federal crime at the time he fired Mr. Comey for refusing to stop investigating him."
DT admitted no such thing. He simply exhibited, for the thousandth time, his attitude toward reality: something to be twisted and manipulated to suit present circumstances. In DT's deeply distorted psyche, there is no such thing as true or false, only perception.
His goal is always to manipulate perception, and this is a textbook example of him doing exactly that. His goal wasn't to accurately represent the facts at the time - that is never his goal. His goal is to convince all of us that his narrative is the only one that is true.
And that is very difficult to subscribe to, since his narrative changes like the wind.
1
Nixon tried to obstruct an investigation into himself. Trump, if guilty, asked the Director of the FBI if he would go easy on Flynn. These are diametrically opposed constructs. Trump, by Comey's own testimony, did not tell Comey to halt the investigation. That choice was left to Comey. It might seem dirty, it might not. But Trump could have ordered the investigation to stop. He could have pardoned Flynn. He could still pardon Flynn. Nothing anyone can do about it.
The Constitution does not entertain the notion of charging the President. It allows the Congress to impeach him. Full stop.
The problem boils down to this. We tolerate, we vote for, we accept each daily insult to Democracy. And if the collective will behinds so easily- Democracy exists in name only. Any that actively oppose, that sound the warning- give hope.
Our Congress is complicit with this deceit. They know everything that the public knows and they’ve been dragging their feet on their own investigation. Meanwhile, they are hurriedly foisting a dramatically bad piece of tax “reform” onto the body politic for which everyone except their super rich sponsors both individual and corporate will benefit. This will unnecessarily drive a hole through the budget and eventually another recession if not worse. These are the actions of men driven by a thrice proven wrong philosophy that both empowers and enriches them while undermining the nation’s Constitution.
1
Unfortunately, we see the weaknesses in our constitution when situations like the one we're faced with arise. The president's behavior ignored by members of his own party, and the opposition powerless to do anything about it. Absent Mr. Muller's indictment of the President, the damage to this country will continue, and I don't see anything absent a landslide democratic victory in the midterms that will change it. The American Experiment is failing.
1
I believe that the escalating lies and deflections from Trump and his protectors indicate a con man desperately attempting to avoid meltdown and devastating exposure. Trump's financial connections to corrupt oligarchs are likely the exposure he fears most, along with revelations that his "business empire" is a mirage. He has underlings to take the fall for any Russian campaign collusion. There is no one to take the fall for the other things he fears.
2
I think we miss the point to Trump's lying when we try to attribute its causes to reason: Trump lies as a reflex when he feels cornered, regardless of the circumstances. For Trump, a lie is as good as -- perhaps better than -- the truth. While the vast majority of humans have an internal moral compass that nearly compels the truth most of the time, Trump's compass points only toward what's good for him, in this moment. That's sociopathic, for sure. No doubt those psychiatrists who see Trump as diagnosable are on to something. Unfortunately, that insight is lost -- or easily ignored -- by politicians and business-people who view Trump, I think, as their guy who will actually do pretty much anything to keep the sale with his base, truly deplorable though it may be. He is their id, unfettered by shame or concern for the future. Is he guilty of collusion, obstruction, et al? Most likely. But my bet is that he escapes scot-free. It's pretty hard to touch a man without a conscience.
We seem to be quite selective in our definition of obstruction of justice. Trump is accused of obstructing the investigation into collusion between his campaign and Russia but that investigation is ongoing on many fronts - Mueller and Congress.
On the other hand, Hillary Clinton violated the FOIA act by maintaining a private server for government communications. Then when asked for those communications she only provided selected emails, with metadata stripped out, and erased everything else. That sure seems like an attempt to obstruct any comprehensive investigation of her communications. But James Comey could find no crime there.
Good job! You win the internet today. Obviously, the problem is Hillary Clinton. The problem is always Hillary Clinton. Most of the problems facing the modern world were, in fact, created by Hillary Clinton. When I debate someone, all I need to say is "But Hillary" and I'm an instant winner! It's really amazing. Anyone can be smart and win!
These faux legal claims made by Trump supporters are simply more 'noise'. Mueller knows it and most of the members of congress know it. Legal experts also know it. Trump must be held accountable for any and all ill-legal activity which occurred prior to his campaign, during his campaign and during his time in office. He is not above the law. He does not have veto rights over the constitution. He is accountable to our laws, just as we all are in this nation of laws.
He may or may not have colluded with Russia in tampering with our election. His actions since the election suggest to even the most casual observer that he has engaged multiple times and with multiple individuals in conversations and/or actions in an effort to end the investigation into potential crimes that he claims innocence.
2
The big difference between Nixon and Trump? Nixon had a sense of shame. He may have developed it only after caught red-handed, on the verge of impeachment and possible prosecution. Ultimately, though, he chose to resign rather than see the country torn apart. Be it from a sense of shame, or a shred of dignity, honor, or sense of country above self, he did the right thing.
Is there anything whatsoever above self for this current president? Do I even need to ask if there's a single person in this country who believes Trump possesses a shred of dignity or is capable of a sense of shame? Ditto for the republican members of Congress who not only will not hold Trump accountable, but are instead gleefully complicit.
3
With the tax bill almost a done deal I think it's even money Trump will resign or be impeached. Too early to tell as Trump will most probably try and hang on until his lawyers convince him he can't win. If President Trump goes will Vice President Pence restore some trust and dignity to the office?
Once the people cease to believe that government is legitimate, rule of law ceases to hold society together. Trump has engaged in so much self dealing that government seems like a rigged game. Admittedly, the Supreme Court did a lot of damage on its own by delivering political access into the hands of pooled capital/corporate elites.
But the Congress can still restore faith in a legitimate government by getting rid of Trump once Mueller delivers (and he surely will) facts supporting grounds for impeachment. It's hard to believe that the gaggle of lawyers that the Congress is comprised of cannot figure out that once faith in good government is lost, the US will end up like Italy under Berlusconi where nobody plays by the rules.
1
The statement of Trump's lawyer Ty Cobb that the president cannot obstruct justice is legal silliness and constitutional nonsense.Since the rule of law and its implementation and enforcement are bigger than any individual -- including the chief law enforcer, anyone can potentially obstruct justice. Even a chief law enforcer can commit a crime and obstruct justice in the investigation and enforcement of the law. Even a chief law enforcer can intend to protect others who have committed crimes and obstruct justice. The crucial element in establishing a chief law enforcer's obstruction of justice is intent, which is a state of mind but can be proved circumstantially. Did Trump intend to protect Flynn and others regarding the Russia investigation? What do you think? In any event, if what we are talking about is obstruction of justice leading to an impeachment process of the chief law enforcer, whatever Congress determines to be "high crimes and misdemeanors" is the final say so. The Supreme Court can no more override Congressional determination of high crimes and misdemeanors than Congress can override the Supreme Court's determination of freedom of speech. Another way to say this is that the federal courts’ power of judicial review of legislation does not apply to Congress' constitutional determination of impeachment.
1
It is time to put the pressure on Congress. Trump is immune to the pressure because he ignores the rule of law and doesn't understand the Constitution in the first place. And his lawyers are there to back him up; what do they have to lose? No one in the administration will ever tell him to resign.
Thus, we must focus our energy on Congress. The Republicans need to understand that they are damaging their own brand by supporting his terrible behavior -- at least in public. Republicans are further damaging their brand if Mueller issues findings that demonstrate obstruction or Logan Act violations AND the Republicans fail to impeach. Do the Republicans really think they can survive the mid-terms or 2020 following this path? Do they really think their big tax "win" will be enough for the voters to overlook the damage? Congressional Democrats need to make this case loudly and clearly, otherwise we're stuck.
1
The Trump team has repeatedly asserted in the Russian investigation that Trump is above the law. This is just par for the course. The lawyer is empirically right in the sense that Trump is in charge of the people that would arrest him.
The reality is that if the House can be convinced that it is necessary to issue articles of impeachments, there is great latitude for it to define 'high crimes and misdemeanors'. It can simply decide to do it. And if enough of the Senate believes it, then the President can be removed from office. But with a Republican Congress, Trump could fulfill his threat to just shoot people and there would be no ramifications because Congress, as shown in its legislative process, and voters, in the person of Roy Moore, value party over country.
1
Perhaps Trump himself has not cooperated illegally with the Russians and is obstructing this investigation out of anger that Mueller is so insolent as to challenge his veracity (I use the word loosely). If so, he may be impeached for a hollow crime. But this seems less and less likely with each day and as his vehemence escalates. If/when Mueller finds evidence of cooperation it’s a good bet that it will have the fingerprints of Trump Jr. or Kushner or Flynn all over it. Before that Trump will probably fire Mueller. This will moot the issue of what Trump knew. At that point it will be up to the Republicans, who have displayed shattering levels of sophistry, to decide on impeachment. At this point it’s not at all clear that this will be resolved justly. It’s time to begin a discussion to insure that it is.
1
Trump's shifting position and constant lies are in step with his sinking into political miasma. He's still going down in record speed, but it still feels all too painfully slow.
The entire Trump presidency has severely eroded a lot of people's faith in our government, especially in the stubborn refusal of the legislature to uphold its duty and provide a check on the executive. If a case is made for obstruction and Congress refuses to impeach, this lack of faith is going to reach crisis levels. I hope the Republicans are not so short-sighted as to trade in cheap, temporary political power for the integrity of our Constitution. However, it would greatly restore faith if the Republicans would indicate somewhere somehow that, at the very least, they won't stand for bald-faced corruption and degeneration of the White House.
2
Two thoughts about trump's lying: he's guilty and it's pathological. He is a vain, narcissistic man who, in reality, has failed at everything he has touched and desperately craves adulation. He will do and say anything to appear to be a winner. The manipulators who surround him are using that pathology to get their way, and we are all paying the price. Ultimately, trump may be following in the footsteps of nixon but today's members of congress, unlike those in 1974, do not have the best interests of America in mind. They act only in the interests of their donors.
1
I think there's ample precedent to impeach a President for obstruction of justice. The question isn't so much "can we?" but "will we?" I'm less optimistic about our chances here. The equation is a simple cost-benefit analysis. What costs more politically for Republicans? Ignoring the President's violations or impeaching the President? Republicans have so far chosen to ignore every transgression imaginable from the White House. They're not likely to change their horses mid-stream.
The position might change after the tax bill is signed but probably not. Republicans are more likely to knuckle down and push on. Roy Moore should be a good indication of which way the winds are blowing. If he wins by anything less than 10 points, Republicans are in trouble if they stick with Trump. If Moore loses, they're officially in crisis mode.
There's also the awkward question of Mike Pence. If Trump falls, he could very well take Pence with him. That puts not only the White House but Congress into turmoil as positions are jockeyed around. You might also wonder whether McConnell and Ryan find Pence preferable to Trump. The G.O.P. can shove anything under the President's nose and he'll sign it without question. I have a feeling Pence would show a little more discipline.
Basically, I'm not even sure a scathing indictment from Mueller will force the hand of a Republican Congress. If Trump threatens the Senate majority though, McConnell is going to drop him like a ton of bricks. Watch.
Voting them out in 2018 could wind up being impossible even with a sizable majority against them if the GOP suceeds in keeping them from voting in any number of imaginable ways. The voting commission set up by the administration continues to hide it's actions even from members, a sure sign of evil intentions. After denying a hearing on Obama's court nominee, it's clear that GOP will stop at nothing, and even the courts are being stuffed with people and will no longer stand between Trump and his ruinous plans.
The difference between Nixon's time and now is that then, members of the Republican Party thought that the rule of Constitutional and criminal law were more important than party loyalty. Now, the Republican Party will accept any behavior that does not derail their goals of comforting the prosperous, and, to that end, increasing the torments of the disadvantaged and dismantling protections on everything from consumers to the environment.
As long as Trump & gang don't get in their way in that regard, they don't seem to care about the law or doing what is right.
1
Does the "right to express his view of any case" also include the right to intervene in the manner in which cases are processed? The president is a citizen whose First Amendment rights of free speech aren't suspended because he holds office. But that right doesn't include authority to ignore the process of the law.
13
Mr. Dowd's statement that the president cannot possibly obstruct justice because he is the nation's highest ranking law enforcement officer truly encapsulates the nature of this presidency. It states that the president of the United States cannot break the law because he *is* the law. Last I checked, nobody in the United States is above the law, least of all the president. Just because this president has been acting as if he were a king does not make it so. It does, however, makes those whose job it is to guard our legal and governmental system failures at their job.
Luckily, they all, in the end, must answer to "we, the people". Not only the POTUS, but all those who perpetrate these illegal activities, as well as those who sit around doing nothing while claiming to be powerless in the face of treasonous acts.
251
That makes the elected president an absolute ruler. I don't think anyone ever told us this. The people are not the sovereign, the president is not responsible to the people?
Let's come down to earth and be honest and realistic, anything else is twisting the law and justice into a pretzel making it a lawless government.
1
His argument is more nuanced than that. It is this: He legally has authority to hire and fire at will in the DOJ or FBI. He does not have any oversight on those choices. The Executive branch works at his discretion. Doing something he legally alone has the right to do cannot be obstruction.
Yes a president can obstruct justice, like Nixon may have by refusing to turn over evidence. There is also the problem that there is no such crime as "attempted obstruction of justice." The fact that all of the investigations have proceeded and he has not interfered kinda belies the point Comey was making, that he felt pressured to not investigate Flint. The fact that even though Comey was fired, Mueller was still appointed and the investigation continued shows no obstruction of justice occurred here.
However to think that the Senate will remove Trump is ridiculous, just like it was to Clinton. The 67 Senator barrier is just to high a hurdle. Trump needs 34 Senators to allow him to stay. The Trials, (4 are required, House Oversight majority, House majority, Senate Oversight Majority, Senate 67 super majority), will again take years and waste resources.
The constitutional crisis is coming, whether people understand it or not. Federalist No. 10 remains instructive -- the GOP have moved from political party to faction, and they (and their leader, Trump), are acting in a fashion contrary to the well-being of the nation, over and over again.
That Trump considers himself above the law is just par for the course the GOP has laid out over the decades. It's a slow-motion coup, and the GOP are complicit in it (that is, there's no hope for congressional redress so long as the GOP holds the majority).
Americans need to wake up and vote the GOP out in 2018 and beyond. It's the GOP faction against American democracy -- for one to thrive, the other must be destroyed.
43
A picture is worth a 1000 words, the GOP has lost any decency and respect for the truth.
More than an opinion, it is a truism legally and philosophically that no one, including a president, is above the law.
22
"At this point they have nothing else to work with."
At this point four individuals connected to Donald Trump have been indicted: two cases, Manafort and Gates, involve accusations of personal tax evasion and money laundering unconnected with Trump or the campaign. Another involves a volunteer who briefly worked for the campaign who is accused of lying to the FBI about having met a Maltese "professor" who said he could set up a meeting which never took place with Putin's "niece." Gen Flynn has been indicted for lying to the FBI about a meeting with the Russian ambassador where Flynn apparently attempted to interfere with Russian foreign policy by asking the Russians not to respond to US sanctions against Russia and also asking the Russian UN Security Council representative, and others, to help Israel fight a UN resolution against illegal settlements.
Lest we forget, the investigation is about "collusion," not between the Trump people and Israel but between them and Russia.
5
Then why does Trump want to shut down the investigation? What is he hiding? Why all the lies?
This is very easy to explain. trump and his circle of pals and advisors believe he is the King of the US and therefor is above the law, can do or say whatever he wants, can decide what is legal or not and who is guilty or not. I really hope that they will soon, very soon, be brought into the real world.
15
The "president cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer." - John Dowd, attorney for Donald Trump
"Well, when the president does it, that means it is not illegal." - Richard Nixon
This did not end well for Mr. Nixon. Neither will it end well for Mr. Trump.
21
Of course Trump can obstruct justice. That people cannot see it is amusing.
The point is what everyone assumes to be true, isn't.
The point ?
Congress has Article 1 authority to rein in a belligerent president. Which everyone assume to be functional. And that's the rub ... it's not
At CPAC 2012, Grover Norquest stated ... We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don't need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. ... We just need a president to sign this stuff ...
Trump is that president. And as long as Congress ignores him obstructing justice and running afoul of other legal issues, Trump will be more than happy to sign whatever they place before him.
184
Mike Pence can also sign papers.....
Liberal media has always won the fights with politicians and governments, including the honest and nationalists? But that long history seems to be doomed under the strong leadership and bold people friendly decisions of President Trump. Well the media can impact his performance by challenging him every day in print and on TV. But hats of to the President for showing the door to hostile and anti people media? In a democracy people and not the media must be a winner and this seems to be happening for the first time?
People friendly? You call poisoning our air and water, deregulating our banks, damaging our health care system etc. people friendly?
The Nixon and Clinton cases are not precedent. Nixon was never impeached. And Clinton was acquitted. Impeachment is just an indictment. It leads to a trial in the Senate and then removal from office if the president is found guilty. But Clinton was acquitted.
So there is no precedent on the question as to whether a president can obstruct justice, and the narrower question of whether he can fire anyone for any reason - including to stop an investigation.
Will this be the first case when a president is impeached and removed from office?
I don’t believe so; not by this Congress; and not for “obstructing Justice” in the first few months of his presidency. And certainly not for firing Comey or asking him to drop his investigation of Flynn.
The editorial board is preaching to its choir; indeed, revving it up - and doing a fine job of that, as evident no doubt by the thousands of letters pouring in expressing their similar outrage.
47
Yoou are correct that those examples don't serve as precedent, but you fail to be persuausive in your claim that Trump cannot be charged with obstruction of justice. That remains to be seen. If the definitions outlined in this editorial are accurate, Trump's actions seem to be tantamount to them. Facts, facts, facts.
3
The Chief Executive can fire anyone in the Executive Branch. For any reason he chooses.
1
So, your defense of Trump is that he did this "during the first months of his presidency" and he can fire whomever he wants.....Pity.
Only a sovereign or sovereign power is above the law. In the U.S, sovereignty is vested in its citizens, however undeserving and unmindful they may be. The President and other, specific, government entities exercise the powers of sovereignty in conducting the res publica, the people’s business. In a republic the right to exercise powers can be rescinded after due process. Let’s get busy.
6
The admission that he's the nation's chief law enforcement officer combined with the confession that he knew Flynn had committed a felony creates one and only one possible conclusion, he was openly protecting a criminal. That isn't obstruction, that's dereliction of duty and conspiracy, both high crimes.
8
Important to note that obstruction is co-morbid but insufficient by itself to bring impeachment. The obstruction has to be about some betrayal of the public trust. In this case stealing the election with the help of Russia would do the trick and that’s why Mueller is not finished. HJe stil needs to connect the dots, which Flynn is able to do.
5
Let us assume Mr. Dowd is correct and a President cannot obstruct justice. Even then, until inauguration, Mr. Trump was a President-ELECT, still a private citizen, and as such he is subject to all the laws of the country including the dusty Logan Act.
It is time for the degradation of the office of the President and the country to end. Smarmy lawyers will not save it.
11
Upholding the rule of law is in the hands of the house and senate. The history of this administrations continuance of turning a blind eye to Trumps never ending derange, destructive, and lawless actions will not end.
The only hope 'we the people' have to ending the ongoing abduction of our Democracy is an historical voter turnout in 2018.
6
What would happen if #45 loses the 2020 election and calls the results "fake" and refuses to bow to the will of the people?
Am I out in left field?
I can see how a lawbreaker might try to do what he might to avoid the cops. Self defense and preservation rule over any moral or ethical concern about the law. Funny how that propensity for obfuscation and avoidance applies not only to thieves and perpetrators at the lowest level of society but also to crooks in the highest echelons of government and business.
The thing is with Donnie, his electoral base doesn't care what he does nor are even knowledgeable about legal issues. He represents change and he's not of the Washington DC culture. And the Republican party, in control of both houses of congress as well as a majority of state legislatures and governorships don't seem overly concerned about any impropriety in the White House as long as their issues get decided in their favor.
Pragmatism rules; never mind what democratic traditions or institutions are plowed under. Really, really scary times because if a large bloc of voters and government leaders don't particularly care, what is going to happen to our free and democratic society?
212
But TV Cynic...I wonder...is it really such a "large block of voters?" Or are we allowing ourselves and our precious ideals (and common, human, decency) to be held hostage by a relatively narrow, yet clearly powerful (?) and active societal fragment? How many folks who voted for Trump are now regretting it (but would never admit it, human nature being what it is)? I guess 2018 will tell. Everyone moved to comment here--Democrat, Independent, moderate Republican, HORRIFIED CITIZEN--needs to take our outrage out of the Times comments section and put it into the voting booth. (And bring at least two folks (who don't usually vote in the off-term and who are like-minded), with you). See the beautifully articulated comment by "oldteacher," earlier: we can't afford to become news-weary. Not now. #saveourdemocracy
3
"Cynic: n. A blackguard whose faulty vision allows him only to see things as they are, not as they should be. Hence the practice among the ancient Scythians of plucking out a cynic's eyes to improve his vision". -- Ambrose Bierce
2
It's already happening.
1
yea. When the president obstructs justice, it is not a crime.
It is and remains an impeachable offense.
Not difficult: crimes are met with prosecutions, civil penalties, and jail time. Impeachable offenses are met with removal from office. One is a civil and criminal matter; the other, a purely political process.
If you don't see the distinction, then consider this: the President of the United States could decide to spend six months in Madagascar. This is manifestly legal, but clearly an impeachable offense.
I'm sorry the editorial board cannot distinguish between a criminal prosecution and an impeachment proceeding, but it seems to be a fairly important distinction.
I'm sure the Founding Fathers would take issue with that interpretation! They established a democratic republic, not a monarchy, which is essentially what Mr. Dowd is inferring Mr. Trump is: above the law.
But the scary thing is that as long as the Republican-controlled Congress allows Trump to get away with everything, he effecting IS above the law. We have all but lost our democracy.
343
Not only is there obstruction, but there is also obfuscation,which seems to be something Trump excels at.
4
We the people allowed this to happen. Leave aside that this thoroughly unfit person was elected. The powers and influence of the presidency has been steadily increasing since FDR. Congress has no interest in doing much to retain its power. It could weaken the presidency at any time it wants, but that would require actually doing things and being active in governance. They'd rather attend donor lunches.
The sooner we reduce the powers of the presidency the better.
3
It can be argued that the president attempted to but did not obstruct justice
because it didn't succeed.
The President has the right to fire even if you think it was done to obstruct Justice.
1
Of course Trump will not change. He is 71, a veteran real estate power,
a major entertainer in charge of :The Apprentice", who has gone bankrupt
6 times. He has traveled the world in the past nine months giving speeches
and laying out his agenda for the U.S. His personal stamina has to
be admired. The reality is Trump lacks a sense of history and what the
President must do to keep America safe and great. Watching Trump
flounder in the charges and counter charges of the Flynn investigation
is painful. The Mueller report will set the stage for impeachment
2
The guy is becoming unhinged and incoherent. That hardly seems like stamina.
1
The president may be the nation’s top law enforcement officer, but he is not the law. He is a citizen, not a king. All indications are that the distinction is obscured in the mind of our chief executive. Congress abdicates its responsibility in refusing to enforce that distinction. It, like certain foreign sovereign’s, have found encouraging the president’s delusions convenient to its aims. The question is not so much to the role of the president as it is to the likelihood he will be constrained to adhere to it or be removed; the problem is systemic complicity, in Washington, in the dismemberment of the republic.
285
Where did these extravagantly paid lawyers learn their jurisprudence. The president cannot obstruct justice? Since when any person is above the law?
Isn't that why the American Revolution started? These people are peddling the medieval concept that the king is the law (Rex, lex). It is known that Republicans never forget (trickle-down economy) but never learn (it doesn't work), so it is not surprising that they are resurrecting this concept. From an intellectual point of view, this claim is more than sufficient to disbar them, for it goes straight against the very essence of the Constitution.
13
The US constitution's article 2 simply establishes the executive branch of the US federal government that includes the President, Vice-president and the cabinet, and vests supreme authity of enforcing the federal laws in the chief executive, since it's the presidential system of government in the US. It never immunises the President from any misuse of power or obstructing justice as he's trying to do with the Robert Mueller headed Special investigation into his Russia links and the Flynn saga following his guilty plea.
73
Article 2 vests the executive power in the President. It does not vest "supreme authority" in him. To the contrary, Article 2 checks the executive in various ways, including by giving Congress power over the appointment of cooridinates, requiring the President to execute the laws, to report to Congress, etc. Nearly every law which is passed contains explicit standards and procedural limitations on how the executive branch is to carry out the laws.
The lack of immunity for the President in Article 1 exists in contrast to the Constitutions explicit grant to members of Congress. Article 1 expressly states that members of Congress shall have with specific protections from arrest and limited immunity relating to their legislative activities
My parents believed Nixon until the tapes came out. Today's low information voter has no reason to trust the media. I won't be fooled again.
This is the Nixon impeachment on steroids. We may have to wait for the midterm elections, but we've seen this all before.
181
As long as Trump's base is happy and they vote to keep republicans in Congress to hold majorities in both House and Senate, nothing will happen.
Congress is the key to impeaching Trump, but as long as he signs their legislative agenda and doesn't argue with them, nothing will happen.
1
Today's low-information voter has *every* reason to believe the media! The mainstream media, that is.
That's the only way they will ever acquire real information.
They need to wake up realize that it is Fox News, Rush & Sean, and Breitbart that are the real purveyors of Fake News -- spewing misinformation and feeding them propaganda in a rightwing, fundamentalist, corporate crusade.
It's past time for the low-info folks to stop listening to the "deplorables" and turn them off!
They also need to start believing the women -- whether they are accusing Democrats or Republicans, Hollywood or NY real estate moguls, a congressman or the President, or a fundamentalist Southern D.A. who preyed on teens and was later removed from a judgeship for ignoring the Constitution, the law, and federal court orders!
Let's hope for the best, but let's see just how low Alabama has sunk on December 12!
We must wait until after the mid terms to insure that democrats are in charge of the process. Then We the People can indict the entire administration, including Pence. After all since his inauguration we have seen nothing but national trauma so impeaching them both will seem like a walk in the park.
The very title of this article is the kicking in of an open door. The President is the font of Executive Power and, as such, he may decide to undertake actions that are not covered by Law.
There are plenty of examples of this happening. The notion of Executive Orders is itself a means to legitimize this phenomenon, as, one could argue, is the power to pardon criminals. This means that what is wrong can be made right by dint of a Presidential decision, regardless of the evidence à charge and regardless of the desirability of such a decision.
The President is sovereign in the use of his powers. With scant exceptions, you (the US) have been very fortunate. Thus far, Presidents have exercised their powers with remarkable restraint.
If Donald Trump uses the power of the Presidency to interfere in the judicial process, to obstruct its course, that would probably be a first. However, were he to do that, he would still be within his 'rights' as President, because that is what you defined the Presidency to be, without restrictions and without needing confirmation from any other body of authority. So, if Trump were to issue a formal statement, that is sufficiently cleverly worded, to legitimize, say, the actions of Jared Kushner, that would be that.
Under normal circumstances, the opprobrium this would cause in Congress should be dissuasive enough, but circumstances haven't been normal for a while now.
21
It remains to be seen whether President Trump can obstruct justice. However, your argument is very far from persuasive, because of its many errors.
Executive orders are not evidence of extra-legal presidential powers. These are simply the method by which the President formalizes detailed interpretations of the law that are necessary in order to resolve ambiguity. Often, laws explicitly require the President to make decisions, which are formalized in this way.
The Presidential pardon power is explicitly granted in the Constitution. And, pardons require an acknowledgement of guilt. They do not absolve.
The President is not sovereign in his/her power. He or she is sworn to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution. And, the Constitution limits the President's powers in at least the following ways: Although the President is the Commander in Chief, he or she cannot make war with out permission of Congress. The President cannot spend money without permission of Congress. The President cannot remain in office after the end of their term, as specified in the Constitution. And finally, the President is, in effect, forbidden to engage in "High crimes and misdemeanors," or, be subjected to impeachment by the House. And, if subsequently convicted by the Senate, the President is removed from office. The President's power comes from the people and the states, by way of the Constitution, and is thereby strictly limited.
77
Ahhh.. the Constitution places significant limits on executive power, because the founding fathers rightly feared the prospect of a president with the unlimited power you suggest he has.
Article 2 of the Constitution of the United States - the Executive Article — defines presidential powers and responsibilities. The president is Commander in Chief of the armed forces, which entails authority to conduct war or military hostilities when authorized by Congress, as well as authority to repel invasions of the United States. As the Supreme Court ruled several times in the 19th Century, the president has no constitutional authority to initiate military hostilities without congressional authorization.
The president possesses unilateral authority to grant pardons for offenses against the United States and to veto bills presented by Congress. He shares with the Senate the authority to make treaties and to make appointments to federal offices. The president has the duty to faithfully execute the laws and to receive ambassadors from foreign nations.
Congress may check the exercise of presidential power through the exercise of various powers — lawmaking, appropriations, oversight and impeachment. For its part, the federal judiciary may check the exercise of presidential authority through the awesome power of judicial review, which includes the authority to declare presidential acts unconstitutional.
The president does not have carte blanche, his powers are tightly defined.
2
Unless a law states specifically that it does not apply to the President, it does apply. If he breaks the law, he can and should be prosecuted for it.
2
It is also very telling how Trump is going out of his way to praise Flynn, particularly when he trashes and disavows people for so little. Trump is trying to stay in Flynn's good graces because he knows that the former General has incriminating information about Trump, and little reason to stay mum. It is more than incongruous for Trump to praise a former associate as a good man whose life was destroyed by the FBI. When Trump declares that Flynn did nothing wrong, that is a last gasp attempt at not being implicated himself.
182
@NM. A thought: talking about a man being ruined by the FBI sounds like a very good reason to pardon the man — and his son while we're at it. What incentive would Flynn have to hold up his end of a plea bargain if he can't be prosecuted for anything?
@NM -- great comments! You're so right about the president praising other people because that's not like him. If he trashes Flynn, and he will when more information comes to light, Flynn will join Comey and Sessions on the president's personal hit list. When the president refrains from slinging mud at someone, you know something's up.
1
I’m no legal scholar, but my layman’s understanding of a core American principle is summed up by, “No man is above the law.” Now I’m hearing hair-splitting arguments that the president can be above the law. What does that make him? An Uber-citizen? I think with the president in particular it is important the law applies the same way it does to the woman or man on the street. Otherwise, we’re just inviting transgressions and the abuse of power.
239
What does that make him? A king. Apparently, every 4 years, we elect a king.
I actually have a functioning prefrontal cortex. Thank you for acknowledging that fact and for writing this absolutely wonderful piece. I just wish that those on the other side would read it. Is there a way to make it happen, please? By the way, I wish that Trump had a functioning prefrontal cortex. Or any form of a prefrontal cortex.
128