Did Trump obstruct justice?

[Tassman]

Interesting legal point made by Alan Dershowitz:

According to less partisan reports than Fox News "Reports that Donald Trump asked former FBI director James Comey to shut down a federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn have added weight to a possible obstruction of justice case against the president, law professors say."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39902108

Your president is stumbling from disaster to disaster. It's only a matter of time before he's gone.

[NorrinRadd]

According to less partisan reports than Fox News ...[/url]

FNC is only the vehicle. The author of the article is Constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz, a long-time committed DEMOCRAT, but a more "old-time" civil libertarian sort.

[Tassman]

FNC is only the vehicle. The author of the article is Constitutional scholar Alan Dershowitz, a long-time committed DEMOCRAT, but a more "old-time" civil libertarian sort.

You are right, I leaped in too hastily. I watch Alan Dershowitz, regularly on CNN and am an admirer. But Dershowitz does

[NorrinRadd]

You are right, I leaped in too hastily. I watch Alan Dershowitz, regularly on CNN and am an admirer. But Dershowitz does

I didn't get the impression he was "critical" of it. He seemed to have kind of mixed views on that aspect. FBI independence is, as you say, a "tradition," not explicitly laid out in the Constitution, and a "recent" one at that. Dersh seems to like practices to be firmly rooted in the Constitution. But from a pragmatic standpoint, the FBI does need some measure of independence.

[seer]

According to less partisan reports than Fox News "Reports that Donald Trump asked former FBI director James Comey to shut down a federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn have added weight to a possible obstruction of justice case against the president, law professors say."

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39902108

Your president is stumbling from disaster to disaster. It's only a matter of time before he's gone.

Tass you do understand that it would have been perfectly legal for Trump to direct Comey to actually shut down the Flynn investigation - right? Even Comey admitted that yesterday. As the liberal scholar Alan Dershowitz confirmed, including past examples. Sorry Tass - you guys got nothing...

[seer]

You are right, I leaped in too hastily. I watch Alan Dershowitz, regularly on CNN and am an admirer. But Dershowitz does

Yes, but no laws broken, nothing impeachable...

[Mountain Man]

Yes, a hearing that completely vindicated Trump and exposed Comey's duplicity was somehow damaging to Trump's credibility.

Liberals are so delusional.

[Starlight]

Yes, a hearing that completely vindicated Trump and exposed Comey's duplicity was somehow damaging to Trump's credibility.

Liberals are so delusional.

You must have been at a different hearing. Perhaps you attended the one where McCain asked insightful questions?

[seer]

You must have been at a different hearing. Perhaps you attended the one where McCain asked insightful questions?

Boy McCain was bad, I mean I love the guy, but it really is time for a nursing home... But as far as any criminal exposure Trump came out ahead.

[One Bad Pig]

You are right, I leaped in too hastily. I watch Alan Dershowitz, regularly on CNN and am an admirer. But Dershowitz does

I wasn't aware that Democrats thought Trump had any credibility to begin with.

[Meh Gerbil]

You must have been at a different hearing. Perhaps you attended the one where McCain asked insightful questions?

McCain is simply one of the most evil actors in our government.
In trying to decide between him or Hillary for jail time I'd have to toss a coin.

[Sparko]

The hyperbole in the hypothetical is lost on you.

no. my sarcasm was lost on you

[Tassman]

McCain is simply one of the most evil actors in our government.
In trying to decide between him or Hillary for jail time I'd have to toss a coin.

Nah! Trump wins hands down.

I wasn't aware that Democrats thought Trump had any credibility to begin with.

Trump's "credibility" sets a low bar admittedly.

[JimL]

I think the answer is a little bit of everything. Yes, he tried to obstruct justice. No, he didn't really succeed in any way that mattered. In his defense, he was just way too stupid to realize the President shouldn't be doing that.

While there may technically be grounds for impeachment here, I don't think they're good grounds. It's like Hillary's emails - she did something wrong but it wasn't serious enough to warrant prosecution. Whereas impeachment on the ongoing and numerous emolument clause violations (Trump using the Office of President for personal financial gain) would rest on extremely solid ground, but any impeachment would ultimately need the Republicans in Congress to agree to it, which isn't going to happen.

Not necessarily, you don't need all the Republicans, if it becomes apparent enough that obstruction occurred, and that the campaign colluded with the Russians, the Republicans will be in a tough spot, it will be difficult to hold the majority together, some of them are actually ethical patriotic Americans once you back them into a corner, i.e. when their election is on the line.

[JimL]

Yes, but no laws broken, nothing impeachable...

Thats your opinion seer, you don't know that, thats up to the special prosecutor to determine, the investigation is ongoing.