candycorn
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #81
This is politics. Nothing is real.*giggle*Theoretically, yes.NOPE!
But our constitution makes the attorney general both the chief prosecutor and the chief political adviser to the present on matters of justice and law enforcement.
The president can, as a matter of constitutional law, direct the attorney general, and his subordinate, the Director of the FBI, tell them what to do, whom to prosecute and whom not to prosecute. Indeed, the president has the constitutional authority to stop the investigation of any person by simply pardoning that person.
Assume, for argument’s sake, that the president had said the following to Comey: quot;You are no longer authorized to investigate Flynn because I have decided to pardon him." Would that exercise of the president's constitutional power to pardon constitute a criminal obstruction of justice? Of course not. presidents do that all the time.
The first President Bush pardoned Casper Weinberger, his Secretary of Defense, in the middle of an investigation that could have incriminated Bush. That was not an obstruction and neither would a pardon of Flynn have been a crime. A president cannot be charged with a crime for properly exercising his constitutional authority
For the same reason President Trump cannot be charged with obstruction for firing Comey, which he had the constitutional authority to do.
The Comey statement suggests that one reason the president fired him was because of his refusal or failure to publicly announce that the FBI was not investigating Trump personally. Trump "repeatedly" told Comey to "get that fact out," and he did not.
Dershowitz: Comey's statement fails to deliver the smoking gun Democrats craved
You folks will never learn.
.
So Trump could dismiss everyone in the FBI from the Director down to the janitor and close the offices down from coast to coast and he would still not be violating any laws whatsoever, right?
.
Well, he should go on Television and explain to the public that he is above the law because he can fire anyone who comes to arrest him.
Only those who think Trump University was legitimate will agree with him (or you).
Once again, he was not a target of an investigation, so why would anyone be coming to arrest him? Your willful ignorance and partisan hackery is starting to get old. Get back to me when you have something real.
.
The goal here is to damage Trump so that congressional Republicans won't help him push his agenda, and to make strides in 2018 & 2020.
Fer fuck's sake, let's just be honest about this. This is the only play the Dems have, and they're doing a pretty good job. They've got an easy target.
If the GOP were in the same position, they'd be doing precisely the same thing.
Which, of course, is the problem.
.
True or false, if the GOP, at least in part, didn't want the Senate to have this hearing tomorrow, they wouldn't be having a hearing. They do, after all, control the agenda and if a full committee has hearings or not. That is why Sandra Fluke had to testify to Democrats only.