"Specific Intent"

[kpete]

A person obstructs justice when they have a specific intent to obstruct or interfere with a judicial proceeding. For a person to be convicted of obstructing justice, they must not only have the specific intent to obstruct the proceeding, but the person must know (1) that a proceeding was actually pending at the time; and (2) there must be a nexus between the defendant’s endeavor to obstruct justice and the proceeding, and the defendant must have knowledge of this nexus.


https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/obstruction_of_justice

[Cicada]

1. President has right to dictate prosecution choices

The President can order FBI to not investigate small scale marijuana selling, or online poker, or fake sports memorabilia or Michael Flynn. He is the boss and can tell them what to investigate and what not to investigate. So I would not count on him being prosecuted for telling the FBI what to do. Telling them what to do is part of his job.

[Xipe Totec]

2. WTF?! nt

[adigal]

3. Sure, he can fire Comey, but once he opened his big fat mouth and said that he did it to release

pressure, it is intent. It is obstruction if you look at exactly what he said.

[Cicada]

4. It is obstruction. It is also legal.

If the President orders the FBI to not investigate a Dreamer kid for some immigration law violation it "obstructs" justice. Right? And the President can legally do that - right? How is an order to not investigate Flynn different? Those in the law and order business make decisions to not pursue prosecutions all the time. That is a huge part of their job - choosing to NOT prosecute various people. And Trump is in the law and order business, as the boss of the executive branch. You can hope he will be prosecuted for obstruction of justice but in this part of it - choosing to not prosecute someone - you are going to be disappointed. He has the legal right to not prosecute anyone he does not want to prosecute. Just like every other prosecutor in the USA has that right.

[Qutzupalotl]

8. The president hired Flynn knowing his background.

That means he is involved in any investigation of Flynn, making his request for Comey to back off self-serving and obstruction of justice.

Since Nixon, there is a bright line between the president and the FBI, and protocol to follow when inquiring about an investigation. Trump trampled it.

[Cicada]

9. Bright lines are not always laws

It is CUSTOM to give FBI autonomy. But it is LAW that the President has executive power. The President is the boss of the FBI and can order it to not investigate specific matters. If the President thinks hair nets on chefs are creepy he can order all chefs in the federal govt to not wear them even tho it is customary for them to do so.

[Qutzupalotl]

10. If those matters concern the president himself, that's obstruction of justice.

[Cicada]

11. There are no statutes nor cases supporting your view

There is a long tradition that no one should be his own judge. But I don't know of any case holding that a prosecutor's decision to not prosecute someone is obstruction of justice. Usually in cases of conflict of interest a different prosecutor is brought in. But the Constitution requires the President to be the boss of all executive action unless he is legally removed from office. So we can not bring in a different prosecutor to override the President in this case. Look there is a good case for removing Trump from office but short of that I don't think he can be punished for his decision to not prosecute General Flynn.

[Qutzupalotl]

12. If a president tries to stop an investigation into himself

as happened here, and as he admitted doing, that's obstruction of justice.

[L. Coyote]

5. "If the president does it, it is not a crime" worked out great for Nixon. LOL

No one is above the law. Try reading the law:

Trump's New Impeachable Offenses: Obstruction of Justice, Conspiracy, Abuse of Power

[Cicada]

6. Tobin is obviously wrong

Using the logic of Toobin, if the US attorney for the District of Idaho orders a prosecutor in his office to not prosecute a guy who drove his pickup to Canada to buy Canada lumber to avoid the new Canada softwood tariff because the US Attorney thinks it's a trivial crime not worth bothering with, the that US Attorney is guilty of obstruction of Justice. Every prosecutor in the USA constantly decides to not prosecute a bunch of people who are guilty of a crime. The President is the boss of all federal law enforcement workers. He can order them to not prosecute Flynn just like that US Attorney in Idaho can order one of the prosecutors in his office to not prosecute people driving up to Canada to get a load of lumber without paying the tariff. Toobin's logic says that US Attorney is guilty of obstruction of justice. Toobin's logic says that every prosecutor in the USA constantly obstructs justice. Toobin is no Frankfurter.

[L. Coyote]

7. OBSTRUCTION: I faced great pressure because of Russia. Thats taken off.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet