@firefly,
firefly wrote:Right, they're worried about real obstruction charges--and they should be worried.
No such charges. The only obstruction charges here are the ones that you are imagining.
firefly wrote:Why do you think Trump's been working so hard to try to discredit Mueller and calling his investigation "a rigged witch-hunt"? He is trying to insulate himself, in the public's mind, against any criminal involvements Mueller might find against him.
He is right to do so. This witch hunt is shameful.
firefly wrote:It sure is obstruction if the president tries to close down a criminal investigation when he, or members of his family, are likely subjects of that investigation.
No. The obstruction statute is about interfering with investigations that the government is trying to pursue.
It does not criminalize a government decision to stop pursuing an investigation.
firefly wrote:And it would qualify as a "high crime or misdemeanor".
Not after Bill Clinton it won't.
firefly wrote:That's why even Rudy Giuliani has said he doesn't believe Trump would ever fire Mueller. Legal experts pretty much agree that if Trump did that he would set off a profound constitutional crisis. That would be the end of his presidency.
Nah. All it would do is set of a big temper tantrum on the left.
But firing Mueller is more hassle than it is worth. Pardons are the way to defang this witch hunt.
