Dershowitz: ‘You Cannot Charge a President With Obstruction for Exercising His Constitutional Power’

[bripat9643]

He can charge Trump with obstruction of justice. Dershowitz is wrong.

Dershowitz is one lawyer's opinion, don't forget. Nothing more or less.

The difference is that Derschewitz has logic on his side. You have pure idiocy on your side.

No one is above the law.

btw Jeff Sessions, the AG, voted to impeach Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice.

The Constitution says the president has the authority to fire anyone in his employ for any reason, period. The Constitution is the law.

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

 

[AntonToo]

This is for all the forum idiots who think Mueller can charge Trump with obstruction of justice:

Mueller can't- you can't charge a sitting President with anything.

But the House could charge the President with Obstruction.

Would the GOP EVER charge Trump with anything- even if there were photo's of him handing over the nuclear codes to Putin in exchange for a suitcase full of diamonds?

Don't think so.

You need to think again, I bet they would prefer Pence as the president over the orange clown nine-to-one.

If Mueller puts together a serious obstruction of justice case Trump is gone.

yea, cause that's what he was hired to do.

again - you don't give a flying shit what you find, but find something.

shit mentality needs to go all around.

It was EXACTLY what he was hired to do. Financial records is how you follow the Russian money.

And let me remind you that we've had another Special Prosecutor and he WAS CERTAINLY NOT hired to look for Clinton's blowjobs. So that ship has LONG SAILED.

No, it wasn't what he was hired to do. Investigating Russian interference in the election is what he was hired to do. Trump's activities with Duetch Bank have nothing to do with that since they all occured long before he announced. Nothing Mueller has done has anything to do with "Russian collusion."

He's a scumbag. Time to terminate him.

Dummy, if Russian interests had Trump in their pocket (remember, no American Banks would lend to him and his sons directly admitted heavy Russian investments) then that is DIRECTLY tied into their peculiar leverage on Trump the candidate.

Candidate who in DIRECT CONTRADICTION to political self-interest consistently took very pro-Russian positions and could find absolutely no way to say anything less than flattering about Putin's regime.

 

[eddiew37]

This is for all the forum idiots who think Mueller can charge Trump with obstruction of justice:

Mueller can't- you can't charge a sitting President with anything.

But the House could charge the President with Obstruction.

Would the GOP EVER charge Trump with anything- even if there were photo's of him handing over the nuclear codes to Putin in exchange for a suitcase full of diamonds?

Don't think so.

You need to think again, I bet they would prefer Pence as the president over the orange clown nine-to-one.

If Mueller puts together a serious obstruction of justice case Trump is gone.

yea, cause that's what he was hired to do.

again - you don't give a flying shit what you find, but find something.

shit mentality needs to go all around.

It was EXACTLY what he was hired to do. Financial records is how you follow the Russian money.

And let me remind you that we've had another Special Prosecutor and he WAS CERTAINLY NOT hired to look for Clinton's blowjobs. So that ship has LONG SAILED.

No, it wasn't what he was hired to do. Investigating Russian interference in the election is what he was hired to do. Trump's activities with Duetch Bank have nothing to do with that since they all occured long before he announced. Nothing Mueller has done has anything to do with "Russian collusion."

He's a scumbag. Time to terminate him.

You forget they investigated Bill Clinton over some bs bank shit but that's not what they got him for

 

[eddiew37]

Dershowitz is one lawyer's opinion, don't forget. Nothing more or less.

The difference is that Derschewitz has logic on his side. You have pure idiocy on your side.

No one is above the law.

btw Jeff Sessions, the AG, voted to impeach Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice.

The Constitution says the president has the authority to fire anyone in his employ for any reason, period. The Constitution is the law.

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

Ford pardoned him

 

[bripat9643]

The difference is that Derschewitz has logic on his side. You have pure idiocy on your side.

No one is above the law.

btw Jeff Sessions, the AG, voted to impeach Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice.

The Constitution says the president has the authority to fire anyone in his employ for any reason, period. The Constitution is the law.

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

Ford pardoned him

Nixon tried to cover up an actual crime (the Watergate breakin). He wasn't accused of obsturction of justice for firing Cox.

 

[eddiew37]

No one is above the law.

btw Jeff Sessions, the AG, voted to impeach Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice.

The Constitution says the president has the authority to fire anyone in his employ for any reason, period. The Constitution is the law.

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

Ford pardoned him

Nixon tried to cover up an actual crime (the Watergate breakin). He wasn't accused of obsturction of justice for firing Cox.

In July [1974] the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to turn over the remaining tapes, which he again tried to resist.

The House of Representatives lost patience, voting to impeach Nixon for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, criminal cover-up and several violations of the Constitution.

 

[BlindBoo]

Yeah cause Nixon proved that when a president does it, it's not illegal.

"Perp walk for Trump"
"Perp walk for Trump"
"Perp walk for Trump"

 

[g5000]

This is for all the forum idiots who think Mueller can charge Trump with obstruction of justice:

Dershowitz: 'You Cannot Charge a President With Obstruction of Justice for Exercising His Constitutional Power' - Breitbart​

Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz batted down the merit of obstruction of justice charges aimed at President Donald Trump for what he said was exercising his constitutional power and authority regarding the firing of then-FBI Director James Comey and instructing the Department of Justice what to and not to investigate.

“If Congress were to ever charge him with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional authority under Article 2, we’d have a constitutional crisis,” he explained. “You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power to fire Comey and his constitutional authority to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who not to investigate. That’s what Thomas Jefferson did. That’s what Lincoln did. That’s what Roosevelt did. We have precedents that clearly establish that.”

​

"It's not illegal if the President does it!"

Trump's gone full Nixon.

Does not bode well for him.

 

[g5000]

People have got to know whether or not their president is a crook. Well, I'm not a crook. I earned everything I've got.

 

[bripat9643]

The Constitution says the president has the authority to fire anyone in his employ for any reason, period. The Constitution is the law.

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

Ford pardoned him

Nixon tried to cover up an actual crime (the Watergate breakin). He wasn't accused of obsturction of justice for firing Cox.

In July [1974] the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to turn over the remaining tapes, which he again tried to resist.

The House of Representatives lost patience, voting to impeach Nixon for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, criminal cover-up and several violations of the Constitution.

Your point?

 

[bripat9643]

This is for all the forum idiots who think Mueller can charge Trump with obstruction of justice:

Dershowitz: 'You Cannot Charge a President With Obstruction of Justice for Exercising His Constitutional Power' - Breitbart​

Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz batted down the merit of obstruction of justice charges aimed at President Donald Trump for what he said was exercising his constitutional power and authority regarding the firing of then-FBI Director James Comey and instructing the Department of Justice what to and not to investigate.

“If Congress were to ever charge him with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional authority under Article 2, we’d have a constitutional crisis,” he explained. “You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power to fire Comey and his constitutional authority to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who not to investigate. That’s what Thomas Jefferson did. That’s what Lincoln did. That’s what Roosevelt did. We have precedents that clearly establish that.”

​

"It's not illegal if the President does it!"

Trump's gone full Nixon.

Does not bode well for him.

When is firing someone illegal?

 

[NYcarbineer]

No one is above the law.

btw Jeff Sessions, the AG, voted to impeach Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice.

The Constitution says the president has the authority to fire anyone in his employ for any reason, period. The Constitution is the law.

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

Ford pardoned him

Nixon tried to cover up an actual crime (the Watergate breakin). He wasn't accused of obsturction of justice for firing Cox.

Flynn's lying to the FBI is an actual crime.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Reminder who Dershowitz is...

FUCKING TRUMP LOVING RIGHT WINGER ALAN DERSHOWITZ?

What does that guy know about the Constitution?

Oh....

Alan Dershowitz - Wikipedia

Alan Morton Dershowitz (born September 1, 1938) is an American lawyer and author. He is a scholar of United States constitutional law and criminal law, and a leading defender of civil liberties.He spent most of his career at Harvard Law School where in 1967, at the age of 28, he became the youngest full professor of law in its history.

So basically, he would have been one of Obama's understudies.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No one is above the law.

btw Jeff Sessions, the AG, voted to impeach Bill Clinton for obstruction of justice.

The Constitution says the president has the authority to fire anyone in his employ for any reason, period. The Constitution is the law.

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

Ford pardoned him

Nixon tried to cover up an actual crime (the Watergate breakin). He wasn't accused of obsturction of justice for firing Cox.

You're obviously not aware that obstruction of justice can be a crime even if it obstructs an investigation leading to the determination that no crime was committed.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Trump's own lawyer Ty Cobb has now taken the position that Trump's other lawyer is full of shit. lol

 

[Ted Frazier]

This is for all the forum idiots who think Mueller can charge Trump with obstruction of justice:

Dershowitz: 'You Cannot Charge a President With Obstruction of Justice for Exercising His Constitutional Power' - Breitbart​

Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz batted down the merit of obstruction of justice charges aimed at President Donald Trump for what he said was exercising his constitutional power and authority regarding the firing of then-FBI Director James Comey and instructing the Department of Justice what to and not to investigate.

“If Congress were to ever charge him with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional authority under Article 2, we’d have a constitutional crisis,” he explained. “You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power to fire Comey and his constitutional authority to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who not to investigate. That’s what Thomas Jefferson did. That’s what Lincoln did. That’s what Roosevelt did. We have precedents that clearly establish that.”

​

Dershowitz versus a whole damn lot of experts: 11 law professors: Trump can obstruct justice

 

[Ted Frazier]

This is for all the forum idiots who think Mueller can charge Trump with obstruction of justice:

Dershowitz: 'You Cannot Charge a President With Obstruction of Justice for Exercising His Constitutional Power' - Breitbart​

Monday on Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends,” Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz batted down the merit of obstruction of justice charges aimed at President Donald Trump for what he said was exercising his constitutional power and authority regarding the firing of then-FBI Director James Comey and instructing the Department of Justice what to and not to investigate.

“If Congress were to ever charge him with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional authority under Article 2, we’d have a constitutional crisis,” he explained. “You cannot charge a president with obstruction of justice for exercising his constitutional power to fire Comey and his constitutional authority to tell the Justice Department who to investigate, who not to investigate. That’s what Thomas Jefferson did. That’s what Lincoln did. That’s what Roosevelt did. We have precedents that clearly establish that.”

​

You cherry-picked one scholar because he is the one you love (for being a conservative).
I found 11 scholars who disagree with Dershowitz in one article alone: Trump’s lawyer: the president can’t obstruct justice. 13 legal experts: yes, he can.

 

[kiwiman127]

Well there is this.
Trump’s lawyer: the president can’t obstruct justice. 13 legal experts: yes, he can.

President Trump’s lawyer, John Dowd, apparently believes the president cannot be guilty of obstruction of justice because he’s the president.
The “president cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer [under the Constitution’s Article II] and has every right to express his view of any case,” Dowd told Axios’s Mike Allen.
But is that true? To find out, I reached out to 13 legal experts and asked them a single question: Can the president commit obstruction of justice?
Trump’s lawyer: the president can’t obstruct justice. 13 legal experts: yes, he can.

You mean 13 douchebag leftwing propagandists say he can. A leftist will say anything if it promotes their agenda.

Are you a Constitutional expert? No.
Why not prove them wrong?
You are just a goose-stepping tool, who doesn’t have the qualifications to question any Constitutional experts.

 

[iceberg]

Well there is this.
Trump’s lawyer: the president can’t obstruct justice. 13 legal experts: yes, he can.

President Trump’s lawyer, John Dowd, apparently believes the president cannot be guilty of obstruction of justice because he’s the president.
The “president cannot obstruct justice because he is the chief law enforcement officer [under the Constitution’s Article II] and has every right to express his view of any case,” Dowd told Axios’s Mike Allen.
But is that true? To find out, I reached out to 13 legal experts and asked them a single question: Can the president commit obstruction of justice?
Trump’s lawyer: the president can’t obstruct justice. 13 legal experts: yes, he can.

You mean 13 douchebag leftwing propagandists say he can. A leftist will say anything if it promotes their agenda.

Are you a Constitutional expert? No.
Why not prove them wrong?
You are just a goose-stepping tool, who doesn’t have the qualifications to question any Constitutional experts.

we have those in here?

 

[eddiew37]

Didn't Nixon do that ?? See how far that got him?

Was he indicted?

Ford pardoned him

Nixon tried to cover up an actual crime (the Watergate breakin). He wasn't accused of obsturction of justice for firing Cox.

In July [1974] the Supreme Court ordered Nixon to turn over the remaining tapes, which he again tried to resist.

The House of Representatives lost patience, voting to impeach Nixon for obstruction of justice, abuse of power, criminal cover-up and several violations of the Constitution.

Your point?

Bripat do you smell money laundering
Subpoena For Deutsche Bank May Put Mueller On Collision Course With Trump

• PHILIP EWING
  
  
  
  
  
  Special counsel Robert Mueller is reportedly requesting Trump family records from German-based Deutsche Bank.
  
  Justin Tallis/AFP/Getty Images
  Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller has reportedly subpoenaed Trump family financial records from the German financial giant Deutsche Bank, a move that could signal a major new direction for his inquiry.
  
  Deutsche Bank has so far not accommodated or discussed American requests for information about the Trumps' accounts. The German business newspaper Handelsblatt, which first reported the subpoena, quoted a spokesman saying that the bank cooperates with official investigators but would not discuss individual cases.
  
  If Mueller's team is expanding its inquiry into the Trump family's banking and financial arrangements, that could put it onto a collision course with the president.
  
  
  NATIONAL SECURITY
  2016 RNC Delegate: Trump Directed Change To Party Platform On Ukraine Support
  Trump, his wife, daughter Ivanka and son-in-law Jared Kushner are understood to be clients of Deutsche Bank. But Trump's attorneys have said they believe the Trumps' business and financial arrangements are out of bounds for Mueller's investigation, and Trump has denied all along that he has any financial connections with Russians.
  
  "I don't make money from Russia," as he told The New York Times. "I don't have buildings in Russia. They said I own buildings in Russia. I don't. They said I made money from Russia. I don't. It's not my thing. I don't, I don't do that. Over the years, I've looked at maybe doing a deal in Russia, but I never did one.