It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
The relevant part:
It remains our position that the President’s actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that he could, if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired.
The position of Trumps lawyers is that he could not commit obstruction of justice because he’s the chief law enforcement officer of the nation. So he can’t obstruct an investigation, even into himself, because all investigations are at his discretion. That’s bull$#it. And sets a dangerous precedent.
Partisanship aside, it should scare everyone when the presidents lawyers argue that the president can kill an investigation into himself or his friends because all investigations are at his discretion as top law enforcement officer.
That is unquestionably putting the president and whoever he wants to pardon above the law. Quite literally.
1Nevertheless, the President’s strong desire for transparency indicated the need to obtain an honest and complete factual report from the Special Counsel, which would sustain and even benefit the Office of the President and the national interest throughout his time in office. Thus, full cooperation was in order, and was in fact provided by all relevant parties.
originally posted by: angeldoll
Does anybody seriously want to live in a country where a president can reek whatever chaos and mob-like behavior he chooses, and have it condoned? Where he is exempt from consequences that even the best and worse of those among us would have to face? Doesn't that eviscerate our system of checks and balances?
This is not patriotism. This is knowingly destructionist.
originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: underwerks
That is unquestionably putting the president and whoever he wants to pardon above the law. Quite literally.
Can you imagine the absolute outrage if a Democratic president tried this BS? But somehow Trump has been elevated to Godlike stature and do anything he wants, because a dork lawyer like Giuliani says so...
Amazing....
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
The relevant part:
It remains our position that the President’s actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that he could, if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired.
The position of Trumps lawyers is that he could not commit obstruction of justice because he’s the chief law enforcement officer of the nation. So he can’t obstruct an investigation, even into himself, because all investigations are at his discretion. That’s bull$#it. And sets a dangerous precedent.
Partisanship aside, it should scare everyone when the presidents lawyers argue that the president can kill an investigation into himself or his friends because all investigations are at his discretion as top law enforcement officer.
That is unquestionably putting the president and whoever he wants to pardon above the law. Quite literally.
Also relevant is the rest of the paragraph:
1Nevertheless, the President’s strong desire for transparency indicated the need to obtain an honest and complete factual report from the Special Counsel, which would sustain and even benefit the Office of the President and the national interest throughout his time in office. Thus, full cooperation was in order, and was in fact provided by all relevant parties.
The point they are making is Trump could have ended the entire investigation, but didn’t.
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
The relevant part:
It remains our position that the President’s actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that he could, if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired.
The position of Trumps lawyers is that he could not commit obstruction of justice because he’s the chief law enforcement officer of the nation. So he can’t obstruct an investigation, even into himself, because all investigations are at his discretion. That’s bull$#it. And sets a dangerous precedent.
Partisanship aside, it should scare everyone when the presidents lawyers argue that the president can kill an investigation into himself or his friends because all investigations are at his discretion as top law enforcement officer.
That is unquestionably putting the president and whoever he wants to pardon above the law. Quite literally.
Also relevant is the rest of the paragraph:
1Nevertheless, the President’s strong desire for transparency indicated the need to obtain an honest and complete factual report from the Special Counsel, which would sustain and even benefit the Office of the President and the national interest throughout his time in office. Thus, full cooperation was in order, and was in fact provided by all relevant parties.
The point they are making is Trump could have ended the entire investigation, but didn’t.
It still remains to be seen whether he will kill the investigation or not. With Giuliani doing the cable news rounds trying to normalize this move by a sitting president it stands to reason this is something they are actively considering. Especially given the letter outlining it from January.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
The relevant part:
It remains our position that the President’s actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that he could, if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired.
The position of Trumps lawyers is that he could not commit obstruction of justice because he’s the chief law enforcement officer of the nation. So he can’t obstruct an investigation, even into himself, because all investigations are at his discretion. That’s bull$#it. And sets a dangerous precedent.
Partisanship aside, it should scare everyone when the presidents lawyers argue that the president can kill an investigation into himself or his friends because all investigations are at his discretion as top law enforcement officer.
That is unquestionably putting the president and whoever he wants to pardon above the law. Quite literally.
Also relevant is the rest of the paragraph:
1Nevertheless, the President’s strong desire for transparency indicated the need to obtain an honest and complete factual report from the Special Counsel, which would sustain and even benefit the Office of the President and the national interest throughout his time in office. Thus, full cooperation was in order, and was in fact provided by all relevant parties.
The point they are making is Trump could have ended the entire investigation, but didn’t.
It still remains to be seen whether he will kill the investigation or not. With Giuliani doing the cable news rounds trying to normalize this move by a sitting president it stands to reason this is something they are actively considering. Especially given the letter outlining it from January.
According to the letter, full cooperation and transparency were in order. But we never see any mention of that.
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
The relevant part:
It remains our position that the President’s actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that he could, if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired.
The position of Trumps lawyers is that he could not commit obstruction of justice because he’s the chief law enforcement officer of the nation. So he can’t obstruct an investigation, even into himself, because all investigations are at his discretion. That’s bull$#it. And sets a dangerous precedent.
Partisanship aside, it should scare everyone when the presidents lawyers argue that the president can kill an investigation into himself or his friends because all investigations are at his discretion as top law enforcement officer.
That is unquestionably putting the president and whoever he wants to pardon above the law. Quite literally.
Also relevant is the rest of the paragraph:
1Nevertheless, the President’s strong desire for transparency indicated the need to obtain an honest and complete factual report from the Special Counsel, which would sustain and even benefit the Office of the President and the national interest throughout his time in office. Thus, full cooperation was in order, and was in fact provided by all relevant parties.
The point they are making is Trump could have ended the entire investigation, but didn’t.
It still remains to be seen whether he will kill the investigation or not. With Giuliani doing the cable news rounds trying to normalize this move by a sitting president it stands to reason this is something they are actively considering. Especially given the letter outlining it from January.
According to the letter, full cooperation and transparency were in order. But we never see any mention of that.
If full cooperation and transparency is what they were shooting for, then why the full court press to justify why Trump shouldn’t have to cooperate?
I’m thinking transparency and cooperation here hold the same weight as the democratic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
originally posted by: Willtell
Trump is turning into a little Hitler.
Guilliani is his Martin Borman.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: LesMisanthrope
The relevant part:
It remains our position that the President’s actions here, by virtue of his position as the chief law enforcement officer, could neither constitutionally nor legally constitute obstruction because that would amount to him obstructing himself, and that he could, if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired.
The position of Trumps lawyers is that he could not commit obstruction of justice because he’s the chief law enforcement officer of the nation. So he can’t obstruct an investigation, even into himself, because all investigations are at his discretion. That’s bull$#it. And sets a dangerous precedent.
Partisanship aside, it should scare everyone when the presidents lawyers argue that the president can kill an investigation into himself or his friends because all investigations are at his discretion as top law enforcement officer.
That is unquestionably putting the president and whoever he wants to pardon above the law. Quite literally.
Also relevant is the rest of the paragraph:
1Nevertheless, the President’s strong desire for transparency indicated the need to obtain an honest and complete factual report from the Special Counsel, which would sustain and even benefit the Office of the President and the national interest throughout his time in office. Thus, full cooperation was in order, and was in fact provided by all relevant parties.
The point they are making is Trump could have ended the entire investigation, but didn’t.
It still remains to be seen whether he will kill the investigation or not. With Giuliani doing the cable news rounds trying to normalize this move by a sitting president it stands to reason this is something they are actively considering. Especially given the letter outlining it from January.
According to the letter, full cooperation and transparency were in order. But we never see any mention of that.
If full cooperation and transparency is what they were shooting for, then why the full court press to justify why Trump shouldn’t have to cooperate?
I’m thinking transparency and cooperation here hold the same weight as the democratic in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
I’m not sure this kind of “thinking” has had any success thus far. In fact, this sounds like another media-induced outrage that will soon blow over when their fears never come to fruition, for the thousandth time.
originally posted by: Grimpachi
Trump claims innocence, but he sure acts guilty.