No. of Recommendations: 11
"You are surprised that obstruction of justice was my biggest concern? Why? The very idea that the President or anyone close to the President would in any way obstruct justice with the intent of obscuring the truth regarding a hostile foreign power interfering within our political election process should be VERY alarming to any US citizen. I don't know how you could not be alarmed at the prospect."

This would be true regardless of who is president.

Yes, but we haver never had a President with the track record of dishonesty that THIS President has. He is a well documented liar. Many shady connections to Russians have been uncovered, and we do know that Russia did in fact interfere with our election process. Note I did NOT say that they changed the outcome. But that they tried in undeniable.

Your answer pre-supposes that Russian interference and collusion, which you said you were not particularly concerned about, took place.

Yes to the first, no to the second. Now we do know that there was intent to collude with Jr's so-called adoption meeting, but there is no indication that it actually happened as of yet. The Mueller investigation may have other information.

It seems the premise of an underlying crime is critical to your theory.

I haven't actually presented a theory. But, of course, if no crime was committed, the investigation will make that same conclusion.

And as far as it being VERY alarming, yes, I agree if it happened. But that is not germane to the discussion.

We disagree. A lot.

To be alarmed about obstruction, I have to pre-suppose it happened. There is no evidence of Trump "collusion" with Russia.

There actually is. The Trump Tower meeting, which Jr lied about several times, is highly suspicious, and shows a clear and unquestionable desire to collude, at the very least.

And Russian interference into Western elections is nothing new, nor is it unique to the US.

Of course. To borrow your phrase, that isn't germane to the discussion.

"Firing an executive branch employee cannot in itself constitute obstruction of justice."

"It absolutely can, depending on what the intent of that firing is. Trump has already stated that he fired Comey to get rid of the pressure from 'this Russia thing'. How is that NOT obstruction of justice?"

The Constitution gives the President the prerogative.

That prerogative is not without boundaries.

"As for 'the facts we know', I suggest waiting until the investigation is complete and the findings come out before you decide what we know."

You presume guilt on the part of the President, without facts to implicate him. Surely my pointing this out is fair game.

Only if it were true. I have not ever said that Trump was guilty of collusion or obstruction of justice. I have repeatedly stated that we do not know yet what the investigation has found so far, if anything. But it MUST be allowed to continue, unimpeded by Trump or anyone else.
Print the post  

Announcements

When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement