Trump lawyer: The president cannot obstruct justice

[yuiyoshida]

President Donald Trump's personal lawyer, John Dowd, revealed Monday a potential legal defense in the ongoing Russia probe, claiming that a president cannot obstruct justice.

"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 NBC News Monday.

Dowd added that the president's weekend tweet — which many have argued strengthened a potential obstruction of justice case for special counsel Robert Mueller — "did not admit obstruction."

"That is an ignorant and arrogant assertion," Dowd said.

His comments were first reported by Axios and came two days after Trump tweeted, "I had to fire General Flynn because he lied to the Vice President and the FBI."

more..
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-lawyer-president-cannot-obstruct-justice-n826231

[bearsfootball516]

1. Tell Richard Nixon that.

[Sophia4]

2. Time, and additional evidence, will "tell."

[Cattledog]

3. "The King can do no wrong"

King Charles I during his trial. He was beheaded.

[Angry Dragon]

4. In another thread someone pointed out that Jeff Sessions said President Clinton was not

above the law


Law for Dummies: Dowd is wrong........no one is above the law.

[struggle4progress]

5. It is a curiously weak defense of Trump

If the President has done nothing, which done by any other actor, would qualify as obstruction, one should expect his lawyer to say so -- but the lawyer here instead wishes to divert the discussion to whether the President by virtue of office, is immunized against any possible obstruction charges

The Supreme Court in 1994 allowed a suit against Clinton to proceed while he was in office, so there seems no absolute bar to a sitting President as defendant, though perhaps a criminal prosecution of a sitting President might face a high bar

Whatever the legal prospects for criminal prosecution of a sitting President, Ford's pardon of Nixon clearly nods towards the idea that an ex-President might indeed be prosecuted for crimes committed in office

Moreover, as a political matter, the theoretical question "Can a President obstruct justice?" has been answered at least twice twice within living memory, by Article I of the House Judiciary Committee in the process against Nixon and again later by Article II in the process against Clinton

Thus, regardless of whether (as either a practical matter or a doctrine of law) a sitting President might be prosecuted for obstruction, it is a novel theory -- and one quite foreign and inimical to our national traditions -- that a person, by virtue of being President, simply cannot commit obstruction and later face charges for that