pbmus
pbmus's JournalObstruction of Justice...Trump
Another major crime echoing in the public discourse around the Russia Connection is obstruction of justice. Under 18 U.S.C. § 1505, a felony offense is committed by anyone who corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication influences, obstructs, or impedes or endeavors to influence, obstruct, or impede the due and proper administration of the law under which any pending proceeding is being had before any department or agency of the United States, or the due and proper exercise of the power of inquiry under which any inquiry or investigation in being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress.
An accompanying code section, 18 U.S.C. § 1515(b), defines corruptly as acting with an improper purpose, personally or by influencing another, including making a false or misleading statement, or withholding, concealing, altering, or destroying a document or other information (emphasis added). This is where obstruction of justice intersects with the false statements law. If you knowingly and willfully make a false statement of material fact in a federal government proceeding, youve potentially violated § 1001, and when you add an objective to influence, obstruct, or impede an investigation, youve now possibly violated § 1505 as well. Perjury can intersect with obstruction of justice in the same way.
Under the statute, a proceeding can be an investigation. Section 1503 criminalizes the same conduct in judicial proceedings. So obstruction during an investigation might violate § 1505, while if that same investigation leads to a criminal prosecution, obstruction during the prosecution itself would violate § 1503. The individual also has to know that a proceeding is happening in order to violate the statute, and must have the intent to obstructthat is, act with the purpose of obstructing, even if they dont succeed.
https://www.lawfareblog.com/was-firing-james-comey-obstruction-justice
Ultimately the answer goes to the motives: Did the President or Attorney General intend for Comeys firing to influence, obstruct, or impede the Russia investigation? Even if they had other reasons or goalsincluding perfectly lawful ones, such as concerns about the publics perception of the FBI and the Directorif obstructing or impeding the Russia investigation was a goal, that would constitute obstruction of justice. Therefore, inquiries as to whether Trumps conduct amount to obstruction will center on his motives.
Profile Information
Member since: Wed Aug 22, 2012, 08:01 PMNumber of posts: 12,422