- Joined
- Mar 6, 2019
- Messages
- 25,767
- Reaction score
- 23,379
- Location
- PNW
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
I know this won't work, but I would like to take the heat out of this argument by focusing on the legalities involved. Basically, there are three points I'd like to make: 1) what obstruction of justice is; 2) Obstruction that is demonstrated in the Mueller report; 3) how continued behavior of the administration is a continuation of obstruction.
I. 18 U.S. Code CHAPTER 73— OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
There are several different provisions of Chapter 73 that might apply to "obstruction" discussed here, but I am going to focus on two:
I quoted the whole thing, without eliding the irrelevant/inapplicable parts, so that no one can argue I'm "hiding the ball" - and I picked those two because they seem the most relevant here.
The operative words are "endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede." That can take, and has taken, many forms - Destroying evidence, unlawful inducements to testify falsely, threats, or just preventing disclosure.
I. 18 U.S. Code CHAPTER 73— OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE
There are several different provisions of Chapter 73 that might apply to "obstruction" discussed here, but I am going to focus on two:
and18 U.S. Code § 1503. Influencing or injuring officer or juror generally - (a) Whoever corruptly, or by threats or force, or by any threatening letter or communication, endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede any grand or petit juror, or officer in or of any court of the United States, or officer who may be serving at any examination or other proceeding before any United States magistrate judge or other committing magistrate, in the discharge of his duty, or injures any such grand or petit juror in his person or property on account of any verdict or indictment assented to by him, or on account of his being or having been such juror, or injures any such officer, magistrate judge, or other committing magistrate in his person or property on account of the performance of his official duties, or 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 administration of justice, shall be punished as provided in subsection (b).
18 U.S. Code § 1505. Obstruction of proceedings before departments, agencies, and committees -
Whoever, with intent to avoid, evade, prevent, or obstruct compliance, in whole or in part, with any civil investigative demand duly and properly made under the Antitrust Civil Process Act, willfully withholds, misrepresents, removes from any place, conceals, covers up, destroys, mutilates, alters, or by other means falsifies any documentary material, answers to written interrogatories, or oral testimony, which is the subject of such demand; or attempts to do so or solicits another to do so; or
Whoever 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 is being had by either House, or any committee of either House or any joint committee of the Congress—
I quoted the whole thing, without eliding the irrelevant/inapplicable parts, so that no one can argue I'm "hiding the ball" - and I picked those two because they seem the most relevant here.
The operative words are "endeavors to influence, intimidate, or impede." That can take, and has taken, many forms - Destroying evidence, unlawful inducements to testify falsely, threats, or just preventing disclosure.
Last edited: