A president can't obstruct justice? That's not quite right, legal scholars say.

The assertion by President Trump’s lawyers that he cannot obstruct justice because he has absolute authority over all federal investigations is legally problematic, analysts say, because it would essentially mean the nation’s commander in chief is above the law.

But the president’s powers are expansive, and many questions remain about how Trump’s office could protect him from the special counsel investigation examining whether his campaign coordinated with Russia to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.

“The fact is, everything that we’re seeing, there is no precedent for,” said Jacob Frenkel, who worked in the independent counsel’s office in the late 1990s and is now at the law firm Dickinson Wright.

In a 20-page letter submitted to the special counsel’s office this year, Trump’s attorneys asserted 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.” They also asserted that “he could, if he wished, terminate the inquiry, or even exercise his power to pardon if he so desired.”

Legal analysts said that as the head of the executive branch, Trump could issue pardons, fire senior officials or order them to shut down investigations. But if his motives were corrupt, such actions could constitute obstruction.

The principle laid out in the letter is “a ludicrous legal theory,” said Neal Katyal, a former acting solicitor general who now works in private practice at Hogan Lovells. “The idea that a president can’t obstruct justice died with King George III, with a brief attempt at revival by Richard Nixon.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/a-president-cant-obstruct-justice-thats-not-quite-right-legal-scholars-say/ar-AAybJxq?li=BBnbcA1