Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DetlefK

(16,423 posts)
Sun Jun 25, 2017, 05:04 AM Jun 2017

In Fox News interview, Trump almost confesses to obstruction of justice.

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-says-hes-willing-to-testify-under-oath-that-the-former-fbi-director-lied-to-congress-f1fecc75b2de

During a Rose Garden news conference on Friday, President Donald Trump said for the first time that he is “100 percent” willing to give a sworn account of his interactions with former FBI Director James Comey.

Trump also accused Comey of lying to Congess during his testimony on Thursday to the Senate Intelligence Committee — an offense that can land a person in prison for up to five years. Comey testified that Trump asked him to quash an active investigation into one of his associates in February, weeks after the president asked his former FBI director to pledge personal loyalty. Comey says he effectively ignored both of Trump’s requests, and was fired in May.

In response to Comey’s stunning testimony, Trump and his lawyer have staked out an incoherent position. They claim that Comey is a liar who provided Congress with an inaccurate account of his interactions with Trump, specifically with regard to former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and the “loyalty pledge;” at the same time, however, they claim Comey’s testimony also totally vindicated the president because he indicated that Trump was not personally under investigation.

----------------------------

http://www.thedailybeast.com/fox-and-friends-host-tells-trump-he-was-smart-to-threaten-comey-with-tapes

But when he found out that there maybe are tapes out there, whether it’s governmental tapes or anything else or who knows, I think his story may have changed.

...

But it was Earhardt’s follow-up that seemed to stun even the president. “It was a smart way to make sure he stayed honest in those hearings,” she said, sounding more like one of his sycophantic cabinet members than a member of the media.

“Well, uh, it wasn’t very stupid, I can tell you that,” Trump replied, a smile forming across his face. “He was, he did admit that what I said was right.

...

A couple of hours after Trump’s interview aired, White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer actually went on camera on Fox, where he insisted to anchor Bill Hemmer that Trump was in no way trying to “intimidate” Comey with his original tweet about tapes.

“The reality is, is that he wanted to make sure the truth came out,” Spicer said, “and by talking about something like tapes, made Comey in particular think to himself, ‘I better be honest, I better tell the truth about the circumstances regarding the situation.’”

----------------------------

1. Comey's witness-account accuses Trump of trying to sabotage the Flynn-investigation. That's obstruction of justice.
2. Trump first calls Comey a liar.
3. Trump then claims that his tape-threat made Comey change his story, which is witness intimidation.
4. Trump then claims that Comey told the truth.
5. WH-spokesperson Sean Spicer then clarifies that Trump did not intimidate the witness. The goal was merely for the truth to come out.

Summed up:
Comey accused Trump of obstruction of justice. And Trump boasted that his tape-threat made Comey change his story from lie to truth.
9 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

Bernardo de La Paz

(49,013 posts)
1. Is witness intimidation to tell the truth still interference (obstruction) of justice?
Sun Jun 25, 2017, 05:59 AM
Jun 2017

Witness intimidation is witness intimidation period. The witness might be less sure of what is wanted than they are sure that they are being intimidated.

I don't for a second trust anything tRump says unless it is self-incriminating because that is not something he would do unless he felt somehow it was better than an alternative. Further, I don't think Comey changed his story.

PJMcK

(22,037 posts)
2. Obstruction of justice is a complex crime
Sun Jun 25, 2017, 07:24 AM
Jun 2017

Almost anything an individual does to impede a legal investigation can be construed as obstruction of justice. This is true even if it turns out that there isn't an underlying crime. One cannot lie or intentionally misdirect law enforcement during an official investigation.

In Trump's case, he pressured the Director of the FBI-- as well as two other high-ranking intelligence officials-- to drop the investigation of General Flynn. No matter the exact wording, it's obstruction of justice. Trump admitted as much days after firing Mr. Comey, both on TV and in a meeting with Russian officials when he said he fired Mr. Comey because of "this Russia thing."

Trump's attempt to intimidate Mr. Comey prior to his Congressional testimony by insinuating that there were "tapes" of their conversations is probably also an obstruction. Trump's lawyers must be pulling their hair out because of their client's stunts with his Twitter account.

It's inevitable that Trump is going to face scrutiny for the first time in his life; it's too late for anyone to stop the inquiries. These investigations are going to go far deeper than just whether Trump's campaign colluded with Russians. When assessing the skills and breadth of experience of the team that Robert Mueller has assembled, it becomes quite clear that Trump's finances and relationship with businesses in Russia are going to be dissected. For example, one lawyer was involved in the Watergate investigation while another is experienced with mob-related prosecutions. One lawyer is a specialist in financial and fraud cases, one is a top tax lawyer and one woman attorney he's hired is actually fluent in Russian! The rest of his A-Team is composed of serious, well-credentialled professionals. Trump is out-gunned by these excellent public servants.

Personally, I love that Mr. Mueller can obtain and review Trump's tax returns even without Trump's knowledge! Ultimately, obstruction of justice may be one of the least problems facing Trump.

mnmoderatedem

(3,728 posts)
3. that's really been my view all along
Sun Jun 25, 2017, 07:35 AM
Jun 2017

it's really going to be about Trump and Russian money laundering. And I believe there will be evidence uncovered regarding that which will stretch for miles.

 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
6. No, it's not. That is what people miss
Sun Jun 25, 2017, 09:17 AM
Jun 2017

If you read the actual Federal law on witness tampering it plainly says that an affirmative defensive is that the moves were meant to pressure someone to tell to the truth. You can pressure someone to tell the truth all you want and it's not illegal.

Claiming to have tapes is claiming to have a true version of events on record. You will never get a prosecutor to try and argue that claiming tapes exist is meant to try and get a witness to give a version of events different than the reality.

kentuck

(111,104 posts)
4. Do they think Comey told the truth after he learned there might be tapes?
Sun Jun 25, 2017, 07:40 AM
Jun 2017

If so, it doesn't look good for Trump. Because it would mean that the President did, in fact, try to pressure Comey to drop the investigation on General Flynn. It means he tried to obstruct the investigation. ..if Comey told the truth?

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»In Fox News interview, Tr...