Democrats and many in the media are still pushing their baseless “obstruction of justice” accusation, but the facts don’t back it up.
Last night, Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz explained why...
ANDERSON COOPER: Thank you. Joining us now is chief political analyst Gloria Borger. Jeff Toobin is back. With us as well is Harvard Law School's Professor Alan Dershowitz. So Professor Dershowitz, you say this is not obstruction of justice by the President and it actually strengthens his position against Director Comey. How so?
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: Well first of all, let's look at the big constitutional picture. The President could have told Comey you are commanded, directed to drop the prosecution against Flynn. The President has the right to do that. Comey acknowledges that. He says in the statement that historically, historically presidents have done that to the Justice Department. But in the last few years we've had a tradition of separation, but that tradition doesn't create crime. Remember also what the President could have done. He could have said to Comey, stop this investigation, I am now pardoning Flynn. That’s what President Bush did in the beginning of the investigation of Caspar Weinberger, which could have led back to the White House to the first President Bush. President Bush on the eve of the trial pardoned Caspar Weinberger, pardoned six people, and Special Counsel Walsh said this is outrageous, he's stopping the investigation. Nobody talked about obstruction of justice. You cannot have obstruction of justice when the president exercises his constitutional authority to pardon, his constitutional authority to fire the director of the FBI, or his constitutional authority to tell the director of the FBI who to prosecute, who not to prosecute. So let's get out of the weeds and let's look at the big constitutional question.
And this morning, Sen. Lindsay Graham further explained how there is no obstruction of justice case being made against President Trump.
CHARLIE ROSE: You are quoted as saying that you thought the opening statement by James Comey was a good thing -- a day, you said, pretty good day for the president.
SEN. GRAHAM: Right.
ROSE: Why did you say it?
SEN. GRAHAM: Well, number one, in the statement Comey said the president is not a target or subject to an investigation. Counterintelligence, criminal, or otherwise, regarding Russian collusion as of this moment. Now, something may happen later but as of right now this moment the president is not under investigation for colluding with Russia and unless Mueller is a complete idiot, which he is not, he's concluded there was no obstruction of justice case because if he had concluded otherwise, Comey wouldn’t be testifying. You wouldn't let your chief and only witness go through this process if you really believed he had a case to prosecute and Mr. Mueller is a good prosecutor.
White House Agenda Read more Blogs
