• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Trump Attorneys Lay Out 2 Arguments Against Obstruction-of-Justice Probe to Mueller

B

BlastProcessing

Member
So let me get this straight. While arguing that Trump didn't obstruct justice, trumps lawyers also attacked Comey to discourage his use as a witness, which would also be obstruction of justice.
 
A

Applesauce

Boom! Bitch-slapped!
Next argument :

bmUoH8W.gif
 
C

Crimson_Gold

Member
The sides agreed getting locked and loaded for the coming charges and trial. Anyone from the administration that says nothing is happening, is lying. The investigation is no longer about building a case, it's about tearing down everything and everyone that had anything to do with this. But not a boom. I guess it is a more nuanced boom. A "you're already dead" boom
 
J

JABEE

Member
He's not even making an argument his obstruction was about some kind of political containment like Nixon did. He is straight-up questioning the integrity of the investigators as the main thrust of his defense.

He knows he did something bad.
 
L

Loxley

Member
Do these fuckers not know that Mueller and Comey have known each other for a long-ass time? Saying things like "Comey is prone to exaggeration" to a man who knows him on a personal level seems rather foolhardy.
 
J

jelly

Member
Seik said:
Are these lawyers paid with tax money?

Because, shit, I don't even need to explain myself. :lol
Click to expand...

Tax money, trump hotels, probably.

I think the better lawyers bailed from defending Trump ages ago because they see the writing on the wall or Trump has the habit of not paying his bills. Lawyers like money and to win.
 
C

Cheerilee

Member
laid out the case that Mr. Trump has the inherent authority under the constitution to hire and fire as he sees fit and therefore didn’t obstruct justice when he fired Mr. Comey
Click to expand...
I'm not a lawyer, but as I understand it...

Sure. The President has the right to fire anyone for any reason, or even no reason at all. I can accept that.

But if the President fired Comey because the President was under criminal investigation and the President was attempting to obstruct justice by firing the person investigating him, then the President is guilty of obstruction of justice. He's not guilty of firing Comey, he's guilty of obstruction of justice.
 
N

Neuromancer

Member
H8YN62D.gif


I'm not surprised at the terrible defense strategy. I'm surprised Trumps lawyers are even talking to Mueller's team at this early stage.
 
W

Wolfgunblood Garopa

Member
BoogieWoogie said:
How is "HE LEAKED TO THE MEDIA" an argument to stop Comey from being a witness exactly?
Click to expand...

Because these are mafia types. To them, leaking to the press is ratting on the boss, which in their mafia fantasy world is not only a crime but an indication of character. If you are in Trump's sphere, you acknowledge and submit to mafia values. Trump tried and failed to get Comey into the 'family', so Trump got hostile with him just like he does to anyone who doesn't submit. This is why everyone around Trump that sticks with him are such low character people.
 
M

MIMIC

Banned
The fact the person under investigation had the sole authority to fire the investigator was the dumbest part this whole thing. How did no one foresee this obvious conflict?
 
Maiden Voyage

Maiden Voyage

Gold™ Member
B

BlastProcessing

Member
Cheerilee said:
I'm not a lawyer, but as I understand it...

Sure. The President has the right to fire anyone for any reason, or even no reason at all. I can accept that.

But if the President fired Comey because the President was under criminal investigation and the President was attempting to obstruct justice by firing the person investigating him, then the President is guilty of obstruction of justice. He's not guilty of firing Comey, he's guilty of obstruction of justice.
Click to expand...

Yup. That analogy would be: It's completely legal to purchase and use a paper shredder. That doesn't mean that it isn't illegal to shred a bunch of subpoenaed documents.
 
J

jdstorm

Banned
MIMIC said:
The fact the person under investigation had the sole authority to fire the investigator was the dumbest part this whole thing. How did no one foresee this obvious conflict?
Click to expand...

Its almost like the electoral college system was meant to prevent corrupt people from becoming POTUS or something.
 
R

Random Painted HIghway

Member
Crimson_Gold said:
Already engaging in discussions with the special counsel though. The legal team is actively fighting charges that haven't come yet. Why? Because they're coming. The boom is that the president will ultimately be charged. IMO at least
Click to expand...

Defense attorneys routinely engage prosecutors at this phase of a white collar investigation. That isn't evidence of anything other than defense attorneys doing their job (and making billable hours) by trying to get in front of things before they develop to much. It usually doesn't work, of course and I doubt mueller did anything other than give the memos to his lowest ranking attorneys to review and discard. This isn't a boom, unless you are just desperate to perceive a boom.
 
G

gcubed

Member
It's not obstruction of justice because I'm allowed to fire him.

Seems solid and irrefutable. Best lawyers.
 
S

Squire

Banned
Loxley said:
Do these fuckers not know that Mueller and Comey have known each other for a long-ass time? Saying things like "Comey is prone to exaggeration" to a man who knows him on a personal level seems rather foolhardy.
Click to expand...

Hell, Mueller trained him to a certain extent, so that's not going to fly in the slightest.
 
S

Stumpokapow

listen to the mad man
Maiden Voyage said:
The original quote was that "he did not get away with it". I disagree, he definitely did.

He was later consulted by future Presidents on foreign affairs and became a best selling author. He was even voted one of the 10 most admirable men in the world, via Gallup. He may not have ran for office again, but it's not fair to say he actually faced real justice.
Click to expand...

Huh? The most admired men in the world thing you link suggests he won in 69, 70, 71, and 72, and then never appeared again? To the extent that this is supposed to be an argument about the social consequences of his crimes, you just demonstrated he DID face a consequence?
 
B

Byakuya769

Member
MIMIC said:
The fact the person under investigation had the sole authority to fire the investigator was the dumbest part this whole thing. How did no one foresee this obvious conflict?
Click to expand...

Fake news! He was told on three sepearste occasions by Obama that he wasn't under investigation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

So looks like Mueller is about to wrap things up?
2 3
117
12K
infinitys_7th replied
President's lawyers may offer Mueller a meeting with Trump
2 3 4
162
21K
HP_Wuvcraft replied
Mueller haunts the West Wing
2
81
15K
ntropy replied
Vox: Top FBI officials could testify against Trump in Mueller probe
2 3
105
13K
XMonkey replied
Mueller Is Said to Be in Talks With White House About Interviewing Officials
19
7K
SodiumBenzoate replied
Top Bottom