ALL HAIL PRESIDENT TRUMP

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

How can you obstruct nothing?

Like if no ones around does tree make sound falling in forest?

Anyway - nice try Trump has plenty of "issues" all y'all are doing is giving him ammo on "deep state" headed into 2020 becausemost ppl cant think past the basics. No collusion and elites are still out to get you and "me"

That's why Democrats won't do shit regarding impeachment or anything. They know that without the underlying crime (collusion), everything falls apart. Trump simply defended himself from a now confirmed political witch hunt. Some say Dems were playing 4D chess and started the hoax to make Trump do stupid shit. Maybe true, but it won't get them anywhere.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Thank you, those are the words I was looking for and not finding....

"

Turtledove wrote:

Obstruction of Justice is prosecuted all the time without there being an underlying crime.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Obstruction of Justice is prosecuted all the time without there being an underlying crime.

Nope.

"

Turtledove wrote:

Since you deny that Martha Stewart served time in jail for Obstruction of Justice without there being an underlying crime, we have to conclude that your connection to reality has been severed completely and replaced with President Donald Trump's tweeter feed. I hope that you are still able to at least bath and feed yourself.

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Since you deny that Martha Stewart served time in jail for Obstruction of Justice without there being an underlying crime, we have to conclude that your connection to reality has been severed completely and replaced with President Donald Trump's tweeter feed. I hope that you are still able to at least bath and feed yourself.

Try harder my dude. Martha Stewart has been found guilty of conspiracy and lying to the FBI. Is that what "no underlying crime" means to you?

"

The highest-profile example of trying a case of obstruction without an underlying crime that our experts could think of was the prosecution of Martha Stewart, the founder of a popular lifestyle and media company. Stewart was tried on charges related to her sale of 4,000 shares of ImClone, a pharmaceutical company, one day before the company’s stock price plummeted.

The charges of securities fraud were thrown out, but prosecutors persisted with charges of obstruction of justice and lying to investigators. She was found guilty of four counts and in 2004 was sentenced to five months of prison, five months of house arrest, and two years of probation.

Stewart "surely feared reputational and business harm" even in the absence of a crime, said Robert Weisberg, co-director of Stanford University’s Criminal Justice Center.

Another notable example is the case of Scooter Libby, a former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, said Samuel Buell, a law professor at Duke University. Libby was charged by a special prosecutor with obstruction, perjury and false statements, but not any underlying crime related to the outing of a CIA employee, Valerie Plame. (Trump pardoned Libby.)

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Since you deny that Martha Stewart served time in jail for Obstruction of Justice without there being an underlying crime, we have to conclude that your connection to reality has been severed completely and replaced with President Donald Trump's tweeter feed. I hope that you are still able to at least bath and feed yourself.

Try harder my dude. Martha Stewart has been found guilty of conspiracy and lying to the FBI. Is that what "no underlying crime" means to you?

Maybe then the problem is that you cannot follow the link I provided and read a little bit?

"

The highest-profile example of trying a case of obstruction without an underlying crime that our experts could think of was the prosecution of Martha Stewart, the founder of a popular lifestyle and media company. Stewart was tried on charges related to her sale of 4,000 shares of ImClone, a pharmaceutical company, one day before the company’s stock price plummeted.

The charges of securities fraud were thrown out, but prosecutors persisted with charges of obstruction of justice and lying to investigators. She was found guilty of four counts and in 2004 was sentenced to five months of prison, five months of house arrest, and two years of probation.

Stewart "surely feared reputational and business harm" even in the absence of a crime, said Robert Weisberg, co-director of Stanford University’s Criminal Justice Center.

Another notable example is the case of Scooter Libby, a former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, said Samuel Buell, a law professor at Duke University. Libby was charged by a special prosecutor with obstruction, perjury and false statements, but not any underlying crime related to the outing of a CIA employee, Valerie Plame. (Trump pardoned Libby.)

"

Boem wrote:

Thoughts on Venezuela anybody?

Should America help or watch on the side-line, thoughts on what trump will do?

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Xavderion wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

Xavderion wrote:

Try harder my dude. Martha Stewart has been found guilty of conspiracy and lying to the FBI. Is that what "no underlying crime" means to you?

Maybe then the problem is that you cannot follow the link I provided and read a little bit?

"

The highest-profile example of trying a case of obstruction without an underlying crime that our experts could think of was the prosecution of Martha Stewart, the founder of a popular lifestyle and media company. Stewart was tried on charges related to her sale of 4,000 shares of ImClone, a pharmaceutical company, one day before the company’s stock price plummeted.

The charges of securities fraud were thrown out, but prosecutors persisted with charges of obstruction of justice and lying to investigators. She was found guilty of four counts and in 2004 was sentenced to five months of prison, five months of house arrest, and two years of probation.

Stewart "surely feared reputational and business harm" even in the absence of a crime, said Robert Weisberg, co-director of Stanford University’s Criminal Justice Center.

Another notable example is the case of Scooter Libby, a former top aide to Vice President Dick Cheney, said Samuel Buell, a law professor at Duke University. Libby was charged by a special prosecutor with obstruction, perjury and false statements, but not any underlying crime related to the outing of a CIA employee, Valerie Plame. (Trump pardoned Libby.)

You mean the link which says she's guilty of perjury? And where the other example was also guilty of perjury?

"

We checked with 11 legal experts to nail down answers. Essentially all of these experts agreed that obstruction can indeed be prosecuted without an underlying crime — and has been in the past, notably in the case of Martha Stewart.

"

Legal experts told us that a president (or anyone) could still be prosecuted for obstructing justice if they believed they might be prosecuted — even if they ultimately never are.

"You can obstruct justice even if a prosecutor ultimately finds you were not guilty of committing the crime that was the focus of the underlying investigation," said Miriam Baer, a professor at Brooklyn Law School. "Even if a prosecutor ultimately concluded that you weren’t guilty of crime X, that says nothing as to whether you thought that you might be indicted for crime X, or, for that matter, if you thought one of your friends of family members would be indicted for crime X."

Eric Posner, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, agreed that an obstruction prosecution could have been argued in this case.

"Suppose Trump knew that no crime had been committed but believed that the investigation would uncover politically or personally embarrassing information, or if he believed that the investigation would embarrass or implicate an ally, aide, or family member," Posner said. "Then interfering with the investigation is a crime. The reason is that the purpose of the investigation is to find the truth, and if people obstruct an investigation, then the investigation becomes more difficult, wasting government resources."

That said, an obstruction case is naturally going to be stronger if there is an underlying crime that’s being prosecuted, said Ric Simmons, a professor at the Ohio State University Moritz College of Law.