Alan Dershowitz: History, precedent and James Comey's opening statement show that Trump did not obstruct justice

Alan Dershowitz is a liberal, but also a legal scholar and what he has to say about the Comey testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee is right on.

"In 1992, then-President George H.W. Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger and five other individuals who had been indicted or convicted in connection with the Iran-Contra arms deal. The special prosecutor, Lawrence Walsh, was furious, accusing Bush of stifling his ongoing investigation and suggesting that he may have done it to prevent Weinberger or the others from pointing the finger of blame at Bush himself. The New York Times also reported that the investigation might have pointed to Bush himself. 
This is what Walsh said: "The Iran-contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has now been completed with the pardon of Caspar Weinberger. We will make a full report on our findings to Congress and the public describing the details and extent of this cover-up."

He goes on to relate the truth of the President's power under the Constitution when it comes to investigations by the FBI.  Under the Constitution, the President can simply tell the FBI to stop investigating any case they may be following.

For instance for all the hand wringing about Trump trying to obstruct the Russia investigation by requesting Comey to lay off Flynn and basically let him go, the fact is that Trump could have simply called Comey in, ordered him to stop the investigation, pardoned Flynn and the next day fired Comey for any reason he deemed fit.  He didn't have to give a reason, Comey worked at the pleasure of the President - period.

Therefore Trump's actions were docile compared what he legally could have done, thus not even close to obstruction or any crime. Liberals don't like that, but then they never liked the Constitution as it was written in the first place.  But that's just too tough, it's the law.




Comments