While Trump’s lawyers and Ruddy Giuliani have tried to sell the idea that Donald Trump, as President , is above the law?
Politico reports that 14 legal people believe that no such thing exists for Trump to hide behind….And have sent a rebuttal to the notion….
Their legal oppinion counters the Department of Justice rules that an American President cannot be charged with a crime….
The reasoning on this could extend to Trump’finishings firing Mueller or get someone to stop any finishing of the Mueller Special Prosecutor investigation of Trump and Russian influence in the 2016 election AND anything Mueller comes across illegal….
The view of the scholars IS a shot in the arm for the Mueller effort that Trump’s people have tried to switch from the legal effort to a political one , where Trump has support form his Republican’s….
The problem for Trump and his legal team is that while they work to get political support in the media?
Mueller’s legal case gets STRONGER everyday….
The scholars’ letter argues that the Constitution’s requirement that presidents “take care that the Laws be faithfully executed” precludes the kind of sweeping arguments Trump private lawyers John Dowd and Jay Sekulow made in a 20-page January letter to Special Counsel Robert Mueller. The Trump attorneys’ missive was first published Saturday by the New York Times.
“Congress has enacted obstruction of justice statutes that prohibit any person from acting “corruptly” to interfere with federal criminal investigations,” the law professors wrote. “Whatever a President may have been able to do in the absence of such statutes, Congress’s judgment that obstruction of justice is prohibited binds the President.”
“The federal obstruction laws, with their bar on corruptly-motivated actions, apply whether the president obstructs an investigation through firing officials leading it, shutting down the investigation, ordering the destruction of documents, or dangling or issuing pardons to induce witnesses to impede the investigation. Just as the President could not use otherwise lawful firing powers in exchange for a bribe without running afoul of federal bribery laws, he is not free to exempt himself from the application of the obstruction of justice laws,” the professors wrote.
The legal scholars argue that Trump could not fire Mueller or pardon himself if Trump’s goal was, in essence, to save his own hide. It is unclear under from the letter under what circumstances, if any, that the scholars believe a self-pardon would be valid.
“These structural checks against abuses typical of monarchy further elucidate the Founders’ vision — seen in the Oath and Take Care Clause — of a chief executive bound to act with care and fidelity for the benefit of the country, not himself personally,” the professors added.
The professors did not direct their rebuttal to Trump’s private attorneys, but to White House Counsel Don McGahn and a recent addition to McGahn’s office, Emmet Flood….
Note…
Anybody think Mueller’s legal people don’t have a copy of this view and have discussed with their boss and Ron Rosenstein?