If Trumps own advisers think he has obstructed justice, how could Republicans decide otherwise?

[kentuck]

by Jennifer Rubin (Washington Post)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2018/01/28/if-trumps-own-advisers-think-he-has-obstructed-justice-how-could-republicans-decide-otherwise/?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.fe2702e63541

<snip>
One day, law professors may use President Trump’s case in a law school exam: Find all the evidence of obstruction of justice. Diligent students will find a wealth of material, if news accounts are proven to be true: requesting a loyalty oath from then-FBI Director James B. Comey; pressuring Attorney General Jeff Sessions to remain in charge of the Russia investigation to protect Trump; leaning on Comey to let former national security adviser Michael Flynn off; firing Comey; cooking up a pretext for firing Comey; telling Lester Holt of NBC News that he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation; falsely suggesting there were White House tapes so as to affect Comey’s testimony; threatening some kind of legal action against Comey for “leaking“; launching spurious conspiracy theories (unmasking, accusing Barack Obama of wiretapping Trump Tower while he was president, smearing FBI officials who could be witnesses) to discredit the investigation; trying to get one of the potential FBI witnesses, Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, fired; drafting a misleading statement about Donald Trump Jr.’s June 2016 meeting with a Russian lawyer in Trump Tower; ordering that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III be fired; and publicly denying he ever considered firing Mueller. We’ve probably missed a few, but even a mediocre law student could get an A on that test.

The evidence of obstruction is simply overwhelming at this point. “Mueller and his team surely have evidence on obstruction of justice that has not yet been made public,” writes Jeffrey Toobin in the New Yorker. “But even on the available evidence, Trump’s position looks perilous indeed. The portrait is of a President using every resource at his disposal to shut down an investigation—of Trump himself. And now it has become clear that Trump’s own White House counsel rebelled at the President’s rationale for his actions.”

[murielm99]

1. "Find all the evidence of obstruction of justice."

I can just see it on an exam. The first thing that came to mind for me were those illustrations from "Highlights" magazine. They were called, "What's Wrong With This Picture?" The kids had to find all the mistakes in the drawing.

Imagine it: A graphic (comic book style) law school exam.

[unblock]

2. The real question is not whether he did it or not

The real question is whether our institutions are strong enough to enforce justice in the matter.

In fact, donnie’s brazen contempt for norms and laws should be seen as a direct challenge by the right-wing axis of a few billionaires, foxnews/hate radio, and the Republican Party against our government.

They’ve been steadily corrupting our institutions for decades. If they can get away with this, then that axis will be the ruling institution of our country.

Our government will merely be a shell, a vehicle at the control of the right-wing axis.

[kentuck]

3. Yep.

"The real question is whether our institutions are strong enough to enforce justice in the matter."