b*d
发帖数: 285 | 1 他说总统可以直接让FBI调查什么或不调查什么。这是行使宪法职权。根本与阻碍司法
无关。他举了小布什的例子。小布什曾下令停止对他手下的调查，并赦免之。一切结束
。搞得调查人员似无赖。
因为为总统可以赦免任何罪行。所以没有阻碍司法之说。
那么，宪法里弹劾总统条件里的阻碍司法又是什么哩？ |
i*****9
发帖数: 3157 | 2 不能阻碍对总统自己的调查，所以只要调查没有涉及总统本人，总统想怎么干都不违法
。丢不丢选票另说。
【在 b*d 的大作中提到】
: 他说总统可以直接让FBI调查什么或不调查什么。这是行使宪法职权。根本与阻碍司法
: 无关。他举了小布什的例子。小布什曾下令停止对他手下的调查，并赦免之。一切结束
: 。搞得调查人员似无赖。
: 因为为总统可以赦免任何罪行。所以没有阻碍司法之说。
: 那么，宪法里弹劾总统条件里的阻碍司法又是什么哩？
|
n******g
发帖数: 17225 | 3 这个有道理呀。总统如果说，无论什么结果都赦免，那确实应该直接停了，省得浪费时
间和资源。 |
s*******0
发帖数: 511 | 4 他也说了，你们要弹劾是根本不需要任何理由的，只要凑够了票数就行……
【在 b*d 的大作中提到】
: 他说总统可以直接让FBI调查什么或不调查什么。这是行使宪法职权。根本与阻碍司法
: 无关。他举了小布什的例子。小布什曾下令停止对他手下的调查，并赦免之。一切结束
: 。搞得调查人员似无赖。
: 因为为总统可以赦免任何罪行。所以没有阻碍司法之说。
: 那么，宪法里弹劾总统条件里的阻碍司法又是什么哩？
|
d********f
发帖数: 43471 | 5 我老已经给左派小白上了很多次课了，老川就算直接命令comey不许查福临，查了就解
职都不可能spin成阻碍司法公正。因为其性质和奥巴阻止遣返已经明确触犯联邦移民法
的非
法移民一样，属于direct执法部门执法重点。从亲疏来说。老川和福临的关系肯定不如
巴马和他在boston非法移民阿姨的。唯一算阻碍司法公正的如果总统本人正在被调查
【在 b*d 的大作中提到】
: 他说总统可以直接让FBI调查什么或不调查什么。这是行使宪法职权。根本与阻碍司法
: 无关。他举了小布什的例子。小布什曾下令停止对他手下的调查，并赦免之。一切结束
: 。搞得调查人员似无赖。
: 因为为总统可以赦免任何罪行。所以没有阻碍司法之说。
: 那么，宪法里弹劾总统条件里的阻碍司法又是什么哩？
|
s*******0
发帖数: 511 | 6 就这操行。你告诉他吸毒不好，他一定要吸，你也挡不住。
【在 d********f 的大作中提到】
: 我老已经给左派小白上了很多次课了，老川就算直接命令comey不许查福临，查了就解
: 职都不可能spin成阻碍司法公正。因为其性质和奥巴阻止遣返已经明确触犯联邦移民法
: 的非
: 法移民一样，属于direct执法部门执法重点。从亲疏来说。老川和福临的关系肯定不如
: 巴马和他在boston非法移民阿姨的。唯一算阻碍司法公正的如果总统本人正在被调查
|
b*d
发帖数: 285 | 7 http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/alan-dershowitz-history-precedent-and-james-comeys-opening-statement-show-that-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/article/2625318
Alan Dershowitz: History, precedent and James Comey's opening statement show
that Trump did not obstruct justice
by Alan Dershowitz, contributor | Jun 8, 2017
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."
Yet Bush was neither charged with obstruction of justice nor impeached. Nor
have other presidents who interfered with ongoing investigations or
prosecutions been charged with obstruction.
It is true that among the impeachment charges leveled against President
Richard Nixon was one for obstructing justice, but Nixon committed the
independent crime of instructing his aides to lie to the FBI, which is a
violation of section 1001 of the federal criminal code.
It is against the background of this history and precedent that former FBI
Director James Comey's opening statement to the Senate Intelligence
Committee must be considered.
Comey himself acknowledged that: "throughout history, some presidents have
decided that because ‘problems' come from Justice, they should try to hold
the Department close. But blurring those boundaries ultimately makes the
problems worse by undermining public trust in the institutions and their
work." Comey has also acknowledged that the president had the constitutional
authority to fire him for any or no cause.
President Trump also had the constitutional authority to order Comey to end
the investigation of former national security adviser Mike Flynn. He could
have pardoned Flynn, as Bush pardoned Weinberger, thus ending the Flynn
investigation, as Bush ended the Iran-Contra investigation. What Trump could
not do is what Nixon did: direct his aides to lie to the FBI, or commit
other independent crimes. There is no evidence that Trump did that.
With these factors in mind, let's turn to the Comey statement.
Comey's written statement, which was released in advance of his Thursday
testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee, does not provide
evidence that Trump committed obstruction of justice or any other crime.
Indeed it strongly suggests that even under the broadest reasonable
definition of obstruction, no such crime was committed.
The crucial conversation occurred in the Oval Office on Feb. 14 between the
president and then-Director Comey. According to Comey's contemporaneous memo
, the president expressed his opinion that retired Gen. Flynn "is a good guy
."
Comey replied, "He is a good guy."
The president said, "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this thing
go."
Comey understood that to be a reference only to the Flynn investigation and
not "the broader investigation into Russia or possible links to the campaign
." Comey had already told the president that "we were not investigating him
personally."
Comey understood "the President to be requesting that we drop any
investigation of Flynn in connection with false statements about his
conversations with the Russian ambassador in December."
Comey did not say he would "let this go," and indeed he did not grant the
president's request to do so. Nor did Comey report this conversation to the
attorney general or any other prosecutor. He was troubled by what he
regarded as a breach of recent traditions of FBI independence from the White
House, though he recognized that "throughout history, some presidents have
decided that because ‘problems' come from the Department of Justice, they
should try to hold the Department close."
That is an understatement.
Throughout United States history — from Presidents Adams to Jefferson to
Lincoln to Roosevelt to Kennedy to Obama — presidents have directed (not
merely requested) the Justice Department to investigate, prosecute (or not
prosecute) specific individuals or categories of individuals.
It is only recently that the tradition of an independent Justice Department
and FBI has emerged. But traditions, even salutary ones, cannot form the
basis of a criminal charge. It would be far better if our constitution
provided for prosecutors who were not part of the executive branch, which is
under the direction of the president.
In Great Britain, Israel and other democracies that respect the rule of law,
the director of public prosecution or the attorney general are law
enforcement officials who, by law, are independent of the prime minister.
But our constitution makes the attorney general both the chief prosecutor
and the chief political adviser to the president on matters of justice and
law enforcement.
The president can, as a matter of constitutional law, direct the attorney
general, and his subordinate, the director of the FBI, tell them what to do,
whom to prosecute and whom not to prosecute. Indeed, the president has the
constitutional authority to stop the investigation of any person by simply
pardoning that person.
Assume, for argument's sake, that Trump had said the following to Comey: "
You are no longer authorized to investigate Flynn because I have decided to
pardon him." Would that exercise of the president's constitutional power to
pardon constitute a criminal obstruction of justice? Of course not.
Presidents do that all the time.
Bush pardoned Caspar Weinberger, his secretary of defense, in the middle of
an investigation that could have incriminated Bush. That was not an
obstruction and neither would a pardon of Flynn have been a crime. A
president cannot be charged with a crime for properly exercising his
constitutional authority
For the same reason, Trump cannot be charged with obstruction for firing
Comey, which he had the constitutional authority to do.
The Comey statement suggests that one reason Trump fired him was because of
his refusal or failure to publicly announce that the FBI was not
investigating Trump personally. Trump "repeatedly" told Comey to "get that
fact out," and he did not.
If that is true, it is certainly not an obstruction of justice.
Nor is it an obstruction of justice to ask for loyalty from the director of
the FBI, who responded "you will get that [‘honest loyalty'] from me."
Comey understood that he and Trump may have understood that vague phrase "
honest loyalty" differently. But no reasonable interpretation of those
ambiguous words would give rise to a crime. Many Trump opponents were hoping
that the Comey statement would provide smoking guns.
It has not.
Instead it has weakened an already weak case for obstruction of justice.
The statement may provide political ammunition to Trump opponents, but
unless they are willing to stretch Comey's words and take Trump's out of
context, and unless they are prepared to abandon important constitutional
principles and civil liberties that protect us all, they should not be
searching for ways to expand already elastic criminal statutes and shrink
enduring constitutional safeguard in a dangerous and futile effort to
criminalize political disagreements.
The first casualty of partisan efforts to "get" a political opponent —
whether Republicans going after Clinton or Democrats going after Trump — is
often civil liberties. Everyone who cares about the Constitution and civil
liberties must join together to protest efforts to expand existing criminal
law to get political opponents.
Today it's Trump. Yesterday it was Clinton. Tomorrow it could be you. |
G****r
发帖数: 5579 | 8 这伊朗门那丑事是老布什的前任里根犯的事， 老布什特赦就相当于福特特赦尼克松和
水门案的人一样。 要是里根自己来特赦那伊朗门的事， 国会不会放过的。
show
five
the
furious,
he
【在 b*d 的大作中提到】
: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/alan-dershowitz-history-precedent-and-james-comeys-opening-statement-show-that-trump-did-not-obstruct-justice/article/2625318
: Alan Dershowitz: History, precedent and James Comey's opening statement show
: that Trump did not obstruct justice
: by Alan Dershowitz, contributor | Jun 8, 2017
: 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
|
G****r
发帖数: 5579 | 9 “只要凑够了票数就行" --- 川统的总统能当多久现在就捏在共和党手里。
【在 s*******0 的大作中提到】
: 他也说了，你们要弹劾是根本不需要任何理由的，只要凑够了票数就行……
|
a**********2
发帖数: 3726 | 10 因此明年中期选举绝对不能让那帮丑恶的猪党人得逞和上位。
【在 G****r 的大作中提到】
: “只要凑够了票数就行" --- 川统的总统能当多久现在就捏在共和党手里。
|
|
|
G****r
发帖数: 5579 | 11 这个 Alan Dershowitz 就是个米犹 + 流氓教授， 特善长给强奸犯辩护的。
最近这米犹挺川特来劲， 还不是因为川统和逼逼交好， 还重用米犹女婿。
【在 b*d 的大作中提到】
: 他说总统可以直接让FBI调查什么或不调查什么。这是行使宪法职权。根本与阻碍司法
: 无关。他举了小布什的例子。小布什曾下令停止对他手下的调查，并赦免之。一切结束
: 。搞得调查人员似无赖。
: 因为为总统可以赦免任何罪行。所以没有阻碍司法之说。
: 那么，宪法里弹劾总统条件里的阻碍司法又是什么哩？
|
s*******0
发帖数: 511 | 12 你这话只说对一半。
国会和参院是民选的。乱投票要负责的。没人会随便拿川爷的base开玩笑。
另外，大部分和党的参众议员还是有良知有常识的。
【在 G****r 的大作中提到】
: “只要凑够了票数就行" --- 川统的总统能当多久现在就捏在共和党手里。
|
s****r
发帖数: 5546 | 13 “国会不会放过”？国会能跟你们底层无赖一样跑到白宫外边自焚吗？
【在 G****r 的大作中提到】
: 这伊朗门那丑事是老布什的前任里根犯的事， 老布什特赦就相当于福特特赦尼克松和
: 水门案的人一样。 要是里根自己来特赦那伊朗门的事， 国会不会放过的。
:
: show
: five
: the
: furious,
: he
|
G****r
发帖数: 5579 | 14 照你说， 尼克松当年应该自己把自己特赦了： 按照这个流氓米犹教兽Alan
Dershowitz 说的很好办， 命令 FBI 不准查水门案。 原来尼克松根本不需要告诉手下
人向 FBI 说谎， 直接命令 FBI 不准查！ 那多爽啊。 难道尼克松有那么傻吗？
该有多弱智的人会去相信流氓米犹教兽Alan Dershowitz 的辩护啊， 这流氓米犹教兽
为了以色列和米犹的利益已经到了脱光裸奔不要脸的地步了。
【在 s****r 的大作中提到】
: “国会不会放过”？国会能跟你们底层无赖一样跑到白宫外边自焚吗？
|
G****r
发帖数: 5579 | 15 川爷的base? 老尼（克松）辞职前还有 30% 的支持率， 那 30% 就是老尼的铁杆。
川爷的铁杆base 也过不了 30%。 川统现在的 40% 支持率里能有七，八成铁杆算不错
了。
【在 s*******0 的大作中提到】
: 你这话只说对一半。
: 国会和参院是民选的。乱投票要负责的。没人会随便拿川爷的base开玩笑。
: 另外，大部分和党的参众议员还是有良知有常识的。
|
r*********t
发帖数: 4911 | 16 不同意你最后一句话。我认为大部分参众议员是没有良知的。但是他们的确有常识。
【在 s*******0 的大作中提到】
: 你这话只说对一半。
: 国会和参院是民选的。乱投票要负责的。没人会随便拿川爷的base开玩笑。
: 另外，大部分和党的参众议员还是有良知有常识的。
|
G****r
发帖数: 5579 | 17 GOP 参众议员真正不敢弹劾川统的只有那些2018年就得再选的， 那些任期还有5，6年
的其实根本不怕。
【在 r*********t 的大作中提到】
: 不同意你最后一句话。我认为大部分参众议员是没有良知的。但是他们的确有常识。
|
O**l
发帖数: 12923 | 18 赶快凑齐凑不够是小狗
: “只要凑够了票数就行" --- 川统的总统能当多久现在就捏在共和党手里。
【在 G****r 的大作中提到】
: GOP 参众议员真正不敢弹劾川统的只有那些2018年就得再选的， 那些任期还有5，6年
: 的其实根本不怕。
|
b*d
发帖数: 285 | 19 我对伊朗门不熟。但文章里提到调查可能影响老布什本人。我记得他是里根的副总统。
文章提到尼克松让人作伪证。这个性质就不一样了。
福林这事好象跟川普本人也无关。
感觉美国的宪法很不完整。争议和界定比较大。
【在 G****r 的大作中提到】
: 这伊朗门那丑事是老布什的前任里根犯的事， 老布什特赦就相当于福特特赦尼克松和
: 水门案的人一样。 要是里根自己来特赦那伊朗门的事， 国会不会放过的。
:
: show
: five
: the
: furious,
: he
|
t*****n
发帖数: 2578 | 20 flynn犯法了么？根本就没犯法。跟俄国做生意交往难道犯法？
唯一不妥的是出任公职。
要是猪党，这也不是个事。洗啦啦不是卖核燃料给俄国？黑巴驴运现金给伊朗。flynn
这算犯法的话希腊啦，黑巴驴那是叛国。 |
W*********y
发帖数: 144 | 21 本来就是叛国，Flynn下台是川普团队太软弱
flynn
【在 t*****n 的大作中提到】
: flynn犯法了么？根本就没犯法。跟俄国做生意交往难道犯法？
: 唯一不妥的是出任公职。
: 要是猪党，这也不是个事。洗啦啦不是卖核燃料给俄国？黑巴驴运现金给伊朗。flynn
: 这算犯法的话希腊啦，黑巴驴那是叛国。
|
