Itself Obstruction News Today

Let me ask you because i think comey will be asked, of course, about the private meeting in february with president trump. i suspect that comey will be asked quite directly, did you believe the president was trying to obstruct your investigation and, vince, his answer could be tricky legally great dont you think? >> i think so. especially because if he says i was pressure to drop the case entirely there will be questions in legal ones about comeys role in that. suggesting that what should he had...

Arthel: a frightening thing happening on american airlines, flight to hawaii a turkish man was arrested after apparently trying to get into the cockpit during the flight. passengers were able to stop using one of those drink carts to block his path. the whole thing caused two fighter jets to escort that flight to safety, to honolulu. authorities say the same guy was arrested in another incident in lax in los angeles for opening a door that led onto an airport ramp. >> on five this was overshadow...

Something smart. certainly. gregg: isnt that what the president then did. >> perhaps. thats why calling it a criminal is not doing it good. no one will prosecute the president in the courtroom. will it lead to further investigation, impeachment proceedings. parsing the statutory language here is not that useful. gregg: when nixon fired archibald cox that was not in and of itself obstruction. it was considered that he had a constitutional authority to do it. now, doug, doesnt comey himself have a...

Comey to drop the flynn investigation, lots to talk about. lets talk to alex little, former prosecutor doug burns. you know each other, too. douglas, let me start with you. obstruction, as you know, is a specific intent crime. if trump tells comey in a private meeting that he wishes or hope that flynn can be cleared because flynn is a good guy, does that kind of vague and ambiguous elliptical language really rise to the level of specific intent? >> not necessarily. necessarily being the key word...

Supporters at the department of justice then comey could be charged with a crime. its 18 usc section four so comey, vince, may be in a bit of a box here if he didnt report it as the law demands. he might have to say, i was troubled by the conversation but i didnt think it rose to the level of obstruction. again, to say otherwise, put james comey in legal jeopardy himself. this is why i think democrats wont be satisfied by james comeys testify as many people at this point think they are. this is ...

All of the words in those memos. then, as you suggest, we have to look at 18 usc 1503 and study it carefully and study the cases. in my view, i side with professor turley who has said that he thanks this would be a very hard approaching case to make the five alex, if the president had said instead, mr. comey, stop the investigation or youre fired. now, that might be the specific intent required for obstruction, right? it certainly would. but that the context of this. you dont always have to say ...