Page 10 - Obstruction Count News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Will tell you i think it's grounds for an obstruction count, because all of his tweets, all of his statements to don mcgahn that he wants him to fire him, all of his statements to fox news and certainly what we received from the "washington post" tonight. all of that is evidence of a possible obstruction count. it's not that different from, let's say, pardoning manafort is evidence of an obstruction count. >> according to the "washington post," his attorneys rudy giuliani and jay sekulow advised him that it could be interpreted as such an action to obstruct justice and thwart the investigation...

>> it. >> it gets worse. >> on a monday, it's a fire hose and continues to dribble throughout the week. do you believe there's evidence, john dean, that the president obstructed justice? >> well, i think we're accumulating a state of mind that could, indeed lead to a charge of obstruction. technically he can't be gooit indi indicted for it because he is president. it could lead to an impeachment, though. we don't have all the facts, don, but what we do have certainly indicates he doesn't want an investigation to go forward. >> there was obstruction of justice with clinton but that's because cl...

>> his perjury was used as an obstruction count as well. same with nixon, nixon was charged with obstruction as well although it never got to the vote of the house. >> the president's lawyer claiming the president cannot obstruct justice. is he grasping at straws or is he right? >> partly he's grasping at straws. even in the nixon era, the president of the united states can obstruct justice, and president nixon did, as john deal well knows. there was a slush fund that was in existence. there was a conspiracy within the white house to use that slush fund to silence and alter testimony of witnes...

Said he should have been fired. did he do the right thing in their view for the wrong reason? that's something we usually don't debate a great deal in terms of a criminal charge. you look for something a little more clear. you're also right, joe, that in the nixon case, the articles of impeachment did include an obstruction count. keep in mind those were anchored in pretty serious crimes, burglaries and slush funds. we're still in search of that crime. >> that, of course, mike barnicle is exactly what bob mueller is doing right now. but if this is a crime where you have to prove state of mind ...

>> no. there's two reasons why that's not the case. first of all, if a president abuses his power, he actually can be subject to impeachment. the nixon articles of impeachment did include an obstruction count. i think there's distinguishing factors. it is analogous to this one. i don't believe we satisfy that standard either. you're going to have adam chiffon who was my opposing counsel in the last impeachment held in the united states senate, courteous trial. we were on either side of that case. i think adam would be the first to say this is a high standard to make. the second reason, in term...