However, this is the main reason why I'd bet that Trump is guilty!

 “The president wants to take down Bob Mueller. His lawyer wants to take down Bob Mueller," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., told ABC News' "This Week" co-anchor Martha Raddatz in an exclusive interview Sunday.

"The question is why," Schiff continued. “I think the answer is they want to lay the foundation to discredit whatever Bob Mueller comes up with. They’re essentially engaging in a scorched-earth litigation strategy that is beginning with trying to discredit the prosecutor.”  

If he was not guilty, why would Trump and his attorney's try to discredit Mueller, and anything he comes up with?

How would Trump even know if he was “guilty”? Of what? Obstruction of justice?  Could there possibly be a vaguer crime as applied to a president exercising his constitutional powers? It really is a replay of the indictment of Governor Perry who exercised his constitutional power to veto legislation bc the DA crossed him - yet the grand jury indicted him for abuse of power. We never got to find out what he did to lead to the indictment, thanks to some “home cooking” by the Texas appellate court which changed the law to protect him from trial, despite all my efforts to hold him accountable.

           Trump will not have that kind of protection, since the special counsel report will be public. But talking heads like Dershowitz insist there can be no obstruction, since Trump had the constitutional power to do what he did. Dershowitz is wrong, of course, since a corrupt exercise of those powers is at least an impeachable offense, if not an indictable one. But it is not an unreasonable position, and one I’m sure Trump believes is correct. So I suspect Trump genuinely believes he did nothing wrong.

        No one likes to be “under investigation,” and when you are a petty, insecure man like Trump that alone is reason to trash the investigator if not fire him. He trashes anyone who crosses him - from poor Rosie O’Donnell, to the beauty queen, to the Mexican judge etc.

So that is "to be determined."  

 
Now it may or may not leak out, and my guess is it probably would, but to say definitively at this point that it will be made public, is not factual.

 
Also, re : Dershowitz, you are not stating his view with enough precision. He believes that Trump CAN obstruct justice, but not with the facts known at present.  

 
He has always acknowledged, when pressed, that if Trump physically threatened someone, destroyed evidence, bribed someone, etc. that those actions would of course be considered an obstruction of justice.  

 
So to categorically state that Dershowitz is "wrong," doesn't take into account his full view on the topic.

-- Modified on 6/18/2017 10:15:00 PM

as I have seen him on TV several times stating flatly that “Trump cannot be charged with  obstruction for firing Comey, which he had the constitutional authority to do.” He also has disagreed with critics who say it is a different ball game if Trump’s actions were  “corruptly” motivated. His op ed, which I thought I followed closely when I wrote the post, on this point is attached.

 
I happen to think he is “categorically wrong” on that point – and I have never seen him say otherwise.  Have you? Maybe he has changed his mind since June 8 and I owe him an apology, but I don’t think so.  

I think you are talking about a different point – Dershowitz does recognize that Trump may obstruct if he commits an independent crime.  No one would dispute that – the question is whether a corrupt intent alone makes the offense impeachable-   I say yes. AD does not address impeachment at least in the article I read but says  no as to a crime.

As to the Mueller report being not being made public, I think you are technically right about that and I was wrong the way I stated it.  He reports to the AG and his report is confidential. But the AG then has to report to the Senate and make disclosure of the findings if it is the public interest.  With respect to whether Trump obstructed justice or committed any other crime (no doubt counterintelligence stuff will be redacted), I can’t imagine how anyone could conclude that this is not in the public interest. If Trump is cleared of course, we will probably received mailed copies of the report. So I reiterate my belief that Trump will not get any obstruction finding swept under the rug, unlike Gov Perry.

When AD is on TV, he oft times has a limited amount of time to respond to questions, due to the massive number of talking heads now recently popular on these cable TV news panels.  

 
With those time constraints, Dershowitz  makes his main points without going into every possible scenario and possibility. You well know some of these highly technical legal and constitutional discussions could be debated for hours, but when Don Lemon, Anderson Cooper, etc have 7 or 8 guests on with him, nuance, subtly and detail are often casualties.

 
But when he is pressed on the subject, he has acknowledged that Trump can commit OOJ, when as you say, he commits an "independent crime."

 
As your link points out, when AD has more time/space to delve into the topic more fully, he has stated that the "corrupt intent" component is flawed to bring action against Trump, especially when he is otherwise acting with a power awarded to him by the constitution.

 
He also points out, as the staunch civil liberty defender that he is, regardless of party, that it is virtually impossible to determine  what Trump is thinking, again, when considering he is acting within his constitutional power.

 
So of course you, and others may disagree with his assertion, but to state categorically that he is "wrong" is incorrect as you both are stating your opinion on what is essentially an unsettled constitutional and/or legal matter.

snowflake assertion of russian collusion ??  no proof after 10+ months of investigation. now you jump to another issue?  again, no proof. you do nothing for the advancement of the country with your silly, but damaging assertions without proof.

Way too narrow of a focus. Trump may not even be guilty of a crime. However, like with releasing his taxes, and what he fears would be revealed if he did, how it would impact the way his base would view him, undercutting his base of support as president. He fears, what he tried to do with Obama, being seen as an illegitimate president, along with any new possible excursions into his business dealings.

on cable TV where millions watch without mentioning all the caveats, but you feel I should outline his complete position if I post on the P & R Board where I think I got “two reads” at the time I posted?

Fair enough, I’m not going to argue with a guy who wants to raise the standards on the P & R Board.

But you also say I can’t give an opinion that AD is wrong if the law is unsettled? Isn’t that going a bit too far?  

I think the Supreme Court was wrong when it said the Second Amendment gives an individual right to bear arms. Obviously I think the Texas appellate court was wrong when it bailed out Gov Perry from having to go to trial. In both cases we have settled law –much less unsettled - but I can’t opine the courts were wrong?

So when you throw that stone, you need to test the integrity of your glass house. lol

 
And of course you can have your opinion, as I stated exactly such in my response, but again to "categorically state" he is "wrong" is a leap.  

 
He may indeed be ultimately proven wrong or not, but I think I will side with Mr. Dershowitz here over an out of work porn star.

 
Now would you please start replying to MY responses instead of replying to the OP over and over.  I know the new TER is confusing but it should be a piece of cake for a man with such a high IQ to eventually figure out. lol

-- Modified on 6/19/2017 12:24:32 PM

This entire thread addresses nothing but semantic bullshit, if the question is did Donald Trump obstruct justice ? The answer is yes of course, what is justice but the application of truth ? Donald has fired the first person (Comey) in charge of finding the truth & threatened the man who appointed a special prosecutor to replace Comey . How could there be any other answer to that question but yes ? It's simple Donald does not want the truth to be known & he has obstructed justice to try to stop the world from seeing it.

How embarrassing!