(09-05-2018, 11:18 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote:

(09-05-2018, 09:25 PM)TJBender Wrote: Things enter a new arena when you go onto Twitter and publicly criticize your Attorney General for bringing indictments against Republicans right before an election. You look at that and see a boss criticizing his subordinate. I look at it and see a President publicly telling his AG not to bring any more indictments until after the election. You see nothing wrong with that, I see it as interfering in a criminal investigation for political purposes. Maybe that's the point at which our understanding breaks down.

I understand your point-of-view. I understand why you think it's obstruction.

I'm just saying that the code section doesn't give special exception to Twitter or Trump (the President) in regarded to criticism of investigations by subordinates. It's either illegal or it's legal. Criticism should be expected from superiors during criminal investigations. Putting that criticism in the public arena doesn't make it any less legal.

You only look at the definition of crimes in statutes if it's a criminal procedure. It's understood that public officials can break the public Trust in ways that private citizens cannot. so an impeachment proceeding would be more about the spirit of the laws and the proper division of power. Both of which Trump is trying to violate in a big way.

---