[ad_1]
William Barr, candidate for the Attorney General of President Donald Trump, explained how he defines the term "obstruction". This is very similar to what the President is accused in a BuzzFeed report.
The media reported Thursday night that Trump had ordered his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, to lie to Congress about his contacts with Russia over a possible Trump tower in Moscow.
Yet, in a note written by Barr to the Department of Justice, he largely defended Trump's allegations that he obstructed justice when he had been dealing with the former director of the court. FBI, James Comey. Comey claimed that Trump had pressured him to make Michael Flynn, the former national security advisor, become ashamed, lightly and later pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI . Barr said the action would not be a hindrance.
"In the current state of affairs, the obstruction laws do not criminalize any act likely to influence a" proceeding "", he writes in a document shared on Twitter by Justin of the Daily Beast. Miller . "They are concerned rather with acts intended to have a particular impact ".
Barr then explained what would constitute an impediment, such as the falsification of witnesses. And he specifically said that even the president could be guilty in this case:
"Clearly, the president and any other official can be a hindrance in the traditional sense of sabotaging a truth-seeking function. For example, if a president knowingly destroys or modifies evidence, removes perjury or incites a witness to alter his testimony, or commits an act deliberately damaging the integrity or availability of evidence, he commits, like everyone else, the crime of obstruction. "
Barr confirmed his position during his hearings before the Senate this week during this exchange with Senator Amy Klobuchar (D-Min.):
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) Also asked a very specific question about this form of obstruction.
"So, if there was any reason to believe that the president was trying to encourage someone not to testify, or to testify wrongly, this could be a hindrance to justice ? "Asked Graham.
"Yes," replied Barr. "Under a law on obstruction, yes."
As in the memo, Barr and Graham were trying to defend Trump against charges of obstruction by claiming that his actions related to Comey – including the dismissal – would not be considered an obstruction. But in doing so, they may have helped clarify exactly what Trump was accused of in the BuzzFeed report.
[ad_2]
Source link
