XPost: alt.global-warming, alt.politics.trump, uk.politics.misc   
   XPost: alt.rush-limbaugh   
   From: athinker@gopfags.net   
      
   Is Mike Pence guilty of obstruction of justice? I asked 7 legal experts.   
   The vice president has a lot of questions to answer.   
   Updated by Sean Illing@seanillingsean.illing@vox.com   
      
      
   So far the most compelling evidence that President Donald Trump may have   
   obstructed justice is that he admitted to firing FBI Director James Comey   
   because he was unhappy with the investigation into his campaign’s ties to   
   Russia.   
      
   “When I decided to do it I said to myself, I said, “You know, this Russia   
   thing with Trump and Russia is a made-up story,” Trump told NBC’s Lester   
   Holt. This contradicts Trump’s earlier claim that he fired Comey due to   
   his mishandling of the Clinton email investigation.   
      
   Last week, both the New York Times and Washington Post broke stories that   
   might implicate Vice President Mike Pence in a potential obstruction of   
   justice case against Trump. Although the precise details are sketchy, we   
   know that Trump initially authored a lengthy memo stating his real reason   
   for firing Comey (that he wanted to shut the Russia investigation down).   
      
   That memo was later rejected by White House Counsel, Don McGahn. But the   
   reports from the New York Times and Washington Post indicate that before   
   it was rejected, Trump read the memo aloud to some of his closest   
   advisers, including Pence. Which means Pence was very likely aware of   
   Trump’s real motivations regarding the Comey decision. Yet on the   
   following day Pence went before the public and affirmed Trump’s cover   
   story for firing Comey.   
      
   I reached out to seven top legal experts and asked if Pence’s   
   participation in Trump’s cover story makes him guilty of obstruction.   
   There was not a clear consensus.   
      
   “If Pence gave any feedback in revising the letter to cover up those   
   intentions and to give disingenuous legal reasons for firing Comey,” Jed   
   Shugerman, a law professor at Fordham University, told me, “he is guilty   
   of conspiracy to obstruct justice and aiding and abetting.”   
      
   Diane Marie Amann, who teaches law at the University of Georgia, is less   
   convinced. “The likelihood that the vice president could face charges for   
   crimes like obstruction of justice ... based on what has been reported to   
   date seems, at best, slim to none.” Part of the reason is that we simply   
   don’t know enough about the contents of Trump’s original memo or what,   
   exactly, Pence may have heard.   
      
   Obstruction of justice is also a notoriously difficult crime to prove. As   
   Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Law school, told me, “It   
   requires that one attempt to corruptly ‘influence, obstruct, or impede’   
   the ‘administration of justice.’" And it’s not clear that Pence’s   
   knowledge of the draft memo or his statements the following day “rise to   
   the requisite level.”   
      
   The seven legal experts’ full responses, edited for clarity and style, are   
   below.   
      
   Asha Rangappa, associate dean, Yale Law School   
   The Eye of Sauron (a.k.a. Robert Mueller) has finally found Vice President   
   Mike Pence. After months of flying under the radar of the scandals   
   swirling around the White House, Pence, it turns out, was present in the   
   Oval Office when President Trump read his initial draft letter firing   
   Comey.   
      
   Until we know what the contents of that letter were or what the White   
   House counsel Don McGahn advised Trump in the presence of Pence and   
   others, we can’t conclude that Pence himself is exposed to any criminal   
   liability — for that to happen, Pence would have had to be aware of   
   criminal activity and to have agreed to either facilitate or conceal it,   
   and there is evidence of neither so far.   
      
   However, given that he was in the “room where it happened,” Pence is   
   certainly a valuable witness for Mueller in terms of understanding Trump’s   
   thought process in the sequence leading up to Comey’s firing, and whether   
   the rationale that was ultimately communicated to Comey for his   
   termination was the real one.   
      
   “IF PENCE GAVE ANY FEEDBACK IN REVISING THE LETTER TO COVER UP THOSE   
   INTENTIONS AND TO GIVE DISINGENUOUS LEGAL REASONS FOR FIRING COMEY, HE IS   
   GUILTY OF CONSPIRACY TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE AND AIDING AND ABETTING.”   
   —JED SHUGERMAN, FORDHAM UNIVERSITY   
   Jessica Levinson, law professor, Loyola Law School   
   I frankly think it is highly doubtful that Vice President Mike Pence would   
   be charged with any crime related to his knowledge of early drafts of a   
   memo outlining President Trump's reasons for firing James Comey and   
   Pence's later statements concerning the firing.   
      
   Obstruction of justice can be a difficult crime to prove. It requires that   
   one attempt to corruptly "influence, obstruct, or impede" the   
   "administration of justice." I'm not sure that Pence's knowledge of the   
   draft of a memo in which Trump says he is going to fire Comey because of   
   the Russia investigation and then his statements that the firing of Comey   
   was unrelated to the Russia investigation rise to the requisite level.   
      
   The same goes for misprision [deliberate concealment] of a felony. This   
   would require that another person (presumably Trump) committed and   
   completed a felony, and that Pence knew that and took steps to conceal the   
   felony. Put another way, a prosecutor would have to show that Trump   
   completed a felony and Pence knew about that and covered it up. It could   
   be difficult to demonstrate that Pence's awareness of the first draft of   
   the memo firing Comey and his later comments meet the elements of this   
   crime.   
      
   Jed Shugerman, law professor, Fordham University   
   Under federal statute 18 U.S.C. 1512, “whoever corruptly obstructs,   
   influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so," is   
   guilty of obstruction of justice. As Trump more or less admitted several   
   times, he fired Comey to impede the official proceedings (by the FBI, by   
   Congress, and by a grand jury) in the Russia investigation. Now the   
   question is who else is implicated.   
      
   As the New York Times reports, Pence was in the room where it happened.   
   If, as reported, Trump read his draft letter to Pence, McGahn, and others,   
   and if it that letter indeed was a "screed" about Comey's handling of the   
   Russia probe, then Pence and others had knowledge of Trump's intentions.   
   If Pence gave any feedback in revising the letter to cover up those   
   intentions and to give disingenuous legal reasons for firing Comey, he is   
   guilty of conspiracy to obstruct justice and aiding and abetting.   
      
   Even if he didn't conspire, he may be guilty of misprision of a felony (18   
   U.S.C. § 4), the active concealment of a felony, because he participated   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)