SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
FBI Director Robert Mueller III testifies before the Senate Judiciary Committee during a oversight hearing on Capitol Hill. (Photo: Win McNamee/Getty Images)
Bolstering Case for Impeachment, Study Concludes Trump 'Likely Obstructed Justice'
A detailed analysis finds "substantial" evidence to support claims that Trump attempted to undermine an ongoing investigation by firing former FBI director James Comey
Oct 10, 2017
In a new study aimed at collecting and analyzing all of the relevant facts surrounding President Donald Trump's legally questionable conduct in office--particularly his firing of former FBI director James Comey--three lawyers conclude it is "likely" that Trump has obstructed justice, and that whether he is held accountable for his actions "will have significant consequences for the functioning of our democracy."
"Demanding the loyalty of an individual involved in an investigation, requesting that individual's help to end the investigation, and then ultimately firing that person to accomplish that goal are the types of acts that have frequently resulted in obstruction convictions."
"We do not yet know all the relevant facts, and any final determination must await further investigation, including by Special Counsel Robert Mueller," concludes the Brookings Institute report--authored by Norm Eisen and Noah Bookbinder of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW) and Barry Berke of the law firm Kramer Levin.
Nonetheless, the lawyers argue that the facts currently in the public record amount to "substantial evidence that President Trump attempted to obstruct the investigations into Michael Flynn and Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election through various actions, including the termination of James Comey."
"Demanding the loyalty of an individual involved in an investigation, requesting that individual's help to end the investigation, and then ultimately firing that person to accomplish that goal are the types of acts that have frequently resulted in obstruction convictions," the analysis notes, citing the impeachment proceedings against former presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, as well as Judges Samuel Kent and Harry Claiborne.
In all of these cases, the lawyers observe, "Congress has...considered obstruction, conspiracy, and conviction of a federal crime to be valid reasons to remove a duly elected president from office."
The study goes on to highlight several pieces of evidence that could form a cumulative case that Trump obstructed an ongoing investigation, including:
- Trump's "fabrication" of his initial reason for firing Comey (which was that Comey poorly handled the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server);
- Trump's role in crafting his son Donald Trump Jr.'s "inaccurate statements about the purpose of his meeting with a Russian lawyer" during the 2016 presidential campaign;
- Trump's threat to Comey that he "better hope there are no 'tapes'" of their conversations; and
- Trump's repeated denunciations of the investigation into his conduct, which he has called a "fake" scandal drummed up by Democrats angry that they lost the election.
While the authors conclude by noting that the "appropriateness of impeaching the president on the grounds discussed" is "ultimately a matter of congressional discretion," the relevant precedents, as well as the large body of evidence, indicate that Congress would have sufficient justification if it chose to do so.
As recent polling data demonstrates, such a move would likely be applauded by a large portion of the American public.
According to a Public Religion Research Institute survey in August, 40 percent of Americans believe Trump should be impeached--up 10 percentage points over a period of six months.
Most Americans also side with Eisen, Bookbinder, and Berke on the matter of obstruction of justice. A recent survey conducted by Public Policy Polling found that 49 percent of Americans believe Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
In a new study aimed at collecting and analyzing all of the relevant facts surrounding President Donald Trump's legally questionable conduct in office--particularly his firing of former FBI director James Comey--three lawyers conclude it is "likely" that Trump has obstructed justice, and that whether he is held accountable for his actions "will have significant consequences for the functioning of our democracy."
"Demanding the loyalty of an individual involved in an investigation, requesting that individual's help to end the investigation, and then ultimately firing that person to accomplish that goal are the types of acts that have frequently resulted in obstruction convictions."
"We do not yet know all the relevant facts, and any final determination must await further investigation, including by Special Counsel Robert Mueller," concludes the Brookings Institute report--authored by Norm Eisen and Noah Bookbinder of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW) and Barry Berke of the law firm Kramer Levin.
Nonetheless, the lawyers argue that the facts currently in the public record amount to "substantial evidence that President Trump attempted to obstruct the investigations into Michael Flynn and Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election through various actions, including the termination of James Comey."
"Demanding the loyalty of an individual involved in an investigation, requesting that individual's help to end the investigation, and then ultimately firing that person to accomplish that goal are the types of acts that have frequently resulted in obstruction convictions," the analysis notes, citing the impeachment proceedings against former presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, as well as Judges Samuel Kent and Harry Claiborne.
In all of these cases, the lawyers observe, "Congress has...considered obstruction, conspiracy, and conviction of a federal crime to be valid reasons to remove a duly elected president from office."
The study goes on to highlight several pieces of evidence that could form a cumulative case that Trump obstructed an ongoing investigation, including:
- Trump's "fabrication" of his initial reason for firing Comey (which was that Comey poorly handled the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server);
- Trump's role in crafting his son Donald Trump Jr.'s "inaccurate statements about the purpose of his meeting with a Russian lawyer" during the 2016 presidential campaign;
- Trump's threat to Comey that he "better hope there are no 'tapes'" of their conversations; and
- Trump's repeated denunciations of the investigation into his conduct, which he has called a "fake" scandal drummed up by Democrats angry that they lost the election.
While the authors conclude by noting that the "appropriateness of impeaching the president on the grounds discussed" is "ultimately a matter of congressional discretion," the relevant precedents, as well as the large body of evidence, indicate that Congress would have sufficient justification if it chose to do so.
As recent polling data demonstrates, such a move would likely be applauded by a large portion of the American public.
According to a Public Religion Research Institute survey in August, 40 percent of Americans believe Trump should be impeached--up 10 percentage points over a period of six months.
Most Americans also side with Eisen, Bookbinder, and Berke on the matter of obstruction of justice. A recent survey conducted by Public Policy Polling found that 49 percent of Americans believe Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey.
In a new study aimed at collecting and analyzing all of the relevant facts surrounding President Donald Trump's legally questionable conduct in office--particularly his firing of former FBI director James Comey--three lawyers conclude it is "likely" that Trump has obstructed justice, and that whether he is held accountable for his actions "will have significant consequences for the functioning of our democracy."
"Demanding the loyalty of an individual involved in an investigation, requesting that individual's help to end the investigation, and then ultimately firing that person to accomplish that goal are the types of acts that have frequently resulted in obstruction convictions."
"We do not yet know all the relevant facts, and any final determination must await further investigation, including by Special Counsel Robert Mueller," concludes the Brookings Institute report--authored by Norm Eisen and Noah Bookbinder of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington (CREW) and Barry Berke of the law firm Kramer Levin.
Nonetheless, the lawyers argue that the facts currently in the public record amount to "substantial evidence that President Trump attempted to obstruct the investigations into Michael Flynn and Russia's interference in the 2016 presidential election through various actions, including the termination of James Comey."
"Demanding the loyalty of an individual involved in an investigation, requesting that individual's help to end the investigation, and then ultimately firing that person to accomplish that goal are the types of acts that have frequently resulted in obstruction convictions," the analysis notes, citing the impeachment proceedings against former presidents Richard Nixon and Bill Clinton, as well as Judges Samuel Kent and Harry Claiborne.
In all of these cases, the lawyers observe, "Congress has...considered obstruction, conspiracy, and conviction of a federal crime to be valid reasons to remove a duly elected president from office."
The study goes on to highlight several pieces of evidence that could form a cumulative case that Trump obstructed an ongoing investigation, including:
- Trump's "fabrication" of his initial reason for firing Comey (which was that Comey poorly handled the investigation into former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's use of a private email server);
- Trump's role in crafting his son Donald Trump Jr.'s "inaccurate statements about the purpose of his meeting with a Russian lawyer" during the 2016 presidential campaign;
- Trump's threat to Comey that he "better hope there are no 'tapes'" of their conversations; and
- Trump's repeated denunciations of the investigation into his conduct, which he has called a "fake" scandal drummed up by Democrats angry that they lost the election.
While the authors conclude by noting that the "appropriateness of impeaching the president on the grounds discussed" is "ultimately a matter of congressional discretion," the relevant precedents, as well as the large body of evidence, indicate that Congress would have sufficient justification if it chose to do so.
As recent polling data demonstrates, such a move would likely be applauded by a large portion of the American public.
According to a Public Religion Research Institute survey in August, 40 percent of Americans believe Trump should be impeached--up 10 percentage points over a period of six months.
Most Americans also side with Eisen, Bookbinder, and Berke on the matter of obstruction of justice. A recent survey conducted by Public Policy Polling found that 49 percent of Americans believe Trump obstructed justice by firing Comey.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.