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
President Donald Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions attend a panel discussion in the Roosevelt Room of the White House March 29, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Photo: Shawn Thew-Pool/Getty Images)
'Very Strong Evidence' of Obstruction: Trump Reportedly Told Sessions to Reverse Recusal from Russia Probe
"Given this bizarre timeline of behavior by Trump, it's hard to conclude that Trump doesn't want Sessions to improperly impede the Mueller investigation."
May 30, 2018
Adding to the "mountain of evidence" that President Donald Trump has obstructed justice and indicating that special counsel Robert Mueller's probe is continuing to expand, the New York Times reported late Tuesday that Mueller is examining a meeting last March during which Trump ordered Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his recusal from the FBI's Russia investigation.
After ranting to aides that "he needed a loyalist overseeing" the Russia probe, Trump told Sessions during dinner at Mar-a-Lago to walk back his decision to recuse himself from the investigation--a move that was required by Justice Department guidelines that "are in place to prevent the sort of political meddling the president tried to engage in," the Times notes.
Sessions ultimately refused Trump's demand.
The special counsel's reported interest Trump's meeting with the attorney general "demonstrates Mr. Sessions' overlooked role as a key witness in the investigation into whether Mr. Trump tried to obstruct" the Russia investigation, the Times observed. "It also suggests that the obstruction investigation is broader than it is widely understood to be--encompassing not only the president's interactions with and firing of the former F.B.I. director, James B. Comey."
Responding to the Times report on Tuesday, legal expert and former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti argued in a series of tweets that Trump's "repeated attempts to push Sessions to reassert control over the Russia investigation" constitute "very strong evidence" that the president has obstructed justice.
\u201cTHREAD: Are the revelations in today's @nytimes article, including Trump's repeated attempts to push Sessions to reassert control over the Russia investigation, evidence of obstruction of justice? (Short answer: Very strong evidence.)\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1527640923
\u201c9/ The hard part of proving obstruction of justice is proving the "corrupt" intent of the defendant. In other words, proving the person acted with the intent to unlawfully impede the investigation. Today's news adds to the mountain of evidence of Trump's intent to obstruct.\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1527640923
"Given this bizarre timeline of behavior by Trump, it's hard to conclude that Trump doesn't want Sessions to improperly impede the Mueller investigation, which is strong evidence that Trump wanted to impede the investigation when he fired Comey," Mariotti concluded.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. 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. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Adding to the "mountain of evidence" that President Donald Trump has obstructed justice and indicating that special counsel Robert Mueller's probe is continuing to expand, the New York Times reported late Tuesday that Mueller is examining a meeting last March during which Trump ordered Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his recusal from the FBI's Russia investigation.
After ranting to aides that "he needed a loyalist overseeing" the Russia probe, Trump told Sessions during dinner at Mar-a-Lago to walk back his decision to recuse himself from the investigation--a move that was required by Justice Department guidelines that "are in place to prevent the sort of political meddling the president tried to engage in," the Times notes.
Sessions ultimately refused Trump's demand.
The special counsel's reported interest Trump's meeting with the attorney general "demonstrates Mr. Sessions' overlooked role as a key witness in the investigation into whether Mr. Trump tried to obstruct" the Russia investigation, the Times observed. "It also suggests that the obstruction investigation is broader than it is widely understood to be--encompassing not only the president's interactions with and firing of the former F.B.I. director, James B. Comey."
Responding to the Times report on Tuesday, legal expert and former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti argued in a series of tweets that Trump's "repeated attempts to push Sessions to reassert control over the Russia investigation" constitute "very strong evidence" that the president has obstructed justice.
\u201cTHREAD: Are the revelations in today's @nytimes article, including Trump's repeated attempts to push Sessions to reassert control over the Russia investigation, evidence of obstruction of justice? (Short answer: Very strong evidence.)\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1527640923
\u201c9/ The hard part of proving obstruction of justice is proving the "corrupt" intent of the defendant. In other words, proving the person acted with the intent to unlawfully impede the investigation. Today's news adds to the mountain of evidence of Trump's intent to obstruct.\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1527640923
"Given this bizarre timeline of behavior by Trump, it's hard to conclude that Trump doesn't want Sessions to improperly impede the Mueller investigation, which is strong evidence that Trump wanted to impede the investigation when he fired Comey," Mariotti concluded.
Adding to the "mountain of evidence" that President Donald Trump has obstructed justice and indicating that special counsel Robert Mueller's probe is continuing to expand, the New York Times reported late Tuesday that Mueller is examining a meeting last March during which Trump ordered Attorney General Jeff Sessions to reverse his recusal from the FBI's Russia investigation.
After ranting to aides that "he needed a loyalist overseeing" the Russia probe, Trump told Sessions during dinner at Mar-a-Lago to walk back his decision to recuse himself from the investigation--a move that was required by Justice Department guidelines that "are in place to prevent the sort of political meddling the president tried to engage in," the Times notes.
Sessions ultimately refused Trump's demand.
The special counsel's reported interest Trump's meeting with the attorney general "demonstrates Mr. Sessions' overlooked role as a key witness in the investigation into whether Mr. Trump tried to obstruct" the Russia investigation, the Times observed. "It also suggests that the obstruction investigation is broader than it is widely understood to be--encompassing not only the president's interactions with and firing of the former F.B.I. director, James B. Comey."
Responding to the Times report on Tuesday, legal expert and former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti argued in a series of tweets that Trump's "repeated attempts to push Sessions to reassert control over the Russia investigation" constitute "very strong evidence" that the president has obstructed justice.
\u201cTHREAD: Are the revelations in today's @nytimes article, including Trump's repeated attempts to push Sessions to reassert control over the Russia investigation, evidence of obstruction of justice? (Short answer: Very strong evidence.)\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1527640923
\u201c9/ The hard part of proving obstruction of justice is proving the "corrupt" intent of the defendant. In other words, proving the person acted with the intent to unlawfully impede the investigation. Today's news adds to the mountain of evidence of Trump's intent to obstruct.\u201d— Renato Mariotti (@Renato Mariotti) 1527640923
"Given this bizarre timeline of behavior by Trump, it's hard to conclude that Trump doesn't want Sessions to improperly impede the Mueller investigation, which is strong evidence that Trump wanted to impede the investigation when he fired Comey," Mariotti concluded.
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.