that can you indict and prosecute a president after he leaves office, after he is impeached and removed. second of all, you can t inkitindict a president for obstructions of justice if the president merely exercises his constitutional authorities under article 2 by firing somebody or by pardoning somebody, the george w. bush case establishes that. george w. bush pardoned five people on the evi eve of their trial including the former secretary of defense and he did it for the purpose of ending the investigation according to the special prosecutor, but the special prosecutor never considered indicting him or going after him. third, president trump simply didn t obstruct justice. you can t obstruct justice by doing things in public, making statements in public and firing people in public. that s not obstruction of justice. obstruction of justice occurs in secret and behind closed doors. tucker: in terms of the president exercising authority over executive
well done, page. that s the extent of what we know from this latest tranche of texts but it tells us a lot. it s now beyond a doubt that executive branch employee worked to hurt the president they worked for for political reasons. this is a betrayal of constitutional order and of democracy itself. why? because the o president is elected. the employees in the executive branch are not. all of their power derives from him and his power derives from you, the voters. when they subvert him, they are subverting you. that s what the constitution says.su it s also clear that there is rot at the highest levels of american law enforcement. we place tremendous trust in the fbi because they hold tremendous power over all of us. some of them, it turns out, are abusing that fire done my power to spy on us and then leave that information to the press, destroying people in the process. the worst kind of abuse of power. the left defends it, why? richard goodstein is an attorney and advisor to the hilla
covering up from the very beginning, for nine long months, the origins of the trump-russia hoax. as i argue in my book, he and others never had any evidence of collusion. there was no evidence of crimes or intelligence to justify a counterintelligence probe. rosenstein is a guy who put his signature on a document to renew the wiretap warrant application, and he knew that that was a fabricated, phony document. he didn t present new evidence, as the law demands. he vouched for its authenticity when he knew it was unverified and fabricated, and that is a fraud on the court and abuse of power. laura: mark meadows, it s been 122 years since a member of the executive branch has been impeached. it s a long time. it s a long time. laura: i m not talking about the president, an executive branch employee other than the president.
covering up from the very beginning, for nine long months, the origins of the trump-russia hoax. as a argue in my book, he and others never had any evidence of collusion. there was no evidence of crimes or intelligence to justify a counterintelligence probe. rosenstein is a guy who put his signature on a document to renew the wiretap warrant application, and he knew that that was a fabricated, phony document. he didn t present new evidence, as the law demands. he vouched for its authenticity when he knew it was unverified and fabricated, and that is a fraud on the court and abuse of power. laura: mark meadows, it s been 122 years since a member of the executive branch has been impeached. it s a long time. it s a long time. laura: i m not talking about the president, and executive branch employee other
you think he can fire him if someone gives him a suitcase full of cash to fire him, that would be okay? of course not and it s a ridiculous assertion. but the president of the united states can fire the fbi director or any other executive branch employee. my point is, when you try to start adding layers of reasoning behind it, you muddle the clear legal issue, which is the president has the authority to do this. no, you don t. no, you don t. because the president is not allowed to act out of a corrupt motive, in firing someone who is investigating him. i mean this is the key issue here, and that s why what giuliani said yesterday was not an explanation, it was a confession. it was giuliani saying, the reason he fired him is that he he wouldn t exculpate the man who fired him.