Sarah Huckster Sanders Accused Of Obstructing Justice In Mueller Probe

[yortsed snacilbuper]

The three torpedoes that Sarah Huckabee’s Sanders shot at James Comey, which open up an entirely new avenue in the case for Mueller. There’s a statute, 1504 in the obstruction of justice statutes, that talks about attempts to influence grand jurors. So the question for Sarah Huckabee Sanders is, “Who asked you to do that? Who told you to do that?”

link

[Sedona]

1. Ohhhhh it would be so beautiful

To see that bitch perp walked with the rest of the traitorous scum

[mdbl]

2. Not to worry

Her daddy is a religious fascist so she's forgiven.

[monmouth4]

6. I have glorious visions of a paddy wagon parked in front of the WH, POTUS and staff being

perp walked out the front door. Visitors to the WH applauding as they are loaded in. sigh.

[yuiyoshida]

3. Can't stand her, and seeing her do jail time

would be nice.

[Calista241]

4. If you can argue that Comey didnt do the things she talked about

Then you have a case. Unfortunately, as Press Secretary, she’s on pretty firm legal ground.

Smearing the prosecutions case has been a legal strategy since forever. Everyone said these things on TV when Comey admitted to leaking his notes. Unfortunately, Comey put himself in legal jeopardy when he did so, and his actions have both started and complicated Mueller’s investigation.

[WinkyDink]

5. "Comey put himself in legal jeopardy....." is Right-Wing hogwash. His own notes, as he

testified, were neither "leaked" (Comey himself gave them to another) NOR classified.

I think Comey knows the law a little better than his civilian accusers.

Moreover, it wasn't his actions that "started... Mueller's investigation"; it was Trump's FIRING of him.

Finally, if the investigation is "complicated," it is because of the depth, breadth, and plethora of Administration crimes.

[barbtries]

7. thank you WinkyDink nt

[Calista241]

9. He leaked the contents of his conversation with the President

And violated his employment contract with the FBI. Unless you can make the case that he would have been in that room for those conversations as a private citizen, then he clearly violated his signed contractual agreements, and the government, led by Trump, can easily and lawfully seek redress for those violations. It doesn’t matter if the conversation, documents, or the leak itself was classified or not.

He may not be in go to jail trouble, but they could easily revoke any benefits and make his firing for cause. That complicates his usability as a witness, which is what Trump wants.

All of this is fact, not right wing hogwash. It sucks, but burying our heads in the sand is not an effective plan for addressing the nightmare that is the Trump regime.

[WinkyDink]

11. Why would Comey jeopardize his financial future and even freedom for this act? He is no friend to

Democrats.

[standingtall]

8. On what legal ground does the Press Secretary have to use

his or her platform to influence the department of justice to investigate a witness against their boss the President?
Comey had the right to leak his notes which were not classified information to begin with, and is not illegal despite the spin republicans are trying to put on it.

If this were anybody else besides the President and his cronies there would be no question in anyone's mind that this amounts to witness intimidation and therefore obstruction of justice.

[Calista241]

10. In actuality, she's complicating any legal case brought against Comey in the future.

But i suspect actually bringing a case is not the goal. The real goal is to tarnish Comey as a witness, by bringing to light the rule breaking acts she's accused him of here.

Mueller will have to put Comey on the stand to make an obstruction case, and Trump's lawyers will have a weeks worth of questions on why he decided to leak this information. There's at least a fair chance Comey takes the 5th at some point, at which point his ability to be an effective witness is brought to an end.

From the FBI standard employment contract is this:

"2. All information acquired by me in connection with my official duties with the FBI and all official material to which I have access remain the property of the United States of America. i will surrender upon demand by the FBI, or upon my separation from the FBI, all material containing FBI information in my possession.

3. I will not reveal, by any means, any information or material from or related to FBI files or any other information acquired by virtue of my official employment to any unauthorized recipient without prior official written authorization by the FBI.

4. Prior to making any disclosure, I will seek a determination of whether the information may be disclosed. I agree to be bound by the guidelines governing prepublication review found in the FBI's Prepublication Review Policy Guide (0792PG) as those procedures may from time to time be amended. I understand that, in this context, "publication" includes disclosure of information to anyone by any means. Wi will submit for review the full text of any proposed disclosure addressed by the FBI's Prepublication Review Policy of this employment agreement as required by the policy at least thirty (30) working days prior to the proposed publication.”

Comey's leak clearly runs afoul of that contractual language.

https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/fd-291.pdf/view

[WinkyDink]

12. A law professor begs to differ, re: Comey and criminality:

http://www.newsweek.com/did-comey-break-law-leaking-trumps-conversation-623790

[WinkyDink]

13. More major disagreements with your conclusions about Comey and the law:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/06/09/theres-no-indication-comey-violated-the-law-trump-may-be-about-to/

http://www.businessinsider.com/were-comey-leaks-legal-memos-2017-6

[WinkyDink]

14. This article directly refutes your "employment contract" argument, re: crime:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2017/06/08/trump_s_lawyer_suggests_james_comey_broke_the_law_he_didn_t.html

It DOES mention the same argument is liked by Breitbart and Drudge.

[Calista241]

15. Their motive is to compromise him as a witness.

He clearly broke his employment contract when he released his notes.

I got my information from The Hill: http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/the-administration/337160-opinion-the-damaging-case-against-james-comey

It contains an in-depth legal analysis of the leak.