Monday December 4th, 2017 16:32 People who are actually asking for it

At no point have I been behind The Unpresidented One’s myriad attacks on the media. That there are still people out there unable to recognize the clear pattern – pieces that disagree with him or make him look bad are fake, pieces that agree with him or make him look good are praiseworthy – is far more troubling to me than a gibbon-headed twit yelling at the TV when he disagrees with it.

But sometimes these people need a good punch up the bracket.

For example:

This since-changed CNN headline started as “Can the president be charged with obstruction of justice?” The subhed reads “President Nixon said years ago that a president could not be charged with obstruction of justice. CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin explains why that may not be true.”

First…

dumbasses

Second…

Nixon’s impeachment specifically references obstruction of justice. Twice.

While it was never voted on, that it was written, introduced, sent to committee, approved by judiciary and finally sent towards a vote is how Congress removes a president that has committed (or is believed to have committed) an indictable offense. Nixon leaving office rendered the impeachment moot, but it could never have started without a real crime with which the target could be charged. That’s just how that works.

And for those elephants in the room with a spotty grasp of history, attempted obstruction of justice is exactly what the house charged Bill Clinton with in his own articles. And more than 50 of those same House members are still there.

Third…

How in the holy hell is this guy your Chief Legal Analyst? I’ve seen opinions rendered more thoughtfully by way of magic 8-ball.

If you had the stomach to watch that drivel, you’d have seen that Toobers himself mentioned the articles of impeachment talking about obstruction. Then, in a defiant act of cowardice, nimbly dances around saying anything more than it’s a “largely discredited” idea, to think that the president is completely above the law. The Chief Legal Analyst simply can’t bring himself to offer real legal analysis when directly asked for it.

Btw, Toobs, the words you were looking for were: “No, the president is not above the law and anyone who says that is a moron. Probably a moron that will end up trying to avoid that big’un in D-block that’s been giving ‘em the eye.”

Los Commentos, as the French say

Your name

Your email

Your URL

Whois

IT guy, dev, designer, writer.

Got a degree in print journalism from UF but history dealt some bad cards to that industry, so I moved back to an earlier love: the computer.

Was recently at ZMOS Networks, but am now the Senior IT Associate at the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation.

My name is moderately common, as are a couple screen names, so always look for the logo to make sure you're reading something with official Km approval.

You can get to me directly with kyle(@)kylemitchell.org