In a fine piece at the Last Hurrah, Kagro X addresses this question: Just what is the underlying crime in the prosecutor purge?
But what clearly ought not to be is the political manipulation of federal investigations to bolster the electoral prospects of Republicans, and damage those of Democrats and other rivals. This is the sort of activity that's so obviously and fundamentally wrong that nobody has yet taken the time to devise a statute to address it.How about obstruction of justice? Mob boss Guido tells a police detective to overlook certain activities at a certain dock. Guido also reveals that one of his mobster rivals can be busted at a certain time and place. Guido has committed a triable crime, has he not?
1 comment:
sofla said...
I don't think it would be a crime of obstruction. I think there would have to be a bribe offered, or a threat made, for it to rise to that level. Simply telling them to avoid the docks tonight, whatever, isn't a crime, and nor of course is ratting out somebody else's illegal operation.
It's yet more vague in the case of the US attorneys and how they were instructed. As Pat Buchanan gave for an example, if a president or AG comes into office with a particular prosecutorial strategy, say, getting tough on 'X' (child pornography, illegal immigration, the sex slave market, etc.), they may very well order the USAs to stop their run of the mill prosecutions to emphasize this preferred area, and if they do not, fire them as a matter of policy.
So, they might not say, drop the investigations of the GOP members, but rather, we need to stop this election fraud by Democrats, get on it!
Doing one thing might preclude doing other things, but ordering them to bring, and making their continued employment contingent on bringing, certain kinds of cases is not a crime. Prosecutors have to choose which cases to bring all the time.
Post a Comment