Essay Example Dedicated to the Obstruction of Justice by Donald Trump

There is substantial evidence in the public record regarding Trump's attempt to impede Michael Fylnn's investigation and the Russian interferences in the U.S 2016 election. However, the subject evokes significant questions as to whether the president obstructed justice and if he did is it possible to prosecute a sitting president? According to Yilek, (2018) there needs to be a solid case to go after a sitting president, the prosecutor should be in a position to build the best case rather than a technical case. A person commits obstruction of justice if the person attempts to impede an investigation and does so with a corrupt intent such as to protect him/her criminal liability or for financial gain (Berke, Bookbinder, & Eisen, 2017).

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

The president is alleged to have interfered with the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and possible conditions with Trump's campaign. It is argued that the Russian hacked into Democratic National Committee and stole Hillary Clinton's emails as well as the launch of FBI investigations. The investigation also claims that there was possible contact between Trump campaign and Russian officials and individuals. Upon failure to convince the FBI director to give him his loyalty, the president fired him. These and many other claims are used by the prosecuting in an attempt to charge the president and request to the Congress to impeach the president. (Berke, Bookbinder, & Eisen, 2017)

Skeptics argue that it will be difficult for the prosecutor to ask the grand jury for charges against the president unless they have a bulletproof case. Their first argument is that the president is exceptional, this is only because he is the sitting president. They argue that there are several unique elements that could complicate efforts to make an obstruction case against President Trump. Secondly, they feel like Mr. Trump's allegations aren't as bad as those of Bill Clinton and Richard Nixon, both had several other accusations and Trump's case has no clear evidence that he did those things. Thirdly they feel that proving Trump's motive could be difficult. Trump could argue that his criticism of the case is that he thinks it's a witch hunt being used by his political opponents to hurt the presidency. Naturally, his argument will be viewed with a lot of skepticism. However, that will not be adequate evidence to disprove them.

On the other hand, many legal experts argue that the president can obstruct justice. They say that he is not above the law even if he has all kinds of constitutional powers he is still subject to obeying the law. The powers have to have a legal intent. There is no express grant of immunity under the constitution, those who are placing that claim are purposely doing so with the concern about the debilitating effects of a president. The Republicans are opposing the accusations; they are undermining the credibility and legitimacy of the justice department to prosecute the president. The Democrats on the other hand strongly feel that there is an ample precedent contrary to Trump's lawyer statement that the president cannot obstruct justice. However the president does not need to be found guilty to lose his place in the White House, the house can still impeach him from finding that it was a high crime.

Reference

Berke, B., Bookbinder, N., & Eisen, N. (2017). Presidential obstruction of justice: the case of Donald J. Trump. Governance Studies, 50-60.

Yilek, C. (2018, February 7). Eric Holder: Robert Mueller could prosecute Trump for obstruction of justice. Retrieved February 8, 2018, from Washington Examiner: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/eric-holder-robert-mueller-could-prosecute-trump-for-obstruction-of-justice/article/2648429