CNN legal analyst Elie Honig on Wednesday took a hammer to Attorney General Bill Barr’s justification for letting President Donald Trump off the hook for obstructing justice.
After watching Barr’s performance during a Senate hearing, Honig said he was stunned at how poorly the attorney general defended his own actions surrounding the decision to clear Trump of obstruction of justice based on the findings in special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.
“How did you come to the conclusion that all 11 potentially obstructive acts [listed in Mueller’s report] were not enough?” he asked rhetorically. “All he had was there was no underlying crime. We know, as a matter of law, it doesn’t matter if there is an underlying crime! It doesn’t matter! You can still charge obstruction!”
Honig then went on to list some high-profile cases — ranging from Martha Stewart to Roger Stone — in which a person has been charged with obstructing justice despite not being charged with an underlying crime.
“Mueller refutes [Barr’s rationale] that in the report,” Honig said. “He said there are plenty of good reasons why people obstruct. Maybe it is in the gray areas — potential criminality — maybe they want to avoid personal embarrassment. That was incredibly weak from William Barr.”
Watch the video below.
GOP shamed by a presidential historian for not taking impeachment seriously
Following the House Judiciary Committee's historic vote, sending two articles of impeachment against Donald Trump to the House floor, presidential historian Tim Naftali broke down why this impeachment was both important and different from previous ones.
Sitting on the panel with host Wolf Blitzer and CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, Naftali began, "Impeachment is the last best defense against those who would abuse their power. In our history, four times the Congress has turned to that tool to deal with a president that for one reason or another they felt was a challenge to the constitutional order."
‘It’s all distractions’: CNN panel obliterates GOP for totally refusing to discuss Trump’s conduct
A CNN panel on Thursday obliterated House Republicans for once again completely ignoring the substance of allegations against President Donald Trump and instead throwing out numerous distractions intended to deflect attention from the president's actions.
"It's been distractions about the Bidens, it's been distractions about conspiracy theories about Ukraine's involvement in the election," said CNN legal analyst Carrie Cordero. "Yesterday, it was distractions about FISA and FISA so-called abuse. It was distractions from Congressman Gohmert reading calls from 1943! It's been all distractions and they won't wrestle with the actual conduct."
CNN’s Jake Tapper does line-by-line fact check of Jim Jordan’s nonstop misleading statements during impeachment hearing
Host Jake Tapper did a special web fact-check for CNN.com where he looked line-by-line into Rep. Jim Jordan's (R-OH) claims about the impeachment proceedings.
He had four specific talking points that were disingenuous and outright false.
1. Jordan: "There was no quid pro quo in the transcript"
There absolutely was evidence in the summary of the transcript. Tapper began by explaining that Americans still haven't seen the full transcript or a recording of the July 25 phone call between President Donald Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.
"If you read the summary of the transcript it clearly shows that after a discussion of U.S. military support for Ukraine, President Trump said the relationship is not 'reciprocal' and he asks Zelensky for 'a favor,'" Tapper said. "The favor? To investigate a conspiracy theory into the 2016 election and later in the call he says, 'one other thing,' he wants Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter."