Public Admissions of Wrongdoing

So… what do you do when criminals boldly admit their criminal acts on national television?

IMPEACH!

Trump, White House lawn: “They should investigate the Bidens.”
Trump: Ukraine And China Should Both Investigate The Bidens
October 3, 2019
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/10/03/trump_ukraine_and_china_should_both_investigate_the_bidens.html
—
Chris Cuomo, CNN: “So you did ask Ukraine to look into Joe Biden?”
Giuliani: “Of course I did!”
‘Of course I did’: Giuliani acknowledges asking Ukraine to investigate Biden
September 19, 2019
https://www.politico.com/story/2019/09/19/giuliani-biden-ukraine-trump-1506009
—
Journalist Jonathan Karl, ABC News: “What you just described is a quid pro quo.”
Mulvaney: “We do that all the time with foreign policy.”
The White House Just Admitted to a Quid Pro Quo with Ukraine on Live TV
October 17, 2019
https://www.gq.com/story/quid-pro-quo-all-the-time
GOP Railing After Mick Mulvaney Admits To Quid Pro Quo Then Pretends He Never Said It
October 18, 2019
https://www.essence.com/news/politics/mick-mulvaney-quid-pro-quo/
—
Trump, White House lawn: “China has started an investigation.”
Trump: Ukraine And China Should Both Investigate The Bidens
October 3, 2019

A Rose By Any Other Name

Read this and tell me what you think.

—//—

Oversight of the Report on the Investigation into County Interference in the 1996 Mayoral Election: Former Dedicated Prosecutor Richard S. Mabry, Jr.

Councilman Tommy Lawry (Westside):
Thank you Superintendent Mabry for your long history of service to our country, including your service as a Marine, where you earned the Bronze Star with a ‘V’ device. I’d like to now turn to the elements of Obstruction of Justice as applied to the mayor’s attempts to curtail your investigation. The first element of Obstruction of Justice requires and obstructive act. Correct?

Mr. Mabry: Correct.

Lawry: I’d like to direct you to page 97 of Volume 2 of your report, and you wrote there on page 97, quote “Sitter was being instructed to tell the Dedicated Prosecutor to end the existing investigation into the mayor and his campaign,” unquote. That’s in the report – correct?

Mabry: Correct

Lawry: That would be evidence of an obstructive act because it would naturally obstruct an investigation. Correct?

Mabry: Ah… correct.

Lawry: Let’s now turn to the second element of the crime of Obstruction of Justice which requires a nexus to the official proceeding. Again, I’m going to direct you to page 97 – the same page in Volume 2 – and you wrote, quote, “by the time the mayor’s initial one-on-one meeting with LaChance on June 19, 1987, the existence of a grand jury investigation by the Dedicated Prosecutor was public knowledge.” That’s in the report – correct?

Mabry: Correct.

Lawry: That would constitute evidence of a nexus to an official proceeding, because the grand jury investigation is an official proceeding… correct?

Mabry: Yes.

Lawry: I can now turn to the final element of the crime of obstruction of justice. On that same page – page 97 – do you see where there’s an intent section on that page? (unintelligible)

Mabry: Correct.

Lawry: Would you be willing to