Judge Andrew Napolitano, a frequent contributor to Fox News as a legal analyst, has recently attempted to paint the President’s actions during the course of the Mueller Investigation as evidence of obstruction. Apparently, the judge has decided to sign-on to this flawed Democrat-supported narrative.
Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano: “When the president asked Corey Lewandowski … to get Mueller fired, that’s obstruction of justice. When the president asked his then-White House counsel to get Mueller fired & then lie about it, that’s obstruction of justice.” pic.twitter.com/5k3dSpD76v
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) April 25, 2019
Yet, the widely-respected Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz has a stark disagreement with the judge on his views on obstruction. He actually calls out Judge Napolitano, challenging him to a rational debate on the subject:
My friend @Judgenap, whose views I respect, disagrees with my views on obstruction of justice. Why don’t we have a rational, thoughtful debate so viewers can hear both sides of this important issue.https://t.co/V4ulsd9EMD
— Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) April 30, 2019
President Trump also sounded off on the judge’s buying into the Democrat Party’s spin on the Mueller Report:
….Ever since Andrew came to my office to ask that I appoint him to the U.S. Supreme Court, and I said NO, he has been very hostile! Also asked for pardon for his friend. A good “pal” of low ratings Shepard Smith.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 28, 2019
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), an avid supporter of President Trump, came out and defended him against Judge Napolitano’s claims. The Senator’s comments are covered over at The Daily Caller:
“GOP Senator Lindsey Graham countered Fox News analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano’s interpretation of whether or not President Donald Trump committed obstruction of justice directly after Napolitano’s Monday night Fox News appearance.
Graham started his conversation with MacCallum by answering a question about the judge’s argument:
[Sen. Graham]: ‘I like Judge Napolitano, but is he completely 100% wrong. The obstruction of justice pertains to colluding with the Russians, not firing Comey. The theory is that you fire Comey to stop the Russian investigation. What do we know after the Mueller report? There was no collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. There is no underlying crime. What do we also know? That the Trump administration gave the special counsel a million documents, allowed people to testify, McGahn for 30 hours and never claimed executive privilege.'”
Real Clear Politics reports on Professor Alan Dershowitz’s comments on Napolitano’s position on obstruction:
“ANDREW NAPOLITANO: When the president asked Corey Lewandowski, his former campaign manager, to get Mueller fired, that is obstruction of justice. When the president asked his then-White House counsel to get Mueller fired and then lie about it, that’s obstruction of justice. When the president asked Don McGahn to go back to the special counsel and change his testimony that’s obstruction of justice… But ordering obstruction to save himself from the consequences of his own behavior is unlawful, defenseless and condemnable.
FOX NEWS HOST: Do you agree? Is this obstruction of justice?
ALAN DERSHOWITZ: I do not agree. I think Judge Napolitano is terrific and we often agree about the law, but in my introduction to the Mueller report, I go through the elements of obstruction of justice. The act itself has to be illegal. It can’t be an act that is authorized under Article Two of the Constitution.
. . .
Nixon obstructed justice because he acted outside his authority — destroying evidence, paying hush money, ordering his subordinates to lie to the FBI.
FOX NEWS HOST: Napolitano said he told people to write letters to the file, he told people to go and deliver messages.
DERSHOWITZ: Not obstruction of justice, those are all legal acts. If he ever told somebody to lie in front of a grand jury, that would be obstruction of justice.”
Sen. Graham and other Republicans are right to call for the baseless obstruction claims to cease, citing the absence of any underlying crime. A person proclaiming his innocence is not attempting to obstruct justice by exercising his right to attest to and speak out about his hot having committed a crime.
Democrats want to continue to shift the goalposts in this case, which was effectively closed by a combination of Attorney General Bill Barr’s decision not to prosecute on obstruction and the Mueller Report which puts to bed the Trump-Russia collusion hoax.
Reasonable people, like Sen. Graham and Professor Dershowitz, need to continue to push back against those who take Democrat narratives and run with them: even Judge Napolitano: