OA76: "I Hope" James Comey's Senate Testimony Shows Obstruction of Justice

Opening Arguments

Opening Arguments Media LLC

Law, Opinion, Politics, News, Liberal, Legal, Supremecourt, Harvard, Atheist

4.3 • 3.7K Ratings

🗓️ 9 June 2017

⏱️ 62 minutes

🔗️ Recording | iTunes | RSS

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

If it's Friday, it's a current events episode, and if it's current events, we're probably talking about Donald Trump. We begin, however, with the second installment of a hopefully infrequent segment about stuff Andrew gets wrong. In this case, it's actually two things. First, Andrew clarifies the terminology related to immunity, and second, Andrew admits to falling for a hoax (!) In our main segment, we look at James Comey's testimony before the Senate regarding his firing. How far up Yodel Mountain does this take us? Listen and find out! After that, fan favorite Breakin' Down the Law returns with an analysis of what's going on with the Trump Administration's appeal of Executive Order 13780, the so-called "Muslim Ban," which we last discussed in Episode #51. Finally, we end with a brand new (and tricky) Thomas Takes the Bar Exam question #27 about the admissibility of a question on cross-examination regarding the availability of insurance proceeds. Remember that TTTBE issues a new question every Friday, followed by the answer on next Tuesday's show. Don't forget to play along by following our Twitter feed (@Openargs) and/or our Facebook Page and quoting the Tweet or Facebook Post that announces this episode along with your guess and reason(s)! Recent Appearances: Andrew was a recent guest on Episode #84 of the Cellar Door Skeptics podcast; give it a listen. Show Notes & Links

We first discussed obstruction of justice in Episode #70, and analyzed the status of Executive Order 13780 in Episode #51.
Snopes debunked the Berkeley Breathed letter here.
The relevant obstruction statutes are 18 U.S.C § 1501 et seq.
The two cases Andrew found that involve valid prosecutions for obstruction of justice where the defendant used the "I hope" construction in threatening a witness are U.S. v. Bedoy, 827 F.3d 495 (5th Cir. 2016) and U.S. v. McDonald, 521 F.3d 975 (8th Cir. 2008).
This is the text of Executive Order 13780.

Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/openargs/ And email us at openarguments@gmail.com

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0	Today's episode is brought to you by Warby Parker.
0:03.1	Please visit WarbyParker.com slash law pod for your next pair of eyeglasses.
0:11.2	Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I'm just a caveman.
0:16.1	Due to habeas corpus, you and Miss Bonifante had a common law marriage.
0:39.4	So you don't work on a contingency basis?
0:41.7	No, money down.
0:43.6	Oops, shouldn't have this bar association logo here either.
0:53.2	Would you please point at that robot over there?
0:59.1	No further questions?
1:03.0	Welcome to opening arguments, the podcast that pairs an inquisitive interviewer with a real
1:07.2	life lawyer. This podcast is sponsored by the law offices of P. Antitore as LLC for entertainment
1:12.5	purposes. It's not intended as legal advice, it does not form an attorney-client relationship.
1:17.6	Don't take legal advice from a podcast.
1:27.5	Hello and welcome to opening arguments. This is episode number 76.
1:32.5	It's a comedy test of honey day and how are you doing over there?
1:36.6	I am doing fantastic. I just want to point out the level of commitment that I have to our listeners.
1:44.7	Multiple DC bars were having comedy test of money day specials, including giving out
1:51.3	free drinks at various points throughout the hearing. I stayed in my home studio and watched it
1:59.4	while sober in order that we could get here and record in the afternoon.
2:04.9	I would help you spin it the other way. Had you just told me right now,
2:10.8	here's my dedication. I went to the bar and drank five drinks because I had to be there
2:16.1	to see that. I would help you spin that way. It's okay, you went the other way.
	...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Previous episode | Next episode

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Opening Arguments Media LLC, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Opening Arguments Media LLC and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.