,
6 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Having now carefully read the entire Obstruction volume of the Mueller Report, I do think there's a strong possibility that Trump will be indicted on some obstruction charge upon leaving office, most likely by the SDNY. I'm not making a value judgment about this, just observing
People claiming that SDNY doesn't have jurisdiction over certain matters arising from the Mueller investigation are wrong. Mueller elucidates the ways in which SDNY would in fact have jurisdiction over certain matters pertaining to obstruction 
Again, I'm not making any normative claim about the utility of such a prosecution. I'm just saying that the fact-pattern laid out by Mueller, as well as the various legal arguments he cites involving obstruction, make reasonably likely that such a prosecution will occur
Chris Christie, a former US Attorney who worked closely with the SDNY, has repeatedly made similar statements cnn.com/videos/politic…
In the case of SDNY, an obstruction charge is probably on stronger footing because there *was* found to be underlying criminality, in the form of the campaign finance violations Cohen pleaded guilty to. So if Trump "obstructed" that investigation, different factors are operative
At the same time, the supreme irony of the only "underlying criminality" found by the Mueller investigation being payoffs to a porn star should not be lost on anyone. (And obviously this would all be thoroughly litigated. Not even clear Cohen's conviction would hold up on appeal)
