Trump Faces Uphill Challenge to Completely Obstruct Justice in Less Than Two Months
With the midterm elections over and, with them, the need to care whether people see him for the corrupt narcissist that he truly is, President Trump is now testing the limits on how much justice can technically be obstructed prior to Democrats assuming majority in the House of Representatives come January.
Skeptics wonder if full obstruction is even possible, given the abbreviated schedule in the lame duck session and the assumed political cost of angering a plurality of Republicans who claim they would like to see justice to go unobstructed, but supporters of the President remind his critics that they have counted him out before. “People said that he couldn’t win the nomination,” said an administration surrogate. “People said that he couldn’t win the Presidency. People said that he couldn’t build the wall. And I’m sorry, but if the same people that have done nothing but mock and ridicule President Trump as he fulfills promise after promise are now saying that he can’t completely and irreversibly obstruct justice, well that just makes him more likely to do it.”
Assisting in the quest to obstruct justice will be Matthew Whitaker, the Trump-appointed acting Attorney General to replace Jeff Sessions. Whitaker, a staunch critic of the investigation into Trump’s connections, once wrote that Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller didn’t even need to be fired, so long as the Justice Department could cut off funding and starve the investigation of resources. While there is no official response from the Attorney General’s office as to whether this will be the strategy going forward, sources in the White House have said, “of course he is going to do that. Why do you think we appointed him? I guess we’re just confused about why you are asking this question. Are you stupid? Are you actually stupid.”
While the administration and their new allies in the Department of Justice conspire on a progressive plan to have justice fully obstructed prior to swearing in the new Congress in January, President Trump used a press conference to warn incoming Democrats that once justice has been obstructed, he expects it to stay obstructed. At the time of writing, no transcript was available for Trump’s remarks, but to paraphrase, “yo, basically we’re working really hard to obstruct this justice and if Democrats want to get in the way of our obstructing, then maybe justice is gonna have to obstruct them a little bit. The voters have spoken and have firmly rejected the party of obstruction. Er, I guess I mean the party of obstructing obstruction. And I guess I mean the voters rejected that party in the Senate. You know what I mean, though. We really, really want this justice to be obstructed and the voters have said that we don’t really need to work hard to give an account of why.”
Democrats, respecting the mandate voters have issued in giving them control of the House, but also weary of polling on this particular issue, appear divided on a response to the Trump obstruction of justice policy. “Our base is screaming for impeachment,” said an incoming representative. “But we also know that going too hard will lose about 60% of the electorate and that in general nothing Trump does matters or has any consequences. So the most likely outcome is this: we make a bunch of noise and do some half-measures. We’ll probably piss off the base by not doing enough and lose those moderates by wasting a lot of time on symbolic nonsense. And we’ll posit ourselves as the natural alternative to Trump — as a feckless and ineffective body with no governing strategy or guiding principles. But, hey, we’re Democrats. The voters knew all this on Tuesday and still gave us a chance. Maybe it will be enough in 2020.”