Things have not changed here I C

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

2 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

Because trump has shown that one corrupt individual can undo everything the US founding fathers never anticipated.

Hi Phil,

Only if the legislative branch lets him.  As they have shown to do so far.

Jerry Baumchen

[jakee 1,489]

3 hours ago, DJL said:

The only narrative of this on the news will be that it's a political attack upon a predecessor and an attempt to weaken his party in upcoming elections.  Regardless of what's found in the courts Trump will be remembered as corrupt and useless.  The danger of pursuing him in courts is that it becomes a political tactic to dig dirt on every politician and their supporting staff each time there's a change in party.

But to not pursue him you would need the new administration to not only order the Federal AG to leave him alone but they'd need to exert considerable political influence and possibly favor-trading to make the State AGs leave him alone. 

 

So... political meddling in the justice system to stop the appearance of political meddling in the justice system? Yeah, sounds like a great idea. Plus I still absolutely believe that it is of the utmost importance that political figures know that they are subject to the same laws as everyone else. This only gets more important the higher you go. 

[Guest]

[DJL 235]

57 minutes ago, jakee said:

But to not pursue him you would need the new administration to not only order the Federal AG to leave him alone but they'd need to exert considerable political influence and possibly favor-trading to make the State AGs leave him alone. 

At the very least all politicians should stay out of it.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

1 hour ago, DJL said:

At the very least all politicians should stay out of it.

While I agree with that in principle, the reality is that State AG is an elected position. So they are, by definition, politicians.

It was kinda funny. Back in February (maybe?) Trump threatened to withhold medical supplies from New York unless Cuomo dropped a civil suit against him.

The NY AG responded by pointing out that she is independent of the governor, elected by the citizens of NY to do her job. And that she fully intended to fulfill the requirements and duties of that job. 

[DJL 235]

2 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

While I agree with that in principle, the reality is that State AG is an elected position. So they are, by definition, politicians.

It was kinda funny. Back in February (maybe?) Trump threatened to withhold medical supplies from New York unless Cuomo dropped a civil suit against him.

The NY AG responded by pointing out that she is independent of the governor, elected by the citizens of NY to do her job. And that she fully intended to fulfill the requirements and duties of that job. 

That appears to fully encapsulate my beliefs.  Sure, there are plenty of elected positions involved in law enforcement but we need to keep the Presidents and Governors out of pursuing action against other politicians.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Just now, DJL said:

That appears to fully encapsulate my beliefs.  Sure, there are plenty of elected positions involved in law enforcement but we need to keep the Presidents and Governors out of pursuing action against other politicians.

For purely political reasons, yes.

When actual crimes are committed, no.

Unortunately, the reality isn't as 'black & white'. 

There's a really 'funny' one going on right now.

Burr was chair of the House Intel Committee. He stepped down because of the insider trading accusations against him. 
A powerful politician who is under investigation for committing a crime, right?

Not so fast. He's never been a 'Trumpette' and has opposed the Mango Mussolini on a number of issues.
The latest is/was the report on Russian interference. The committee is/was in the process of finalizing a report that essentially contradicts every claim Trump has made about the issue. 

So do you think that the next chair of the committee will be willing to release a report that contradicts the President? 

Or do you think McConnell will appoint a toady who will report whatever the Mango Mussolini wants to hear?

Keep in mind that the new 'acting' DNI is doing just that. He claims it was the Ukraine, not Russia that interfered. His predecessor was more interested in the truth than 'the Emperor's New Clothes.'
A lot of the people appointed by the Orange One are there to tell him how good his new suit looks. 

[RonD1120 62]

2 hours ago, markharju said:

True that

[billvon 2,991]

55 minutes ago, RonD1120 said:

True that

Agreed.  And that pretty much defines Donald Trump.

[DJL 235]

16 minutes ago, billvon said:

Agreed.  And that pretty much defines Donald Trump.

I mean...I didn't get past #1 "Falsely accuse you of what they are in fact doing."  How many different examples of that do we have?

1.  Accusing HRC of using Clinton Foundation as a pay to play.  Trump: Literally using Trump Foundation to channel election money for Trump's campaign and using Trump Foundation to LITERALLY pay $25,000 into the election campaign of a Florida AG who would decide whether to pursue charges regarding Trump University.

[normiss 800]

5 hours ago, RonD1120 said:

True that

You're missing the point of this calling out our Dear Leader The Trumpster.

Which is rather amusing.

[kallend 2,027]

Flynn committed perjury and his guilty plea of lying to FBI should not be dismissed, as Justice asks, court-appointed counsel finds Former New York federal judge John Gleeson was asked to argue against the Justice Department’s request to dismiss the prosecution of President Trump’s former national security adviser. Michael Flynn was the highest-ranking official convicted in special counsel Robert S. Mueller III’s investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election. In an extraordinary reversal, the Justice Department sought to undo its conviction after Flynn withdrew his guilty plea of lying to the FBI about his Russian contacts.

[gowlerk 2,192]

14 minutes ago, kallend said:

Former New York federal judge John Gleeson was asked to argue against the Justice Department’s request to dismiss the prosecution of President Trump’s former national security adviser.

When is the deep state going to end its vendetta against this martyr?

[normiss 800]

Re: the filthy attempt to dismiss the criminal case against Flynn, here’s what Judge Gleeson concluded:

“A respected jurist and former prosecutor, Gleeson is unsparing:

“”The Government’s ostensible grounds for seeking dismissal are conclusively disproven by its own briefs filed earlier in this very proceeding,” he argues. “They contradict and ignore this Court’s prior orders, which constitute law of the case. They are riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact.” Accordingly, “leave of court should not be granted when the explanations the Government puts forth are not credible as the real reasons for its dismissal of a criminal charge.”

“Gleeson also persuasively argues that the government is guilty of prosecutorial misconduct.

“”The Government has engaged in highly irregular conduct to benefit a political ally of the President. The facts of this case overcome the presumption of regularity. The Court should therefore deny the Government’s motion to dismiss, adjudicate any remaining motions, and then sentence the Defendant.”

“Finally, Gleeson presents the argument that Flynn is guilty of perjury, though he recommends that this be taken into account on sentencing rather than serve as the basis for a new charge of contempt of court. Gleeson writes: “There is irrefutable evidence in the record that Flynn made material false statements to this Court in his Declaration in Support of his Supplemental Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty . . . on two topics: (i) whether he knowingly made materially false statements to the FBI. . . and (ii) whether the FBI induced him to enter a plea by threatening to prosecute his son.” If Flynn’s original declaration was truthful, as the transcripts confirm it was, then the newest declaration is false. “Under federal law, a defendant who makes two or more material declarations under oath before a U.S. court that ‘are inconsistent to the degree that one of [those declarations] is necessarily false’ has committed perjury, even without proof as to which statement is false,” Gleeson writes.”

 

Interesting that based on this opinion, Flynn could face years in prison.

Seems appropriate.

Good to know we do still have the rule of law, given all that Trump has destroyed.

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

9 minutes ago, normiss said:

“Finally, Gleeson presents the argument that Flynn is guilty of perjury, though he recommends that this be taken into account on sentencing rather than serve as the basis for a new charge of contempt of court. Gleeson writes: “There is irrefutable evidence in the record that Flynn made material false statements to this Court in his Declaration in Support of his Supplemental Motion to Withdraw Plea of Guilty . . . on two topics: (i) whether he knowingly made materially false statements to the FBI. . . and (ii) whether the FBI induced him to enter a plea by threatening to prosecute his son.” If Flynn’s original declaration was truthful, as the transcripts confirm it was, then the newest declaration is false. “Under federal law, a defendant who makes two or more material declarations under oath before a U.S. court that ‘are inconsistent to the degree that one of [those declarations] is necessarily false’ has committed perjury, even without proof as to which statement is false,” Gleeson writes.”

 

Interesting that based on this opinion, Flynn could face years in prison.

Seems appropriate.

Good to know we do still have the rule of law, given all that Trump has destroyed.

Gotta love how Flynn is almost certainly guilty of perjury, no matter what the truth is (he told two very different stories under oath). 

And the rule of law is still here...

For now.

McConnell is confirming Federal Judges at an insane pace. How many of THOSE will hold to the rule of law?

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

37 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

McConnell is confirming Federal Judges at an insane pace. How many of THOSE will hold to the rule of law?

Hi Joe,

This is the real tyranny of the Trump election.

Jerry Baumchen

[turtlespeed 220]

On 4/29/2020 at 9:17 PM, rushmc said:

FISA  abuse. Flynn framed, Papadopoulos illegally surveilled. It's going to get fun folks

Here is an interesting take on it . . . Gotta love those Canadians. 

 

[kallend 2,027]

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/23/prosecutor-says-he-was-pressured-to-cut-roger-stone-a-break-because-of-his-ties-to-trump-336075

Prosecutor says he was pressured to cut Roger Stone 'a break' because of his ties to Trump

[jakee 1,489]

That's the real story. Whatever happens as a result of the court's actions will be sorted out on appeal. If the judge is doing something illegal it will be fixed and the 'correct' legal action reinforced in precedent.

 

What Barr's Justice department is doing is a separate and far more important issue. He is destroying the fundamental principle that all men are equal in the eyes of the law, and substituting for it his preferred idea that justice depends on who your friends are.

 

It's mind boggling that up until now this mature democracy has depended solely on participants respecting the convention that President's don't tell AGs what to do and AGs don't meddle in political cases. If it prompts the gov't to actually taking some kind of action to fix that it might just be that Trump and Barr are doing you a favour by ripping that convention to shreds, but I doubt it.

[turtlespeed 220]

57 minutes ago, jakee said:

That's the real story. Whatever happens as a result of the court's actions will be sorted out on appeal. If the judge is doing something illegal it will be fixed and the 'correct' legal action reinforced in precedent.

 

Speaking of appeals courts . . .

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/24/882787253/appeals-court-orders-lower-judge-to-throw-out-michael-flynn-case

[SkyDekker 1,465]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Speaking of appeals courts . . .

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/24/882787253/appeals-court-orders-lower-judge-to-throw-out-michael-flynn-case

Have a feeling en banc will be next

[DJL 235]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Speaking of appeals courts . . .

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/24/882787253/appeals-court-orders-lower-judge-to-throw-out-michael-flynn-case

I agree with throwing it out on the grounds that it's hard to prosecute a shit-show.

[jakee 1,489]

1 hour ago, turtlespeed said:

Speaking of appeals courts . . .

https://www.npr.org/2020/06/24/882787253/appeals-court-orders-lower-judge-to-throw-out-michael-flynn-case

See, there you go. Whether what the Sullivan is doing is right or wrong isnt hugely important since there is a mechanism to fix it. There is no existing mechanism to fix what the Justice department is doing. I mean look at the ruling - the White House and the AG can protect anyone they want to from prosecution, for any reason, and the court isn't allowed to even ask why. Forget the blanket power to pardon, the only thing stopping the President and AG from giving all their cronies effective immunity from the feds for the duration of their term is the negative publicity. That's a fucked up system.

 

And damn, Jim Jordan is yet again a sickeningly slimy brown nosed partisan hack.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Just now, jakee said:

And damn, Jim Jordan is yet again a sickeningly slimy brown nosed partisan hack.

Gym Jordan? The guy who didn't know boys where getting abused all around him?

[normiss 800]

1 hour ago, DJL said:

I agree with throwing it out on the grounds that it's hard to prosecute a shit-show.

Throwing out a case against a guy that admitted the crime. Twice.

Only in Trump Times.

I sincerely doubt anyone on this site will live long enough to see AmeriKKKa regain it's place of respect and honor in the world.