Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Moose & Squirrel v Boris & Natasha: what's the deal with the rooskies and trumpland?

Jumbo

By Jumbo
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

Popeman38

Popeman38

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Yes I understand all this.  I didn't say what Barr was doing was illegal, but I do think what he is doing by not releasing the full report (sanz anything that needs to be redacted for national security reasons) has more to do with concealing and protecting than it has to do with him determining it "isn't in the public interest" to do so. 

It's been what, 96 hours?  It might take some time to parse what needs to be redacted (national security, grand jury info).  I thought i read/heard that Barr and Mueller were working together to produce a "public consumption" report to be released.  Maybe that is just speculation.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bearrock

bearrock

Posted
Posted

Mueller investigation and its aftermath isn't very amenable to hot takes.  We'll probably have to be patient and see what ultimately ends up happening.  Barr will release some portion of the report.  How much of it gets left out remains to be seen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LD0506

LD0506

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

So hey, Wikileaks....you out there?  Would be a great time to show the world you aren't still entirely in the can for an ego-maniacal sociopath............. *sigh* 

 

HAHAHA< good one!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Popeman38 said:

Here is the order authorizing the Special Counsel:

 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/press-release/file/967231/download

Nowhere in the order does it state the SC has an obligation to indict anyone, the order is to facilitate an investigation.

 

Additionally, DoJ regulations issued by then-AG Janet Reno mandate the report be provided to the AG. The AG, and only the AG, can then turn the report over to Congress or simply issue a 4 page summary. There is no regulatory or legislative obligation to produce the full report to either Congress or the public. So anyone saying that Barr usurped the authority of Congress is flat wrong.

 

I think we're talking about two different things, maybe.

 

I am not saying Barr is obligated under regs to release the report, though he should and it sounds like he will at least partially.

 

I am saying that once delivered, the report, if that report details evidence of criminal activity by the President, one of two things ought to happen.

 

1. DOJ makes a traditional decision to prosecute or not.

 

2. DOJ defers to Congress.

 

Now sure, what evidence the AG turns over is subject to regs (or Congressional subpoenas) but the point I'm making is that historically DOJ has followed its policy not to indict sitting Presidents.

 

So generally speaking, #1 is out.

 

This means Congress should get a crack at it, if they so choose, examining evidence of wrongdoing and making a decision on impeachment.

 

But my point is Barr did #1, which on its face is against DOJ policy.  Not against regs or law, but against DOJ policy.

 

And if Barr is going against DOJ policy, fine, but that should open the gates to criminal prosecution of Presidents while in office.

 

 

 

Now, my mention of interference in legislative duties back on Sunday/Monday stems from a different place than my above point, but I'll explain.

 

Congress has a right to impeach/remove.  DOJ charges criminally.

 

DOJ functionally ceded that right with their policy.

 

Barr has, seemingly, grabbed it back.  That is okay so long as that is across the board.

 

If Barr applies this policy change inconsistently, that is, puts the no indictment policy right back in place when SDNY tries to go for Trump, then what reason could Barr cite for such inconsistent application?  Further, what is the practical effect of it?

 

The practical effect, and this is true whether Barr applies his DOJ policy change consistently or inconsistently, is that he has neutered and tainted any Congressional investigation.  Before Congress, and by extension, the public, could even examine the evidence, Barr has declared him a-ok.

 

So when the House does its Constitutional job and examines the evidence for high crimes and misdemeanors, it has to deal with the fact that Barr jumped in and told everyone what to think before anyone had the chance to have an independent thought.

 

Now sure, his actions probably aren't criminal or impeachable, but it's definitely interfering.  He's actively changing DOJ policy to get ahead of Congress doing its job and make it that much harder for them to do their job or reach a conclusion other than the one Barr trumpeted.

  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NoCalMike

NoCalMike

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

Now sure, his actions probably aren't criminal or impeachable, but it's definitely interfering.  He's actively changing DOJ policy to get ahead of Congress doing its job and make it that much harder for them to do their job or reach a conclusion other than the one Barr trumpeted.

 

Thanks for wording it better than I did, or likely could.  In essence Barr right now is acting as a buffer between the Mueller report and Congress.  Is it illegal? I don't think so, but is modifying the rules as he goes highly unethical?  I would think so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Popeman38

Popeman38

Posted
Posted

AG Janet Reno changed DoJ policy. In 1998, after the Independent Counsel report (Starr Report). Under these new guidelines, the AG alone gets the report, and makes the decision whether anything gets released. That would include deciding whether to indict. The report goes to the AG. Barr didn’t do anything to change the rules.

 

I linked to the DoJ framework for Special Coumsel a couple pages ago. It changed fundamentally how these investigations were handled. Nixon and Clinton were investigated by Independent Counsel, and their reports were delivered to Congress for action. The new Special Counsel rules enacted by AG Janet Reno in 1998 changed that and charged the AG with receiving the report and making decisions on release.

 

what am I missing? I feel like we are talking in circles...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

AG Janet Reno changed DoJ policy. In 1998, after the Independent Counsel report (Starr Report). Under these new guidelines, the AG alone gets the report, and makes the decision whether anything gets released. That would include deciding whether to indict. The report goes to the AG. Barr didn’t do anything to change the rules.

 

I linked to the DoJ framework for Special Coumsel a couple pages ago. It changed fundamentally how these investigations were handled. Nixon and Clinton were investigated by Independent Counsel, and their reports were delivered to Congress for action. The new Special Counsel rules enacted by AG Janet Reno in 1998 changed that and charged the AG with receiving the report and making decisions on release.

 

what am I missing? I feel like we are talking in circles...

 

I think it's on this:

 

"Under these new guidelines, the AG alone gets the report, and makes the decision whether anything gets released. That would include deciding whether to indict."

 

I don't see that part in the regs cited.  Indicting, in my view, is a whole separate process compared to anything in the regs, which seem to deal with information disclosures.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted

 

 

You know, I would feel a lot better about this not being a coverup if even one Republican in a position of power, even if only for 5 minutes, stopped acting like they were trying to cover things up.

 

 

Just now, RedskinsFan44 said:

What are the odds we get to see the written questions to and answers from Trump?

Depends when they get around to dropping a copy off at the Washington Post in a clandestine fashion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
visionary

visionary

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

 

So there is a case to be made.

 

 

More of what happened to Comey, McCabe, Strozk...etc, incoming.  More good, patriotic people will have their lives and careers torn apart while Trump and his inner circle celebrate and consolidate more power.

Edited by visionary
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twa

twa

Posted
Posted

As to that, many document requests from the congressional committees were denied due to the Mueller probe in progress.....simply getting those documents would be enlightening.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Popeman38

Popeman38

Posted
Posted
52 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

I think it's on this:

 

"Under these new guidelines, the AG alone gets the report, and makes the decision whether anything gets released. That would include deciding whether to indict."

 

I don't see that part in the regs cited.  Indicting, in my view, is a whole separate process compared to anything in the regs, which seem to deal with information disclosures.

I gotcha. 

 

I think the unredacted report should be delivered to the Intelligence Committees, and the redacted version to Congress as a whole. I guess that version can be released publicly...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Simmsy

Simmsy

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Popeman38 said:

I gotcha. 

 

I think the unredacted report should be delivered to the Intelligence Committees, and the redacted version to Congress as a whole. I guess that version can be released publicly...

Screw that, I want the whole thing! Trump is an egotistical narcissist. If he really had all the money he says he has, he'd release his tax returns. If he really was a great student, he wouldn't threaten his alma mater with a lawsuit if they release his grades. If he was truly innocent, he wouldn't block the Mueller report, he would send it out to every single mailbox in America. Only his base is dumb enough to fall for this half brained scheme.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Popeman38

Popeman38

Posted
Posted
Just now, Simmsy said:

Screw that, I want the whole thing! Trump is an egotistical narcissist. If he really had all the money he says he has, he'd release his tax returns. If he really was a great student, he wouldn't threaten his alma mater with a lawsuit if they release his grades. If he was truly innocent, he wouldn't block the Mueller report, he would send it out to every single mailbox in America. Only his base is dumb enough to fall for this half brained scheme.

Ok. You know it all. You should make the rules. 🙄

 

You do realize there are sensitive things going on that the general public doesn’t have a right to know? Like intelligence means, methods, and sources? Oh yeah, no gems jury information can be released either. But yeah, release it all. And if you don’t buy that you are part of his dumb base.

 

Genius. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...