- Joined
- Nov 8, 2006
- Messages
- 13,406
- Reaction score
- 8,258
- Location
- Milwaukee, WI
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Bet all you have on Biden then.
PredictIt has Biden at +14 cents so betting markets are in line with the polls.
Bet all you have on Biden then.
Wow. AG Barr is an accomplice, not an attorney.
As does EVERY honest and thinking American.
PredictIt has Biden at +14 cents so betting markets are in line with the polls.
He’s already had the most turnover of any administration in recent/all history......:thinking
Trump will be elected so you may as well count on it and get used to him as president.
Durham should come up with a report before the election
Is that DoJ policy, not that it matters?
Trump will be elected so you may as well count on it and get used to him as president.
Trump will be elected so you may as well count on it and get used to him as president.
Thank you for giving Trump the Kinahora.Trump will be elected so you may as well count on it and get used to him as president.
Don't worry, Trump and Barr are demanding it. That's called pressure. That's why she resigned. What are they going to do since they don't have shi*? Lie some more?
Shocking, no
Durham is being pressed to violate DOJ Policy and announcing investigations/innuendo 60 days prior to an election
And those on the right cheer it on
Now consider election results will be delayed due to mail in ballots- so if close, Trump will use it to sow more lies and hate
Delayed results- Trump will state election fraud
Don't worry, Trump and Barr are demanding it. That's called pressure. That's why she resigned. What are they going to do since they don't have shi*? Lie some more?
No chance in hell will Trump be re-elected. Not after the Woodward interview revealing Trump to be a psychopath.
She was then in the wrong job.
There is no such policy.
There is an unofficial policy that the DOJ should take great care in such a circumstance with candidates for office.
But Barr has already said that Biden is not under investigation and I do not believe anyone else who was in the government 2016- to Mueller's appointment in 2017 is running for office. So the concern is moot.
Publicly Discussing Criminal Investigations
The Justice Department’s longstanding policy against any public discussion of criminal investigations is based on the principle that no one under investigation by the department should be tainted by public discussion of the investigation unless and until formal criminal charges are filed.
According to Rule 1-7.400 in the Department of Justice Manual, “DOJ generally will not confirm the existence of or otherwise comment about ongoing investigations.” The Rule, further states, “DOJ personnel shall not respond to questions about the existence of an ongoing investigation or comment on its nature or progress before charges are publicly filed.” (Given that several past investigations, including one by the DOJ’s own Inspector General, concluded that the Russia investigation was justified, there is no basis for applying the narrow exemption to this Rule that “the community needs to be reassured that the appropriate law enforcement agency is investigating a matter.”)
Sorry, I believe your 90% is already 100%, as we see with CERTAIN GOP Senators investigating Biden, as we see with Barr signaling he’ll have a ‘Comey’ surprise soon.Don't get complacent.
I'm treating this election as a 90 percent chance Trump will attempt things never imagined by anyone in recorded history to get his cheats to work.
We will be seeing footage from polling places in swing states that will make the dogs of Birmingham look like a Cub Scout outing.
Only this time it won't have to wait for the 6 o'clock news, it will be in real time, and the whole world will be watching.
Where were we.. oh yes, I remember now.
Judge Sullivan Amicus John Gleeson Lays Out How DOJ Is Arguing Against DOJ, then Invokes Barr's Other Interference | emptywheel
...Gleeson is exploiting DOJ’s failures to address his claims. he’s probably right.
GLEESON EXPANDS THE RECORD TO INCLUDE SOLID EVIDENCE OF PROSECUTORIAL ABUSE
Sullivan.. will not order further discovery in this case. But Gleeson got three key pieces of additional information into his brief. He cited the SSCI Report describing why Flynn’s lies were material.
In its bipartisan report assessing Russia’s interference with the 2016 presidential election, the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee similarly concluded that the “series of communications between Flynn and Kislyak” on sanctions was relevant to assessing “what Moscow sought to gain and the counterintelligence vulnerabilities associated with the Transition.” ..
He pointed to Aaron Zelinsky’s testimony describing how Billy Barr personally intervened to sabotage the Roger Stone prosecution.
Most notably, there is now concrete evidence of another prosecutorial decision infected by “heavy pressure from the highest levels of the Department of Justice . . . based on political considerations.” ... (statement of Aaron S.J. Zelinsky, Assistant U.S. Att’y), Perma | judiciary.house.gov. This prosecutorial decision concerned the Government’s sentencing recommendation for Roger Stone, another well-connected political ally of the President who committed serious crimes. There, as here, the President publicly assailed the Department of Justice for pursuing the prosecution. And there, as here, the Department of Justice succumbed to that corrupt pressure— though only after all four career prosecutors resigned from the case. As one of those career prosecutors later testified, senior officials at the Department of Justice exerted “significant pressure” to go easy on Stone, against the record of the case, customary prosecutorial practice, and departmental policy. Id. at 2. This occurred “because of [Stone’s] relationship to the President,” id., and “because the U.S. Attorney”—who also signed the Rule 48(a) motion in these proceedings—“was ‘afraid of the President,’” id. at 10.11
And he used that to invoke the case of Geoffrey Berman.
11 Perhaps those officials had reason to worry: the President recently fired a prominent and wellrespected U.S. Attorney who was investigating his associates. See Paul Le Blanc et al., White House Admits Trump Was Involved in Firing of Top US Attorney After Trump Claimed He Wasn’t, CNN (June 22, 2020), Perma | White House admits Trump involved in firing of top US attorney after Trump claimed he wasn't - CNNPolitics .
Had he waited a few hours, he could have cited how John Durham’s deputy, Nora Dannehy, just resigned in part because of political pressure.
..
..he has succeeded in establishing a record that Billy Barr’s own DOJ disagrees with him.
Don't get complacent.
I'm treating this election as a 90 percent chance Trump will attempt things never imagined by anyone in recorded history to get his cheats to work.
We will be seeing footage from polling places in swing states that will make the dogs of Birmingham look like a Cub Scout outing.
Only this time it won't have to wait for the 6 o'clock news, it will be in real time, and the whole world will be watching.
Until I read your post I didn’t even bother to read the article. Having read it I’m wondering how the report supports the headline. Should I read it a few more times?From the article.
Dannehy, a highly regarded prosecutor who has worked with or for Durham for decades, informed colleagues in the U.S. Attorney’s office in New Haven of her resignation from the Department of Justice by email Thursday evening. The short email was a brief farewell message and said nothing about political pressure, her work for Durham or what the Durham team has produced, according to people who received it.
Durham, who has never even acknowledged that Dannehy was in Washington working for him, had no immediate comment on the resignation.
LOL. Says the side who was the benefit of numerous leaks from investigations of Trump before the final report was made. You can sure dish it out but don't want to take it.