Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2018 American Political Scene

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by zraver View Post

    Except that is not what the reg says. The regs require a predicate crime, not an open ended fishing expedition. Predicate crimes require probable cause worthy of a warrant, not salacious and unverfied slander.
    Would you mind posting the exact wording of this reg you are talking about. I want to see where the word predicated crime is in it.

    Comment


    • firestorm,

      Really? Maybe the American left is far more fucked up than I thought.
      you'll find that extremes are usually pretty fucked up. i wouldn't put too much stock in one writer's assertion that it's the "leading" intellectual voice, seeing as how its circulation of 36,000 is tiny compared to other more mainstream Left magazines like The Nation or even the failing New Republic.

      That Vox journalist goes to great lengths to label the Jacobinites as everything except what they are: frickin commies.
      guy puts it in bold, "no bullshit marxism" and even goads them to state that they're closer to the revolutionary Rosa Luxembourg or that they're Trotskyites...so it's not like there's false advertising, lol.

      in any case the point i was making is that yeah, there's crazies out there whom think Sanders is a barely tolerable social democrat and that if they had their druthers they'd have guillotined most members of Wall Street already. i personally think that this is a pretty good warning sign to the right; you want to call Obama a communist, dude, you should check out the real thing, and your extremism is empowering the other.

      ugh.
      There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

      Comment


      • Apparently Mr Cohen was in the habit of recording his conversations. Now the FBI has his tapes. Wonder if there are any convenient gaps? ;-) This is getting messier by the minute. I would love to be a fly on the wall with the FBI 'taint team'. Pity they won't be able to tell us the good stuff.

        https://www.vox.com/2018/4/13/172367...bi-trump-tapes

        I swear this Administration couldn't get any weirder if Trump held a press conference sitting on a green unicorn.
        sigpic

        Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

        Comment


        • "Stable genius's" have unicorns?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by snapper View Post
            "Stable genius's" have unicorns?
            Genii
            Trust me?
            I'm an economist!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by DOR View Post
              Genii
              Is the past tense of highlight, highlighted or highlit?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
                Would you mind posting the exact wording of this reg you are talking about. I want to see where the word predicated crime is in it.
                600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
                The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

                Note the word crimminal

                Rosenstein doesn't mention the word crime, criminal or any related word in his letter apointing Mueller.

                https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...el-Russia.html

                Its an open ended fishing expedition that violates the law. Here is the DOJ reg in question

                All such investigations, however, shall be based on reasonable factual predicate and shall have a valid law enforcement purpose

                https://www.justice.gov/archives/ag/...e-and-domestic

                Comment


                • much like the entire idea of impeachment, this discussion of legality has little meaning because removing or keeping Mueller is wholly a political decision.
                  There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                    600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
                    The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

                    Note the word crimminal

                    Rosenstein doesn't mention the word crime, criminal or any related word in his letter apointing Mueller.

                    https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...el-Russia.html

                    Its an open ended fishing expedition that violates the law. Here is the DOJ reg in question

                    All such investigations, however, shall be based on reasonable factual predicate and shall have a valid law enforcement purpose

                    https://www.justice.gov/archives/ag/...e-and-domestic
                    Could you use your deep insight to assess Ken Starr's performance back in the late 1990s?
                    Thanks.
                    Trust me?
                    I'm an economist!

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                      600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
                      The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -
                      I eliminated the rest as it doesn't pertain.

                      Only 600.1 pertains and as I knew predicated wasn't there but an addition by you. So looking back over all the previous special councils one can see pretty much the same thing. They were appointed to "determine" if a criminal investigation was in order. Much like a Grand Jury. The Grand Jury obtains documents, reviews evidence, and interviews sworn witnesses to determine if there is enough probable cause to believe that one or more people have committed a crime. Then they refer for prosecution. That is my understanding based on a friend who was foreman of a local Grand Jury for two years.

                      Seems to me that the Special Council is the same as the Grand Jury. As such he was appointed to investigate if there was any collusion between the Trump people and the Russians which could be criminal. Grand Juries do the same on a local scale such as a councilman and developer. The word crime isn't mentioned because the job is to determine "if" a crime has been committed. Mueller is doing exactly that as per his appointment. He is obtaining documents, reviewing evidence and interviewing sworn witnesses to determine probable cause. If sworn witnesses lie to him oh well they should have known better. If he runs across other criminal activity in his review of evidence then he refers out to the proper authorities as in no way should he ignore it.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
                        I eliminated the rest as it doesn't pertain.

                        Only 600.1 pertains and as I knew predicated wasn't there but an addition by you. So looking back over all the previous special councils one can see pretty much the same thing. They were appointed to "determine" if a criminal investigation was in order. Much like a Grand Jury. The Grand Jury obtains documents, reviews evidence, and interviews sworn witnesses to determine if there is enough probable cause to believe that one or more people have committed a crime. Then they refer for prosecution. That is my understanding based on a friend who was foreman of a local Grand Jury for two years.

                        Seems to me that the Special Council is the same as the Grand Jury. As such he was appointed to investigate if there was any collusion between the Trump people and the Russians which could be criminal. Grand Juries do the same on a local scale such as a councilman and developer. The word crime isn't mentioned because the job is to determine "if" a crime has been committed. Mueller is doing exactly that as per his appointment. He is obtaining documents, reviewing evidence and interviewing sworn witnesses to determine probable cause. If sworn witnesses lie to him oh well they should have known better. If he runs across other criminal activity in his review of evidence then he refers out to the proper authorities as in no way should he ignore it.
                        Under the current law the previous two special councilors were impaneled after actions that could have clearly broken federal law Waco (homicide) and Plame (leaking an agents name). All of the previous ones under older laws also had criminal violations at their core. Rosenstien completely violated standing law and precedent in appointing Mueller.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                          600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
                          The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -

                          Note the word crimminal

                          Rosenstein doesn't mention the word crime, criminal or any related word in his letter apointing Mueller.

                          https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...el-Russia.html

                          Its an open ended fishing expedition that violates the law. Here is the DOJ reg in question

                          All such investigations, however, shall be based on reasonable factual predicate and shall have a valid law enforcement purpose

                          https://www.justice.gov/archives/ag/...e-and-domestic
                          Yes I see the word criminal in §600.1. And no, Rosenstein doesn't mention the word "crime" in his letter appointing Mueller (or does he?). Where does it say he has to do that?

                          He invoked §600.1, period. Where does it say he has to then quote §600.1 verbatim in order for it be applicable?

                          Oh wait, what's this?

                          "(c) If the Special Counsel believes it is necessary and appropriate, the Special Counsel is authorized to prosecute federal crimes arising from the investigation of these matters."

                          Your argument is, frankly, both farcical and preposterous.

                          Not unlike this Administration, appropriately enough.
                          “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                            Under the current law the previous two special councilors were impaneled after actions that could have clearly broken federal law Waco (homicide).
                            So the whitewater investigation had to do with Waco? Or was Vince Foster at Waco? Please connect the dots. And how did any of these things tie into lying about a BJ in the White House if the Special Counsel is limited in scope?

                            Or are you just puling this stuff from your 4th point of contact?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Gun Grape View Post
                              So the whitewater investigation had to do with Waco? Or was Vince Foster at Waco? Please connect the dots. And how did any of these things tie into lying about a BJ in the White House if the Special Counsel is limited in scope?

                              Or are you just puling this stuff from your 4th point of contact?
                              The White Water investigation was a criminal investigation enacted under the Ethics in Government Act. That law expired in 99. When it expired, Janet Reno promulgated rules that have been the regs in the three cases since; Waco, Plame and Mueller.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                                Yes I see the word criminal in §600.1. And no, Rosenstein doesn't mention the word "crime" in his letter appointing Mueller (or does he?). Where does it say he has to do that?
                                I posted the DOJ regs requiring a predicate crime. Otherwise the government can open any investigation on anyone at any time for anything. Thats not the rule of law. Our common law system is based on innocent until proven guilty. This maxim is based on a common law tradition that says what is not forbidden is permitted. So without a clear violation government has no right to pry. No one has been able to put forward what crime that Trump or his campaign allegedly committed.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X