The real collusion
Comments
-
If they can do what they want why are they bitching about not being able to see the full report? Just march over to the DOJ and take it. They can do whatever the fuck they want.CirrhosisDawg said:
The law was changed?RaceBannon said:
The law was changedCirrhosisDawg said:
What Janet Reno “said” sure makes trumptards fall in line 20 years later.RaceBannon said:Its another unintended consequence
Democrats led by our own Janet Reno were so disgusted about the Starr report that they said never again will it just be released by the SP
Trump should just ignore all of this and sweep it under the rug for the next 20 months.
He’s busy closing the border, eventually, with all of the mexicos anway.
Trump is feeling it!
Like Bob said, you have to be pretty stupid and you are
J F C
This must be really embarrassing for you and bob. Special counsel provisions are covered under DOJ regulatory authority (28 CFR 600) the mechanics of which were put in place in 1999 by reno’s DOJ when the independent counsel law expired. Nadler and Congress can do whatever the fuck they want.
Retards. -
You don't redact Penthouse Forum stories...you just don't do that. BJ's and cigars HAVE to be disclosed.CirrhosisDawg said:
Did the Starr report get released unredacted?Sounds like a majority favored transparency in 1998 despite nadler’s opposition. Was there strong support from republicans for full release? Must have been rather easy. Say 420-0?GrundleStiltzkin said:
Nadler in 1998: Of course you can’t release grand-jury testimony in prosecutor’s reportApostleofGrief said:This is an unresolved matter unless and until the House receives the complete unredacted report being blocked by Trumps AG
Nothing is more consistent about partisan warfare in the Beltway than inconsistency. Today’s case in point comes from 1998 (and from Jeff Dunetz), when House Judiciary Committee member Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) objected to the idea that everything found by an independent prosecutor should get published for all to see. Nadler told Charlie Rose that Ken Starr’s report might contain “all kinds of material that it would be unfair to release,” including “statements which may or may not be true by various witnesses.” Besides, Nadler argued at the time, releasing grand-jury material violated federal law.
Yes, I know you were talking about the House receiving it. But still.
Either way. Sounds like you don’t care.
We're fucking AMERICANS! We want our porn.
NGAF about email servers, meetings and that other bullshit.
Stain on blue dresses? Hell yeah!
-
Monday afternoon on FOX News, legal scholar Alan Dershowitz said there is "no legal basis" for Democrats to demand the release of the full Mueller report. "This is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue," he said.
"I think, even if Barr were hypothetically to refuse to issue anything, there would be no legal basis for a court to compel him to do that," Dershowitz said.
"The special counsel, under the rules, has an obligation to file a report with the attorney general. There’s nothing in the rules that require the attorney general to make the report public, particularly if it contains information critical of people who were not indicted. So, this is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue."
Dershowitz added: "This rush to release is understandable. The American public wants to see this report. They’re curious. But the law has to be complied with, and the law generally protects subjects of investigations who haven’t been indicted." -
None of that fucking matters, they can do whatever they want.RaceBannon said:Monday afternoon on FOX News, legal scholar Alan Dershowitz said there is "no legal basis" for Democrats to demand the release of the full Mueller report. "This is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue," he said.
"I think, even if Barr were hypothetically to refuse to issue anything, there would be no legal basis for a court to compel him to do that," Dershowitz said.
"The special counsel, under the rules, has an obligation to file a report with the attorney general. There’s nothing in the rules that require the attorney general to make the report public, particularly if it contains information critical of people who were not indicted. So, this is a political issue. This is a media issue. This is not a legal issue."
Dershowitz added: "This rush to release is understandable. The American public wants to see this report. They’re curious. But the law has to be complied with, and the law generally protects subjects of investigations who haven’t been indicted." -
US statutes authorize DOJ to create SP regulations.
The current regulatory framework in place dates back to 1999 and Janet reno’s DOJ.
Regulations do not carry the same authority as laws. Congress maintains oversight, management, and control over the regulatory process (thanks to strong republican inroads during the Clinton and Obama administrations).
Trumptards are claiming that since mueller submitted his report to the AG per the SP regulations (as authorized under law) then they have complied with the law, and end of story.
Nadler and House Dems are saying that they maintain control over DOJ and its regulatory authority. The House Judiciary Committee tomorrow is approving nadler’s authority to issue subpoenas compelling full release of the full unredacted report. (In other words “Doing whatever the fuck they want,” tomorrow.)
We’ll see which argument wins the legal battle as the process ensues.
Regardless, the mueller report must be extremely damaging to trump for him to go to these extremes. He would rather have this play out until November 2020? Whatever happened to 420-0? -
Nadler and House Dems are saying that they maintain control over DOJ and its regulatory authority
DOJ is not under the House
Its executive branch
Fucking morons -
Pay up deadbeat.PurpleThrobber said:
"I dont know anything about this topic but I'm going to weigh in anyway and you'd better respect my opinion" @MarriotaTheGawdMariotaTheGawd said:
You have no idea what that word meanspawz said:
Ironic.MariotaTheGawd said:
You're quite the nut hugger aren't youSFGbob said:
What was the news source you used for this Hondo?2001400ex said:Amgreatness is the new tin foil hat website now. Zero hedge and Brietbart aren’t far enough out there for you.
And it's a documented fact that Trump's team met with a Russian team to discuss giving DNC emails and Hillary emails to Trump
You've got no fucking business giving anyone else shit about tin foil hat websites you pathological lying piece of shit. -
This is really sad. Seriously.RaceBannon said:
Nadler and House Dems are saying that they maintain control over DOJ and its regulatory authority
DOJ is not under the House
Its executive branch
Fucking morons -
"I dont know anything about this topic but I'm going to weigh in anyway and you'd better respect my opinion" @Benny FO, G BeaverBennyBeaver said:
Pay up deadbeat.PurpleThrobber said:
"I dont know anything about this topic but I'm going to weigh in anyway and you'd better respect my opinion" @MarriotaTheGawdMariotaTheGawd said:
You have no idea what that word meanspawz said:
Ironic.MariotaTheGawd said:
You're quite the nut hugger aren't youSFGbob said:
What was the news source you used for this Hondo?2001400ex said:Amgreatness is the new tin foil hat website now. Zero hedge and Brietbart aren’t far enough out there for you.
And it's a documented fact that Trump's team met with a Russian team to discuss giving DNC emails and Hillary emails to Trump
You've got no fucking business giving anyone else shit about tin foil hat websites you pathological lying piece of shit.
-
Nadlertards are upset
