Biden Is Part Of The DOJ's Investigation Into Illegal Russian Collusion Scandal Against President Trump - Conflict of Interest

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
67,200
Reaction score
25,345
Points
2,290
Any attempt by Biden to end, silence, prevent a final report on Durham's criminal investigation into the scandal he himself was part of, being VP at the time and having proven to have known about / been part of it, would be a criminal conflict of interest.


Durham continues to investigate whether the FBI, Justice Department and Obama administration officials knowingly used the patently false allegations of Trump-Russian collusion to launch an intelligence campaign against the Republican 2016 presidential candidate.

Conducting electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and deploying federal investigatory resources on false grounds is not only unprecedented (aside from President Richard Nixon in Watergate), but illegal.

Biden is not just considering whether to hire some of the officials who may have started the unfounded Russia investigation. The president-elect himself may have personal involvement.

On January 5, 2017, while the Obama administration was winding down and the Trump administration was preparing to enter office, then-Vice President Biden attended a White House meeting with President Obama where they discussed surveillance of Michael Flynn, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, with Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and Comey.

The officials were worried that Flynn had passed classified information in conversations with the Russian ambassador about economic sanctions. According to FBI notes of the meeting, Biden may have raised the idea that Flynn had violated the Logan Act, a law enacted in 1799 that makes it a crime for a private citizen to interfere with U.S. foreign policy. But the Logan Act has never served as the basis for a successful prosecution because it likely violates the right to free speech.

Critics claim that Biden raised the Logan Act as a pretext to investigate Flynn for political dirt to handicap the incoming Trump administration.

Contrary to claims that the Durham probe represents political score-settling on the part of Barr, several investigations have already shown that Obama intelligence and law enforcement officials abused the government’s broad surveillance powers to investigate the Trump campaign.



 

edthecynic

Censored for Cynicism
Joined
Oct 20, 2008
Messages
40,646
Reaction score
5,605
Points
1,830
Any attempt by Biden to end, silence, prevent a final report on Durham's criminal investigation into the scandal he himself was part of, being VP at the time and having proven to have known about / been part of it, would be a criminal conflict of interest.


Durham continues to investigate whether the FBI, Justice Department and Obama administration officials knowingly used the patently false allegations of Trump-Russian collusion to launch an intelligence campaign against the Republican 2016 presidential candidate.

Conducting electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and deploying federal investigatory resources on false grounds is not only unprecedented (aside from President Richard Nixon in Watergate), but illegal.

Biden is not just considering whether to hire some of the officials who may have started the unfounded Russia investigation. The president-elect himself may have personal involvement.

On January 5, 2017, while the Obama administration was winding down and the Trump administration was preparing to enter office, then-Vice President Biden attended a White House meeting with President Obama where they discussed surveillance of Michael Flynn, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, with Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and Comey.

The officials were worried that Flynn had passed classified information in conversations with the Russian ambassador about economic sanctions. According to FBI notes of the meeting, Biden may have raised the idea that Flynn had violated the Logan Act, a law enacted in 1799 that makes it a crime for a private citizen to interfere with U.S. foreign policy. But the Logan Act has never served as the basis for a successful prosecution because it likely violates the right to free speech.

Critics claim that Biden raised the Logan Act as a pretext to investigate Flynn for political dirt to handicap the incoming Trump administration.

Contrary to claims that the Durham probe represents political score-settling on the part of Barr, several investigations have already shown that Obama intelligence and law enforcement officials abused the government’s broad surveillance powers to investigate the Trump campaign.



BDS!
 

TheGreatSatan

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2019
Messages
4,147
Reaction score
4,398
Points
1,970
Democrats are above the law.

Americans are either going to submit to foreign rule, or fight and punish the traitors. We must go through all peaceful options first so the actions we take in war are justified.
 
OP
easyt65

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
67,200
Reaction score
25,345
Points
2,290
Attorney General William Barr was criticized by many Democrats Tuesday when he revealed that he has appointed John Durham as a special counsel to investigate the origins of the probe of alleged collusion between Russia and the 2016 Trump presidential campaign. But in 1987, a prominent Democratic U.S. senator wrote a strong argument in favor of appointing such special counsels.

The future president-elect wrote: “The need for a special counsel who is to some extent independent of the Attorney General and free of the conflicts of interest that exist when an Administration investigates alleged wrongdoing of its own officials has unfortunately been demonstrated several times in [the last] century.”

In his article, Biden demanded the reauthorization of a law that created prosecutors who operated even more independently than will Durham, who also serves as the U.S. attorney for Connecticut.
Biden explained in 1987 that the federal government needs independent counsels, even though the text of the Constitution may appear to vest the control of prosecution solely in the president, because of the conflict of interest created when high-ranking executive officials break the law.

“There are certain extraordinary moments of crisis when the people’s faith in the integrity and independence of their elected officials is caused to waiver,” Biden wrote. “These scandals tarnish the view that the Attorney General is an independent executive official who can be trusted to enforce the criminal law in the high offices of the government.”

To escape this conflict of interest, Biden argued,
a special counsel must have the freedom to investigate a president, Cabinet officials, or the prosecutors or FBI agents themselves without fear of removal, limits on the scope of his or her inquiry, or reduced budgets and personnel (all of which work to control normal prosecutors).


Even if Durham's investigation continues into Biden's Presidency , ACCORDING TO HIM any attempt to fire Barr and/or Durham while the investigation is on-going, if Biden attempts to stop the investigation, impede / obstruct, or prevent a final report from being released he will be GUILTY of CIMINAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

Do I think anything will come of the investigation / Durham's report? Hell no. I am just pointing out that Biden's hands are tied while the investigation continues and until Durham's full report comes out.
 

JackOfNoTrades

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
8,813
Reaction score
7,414
Points
1,940
Location
Granite State
I expect the new AG will wait about 15 minutes before he goes to Durham and asks to see the "evidence" he's "gathered". I would. There has to be a legitimate reason for initiating this snipe hunt. And Barr (unlike Rod Rosenstein) hasn't provided any. Durham's work is being conducted in a vacuum. So far, all this looks like is Barr's attempt at leaving behind a poison pill for the new AG to elevate Durham to a position where it would make it hard for an incoming AG to can him.
 
OP
easyt65

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
67,200
Reaction score
25,345
Points
2,290
Remember how you little whiny-assed bitches cried about how Trump couldn't fire Comey and he was guilty of a crime if he did so....shoe's on the other foot, snowflake.
 

ColonelAngus

Diamond Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2015
Messages
28,485
Reaction score
15,591
Points
1,415
If Biden touches anyone associated with the Durham investigation, it is obstruction of justice and should lead to Biden impeachment.
Heck we can impeach Biden, if we don't like him. That's how Trump got impeached.
Absolutely. Not even a reason needed. Just a house and senate majority.

It will happen in 2022.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
42,106
Reaction score
9,357
Points
2,040
Any attempt by Biden to end, silence, prevent a final report on Durham's criminal investigation into the scandal he himself was part of, being VP at the time and having proven to have known about / been part of it, would be a criminal conflict of interest.


Durham continues to investigate whether the FBI, Justice Department and Obama administration officials knowingly used the patently false allegations of Trump-Russian collusion to launch an intelligence campaign against the Republican 2016 presidential candidate.

Conducting electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and deploying federal investigatory resources on false grounds is not only unprecedented (aside from President Richard Nixon in Watergate), but illegal.

Biden is not just considering whether to hire some of the officials who may have started the unfounded Russia investigation. The president-elect himself may have personal involvement.

On January 5, 2017, while the Obama administration was winding down and the Trump administration was preparing to enter office, then-Vice President Biden attended a White House meeting with President Obama where they discussed surveillance of Michael Flynn, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, with Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and Comey.

The officials were worried that Flynn had passed classified information in conversations with the Russian ambassador about economic sanctions. According to FBI notes of the meeting, Biden may have raised the idea that Flynn had violated the Logan Act, a law enacted in 1799 that makes it a crime for a private citizen to interfere with U.S. foreign policy. But the Logan Act has never served as the basis for a successful prosecution because it likely violates the right to free speech.

Critics claim that Biden raised the Logan Act as a pretext to investigate Flynn for political dirt to handicap the incoming Trump administration.

Contrary to claims that the Durham probe represents political score-settling on the part of Barr, several investigations have already shown that Obama intelligence and law enforcement officials abused the government’s broad surveillance powers to investigate the Trump campaign.



4on1k0.jpg
 

bodecea

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
139,253
Reaction score
16,645
Points
2,180
Location
#HasNoClothes
Any attempt by Biden to end, silence, prevent a final report on Durham's criminal investigation into the scandal he himself was part of, being VP at the time and having proven to have known about / been part of it, would be a criminal conflict of interest.


Durham continues to investigate whether the FBI, Justice Department and Obama administration officials knowingly used the patently false allegations of Trump-Russian collusion to launch an intelligence campaign against the Republican 2016 presidential candidate.

Conducting electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and deploying federal investigatory resources on false grounds is not only unprecedented (aside from President Richard Nixon in Watergate), but illegal.

Biden is not just considering whether to hire some of the officials who may have started the unfounded Russia investigation. The president-elect himself may have personal involvement.

On January 5, 2017, while the Obama administration was winding down and the Trump administration was preparing to enter office, then-Vice President Biden attended a White House meeting with President Obama where they discussed surveillance of Michael Flynn, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, with Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and Comey.

The officials were worried that Flynn had passed classified information in conversations with the Russian ambassador about economic sanctions. According to FBI notes of the meeting, Biden may have raised the idea that Flynn had violated the Logan Act, a law enacted in 1799 that makes it a crime for a private citizen to interfere with U.S. foreign policy. But the Logan Act has never served as the basis for a successful prosecution because it likely violates the right to free speech.

Critics claim that Biden raised the Logan Act as a pretext to investigate Flynn for political dirt to handicap the incoming Trump administration.

Contrary to claims that the Durham probe represents political score-settling on the part of Barr, several investigations have already shown that Obama intelligence and law enforcement officials abused the government’s broad surveillance powers to investigate the Trump campaign.



Durham.... :heehee:
 

JackOfNoTrades

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
8,813
Reaction score
7,414
Points
1,940
Location
Granite State
If Biden touches anyone associated with the Dunham investigation, it is obstruction of justice and should lead to Biden impeachment.
Mueller was required to give Rod Rosenstein regular reports on his activities. Rosenstein could have shut it down if he thought it wasn't going anywhere.
Should be the same deal with Durham and the new AG. They keep hoping to manufacture some evidence...and keep coming up with nothing. Kinda amusing actually.
 

jillian

Princess
Joined
Apr 4, 2006
Messages
84,494
Reaction score
16,381
Points
2,220
Location
The Other Side of Paradise
Any attempt by Biden to end, silence, prevent a final report on Durham's criminal investigation into the scandal he himself was part of, being VP at the time and having proven to have known about / been part of it, would be a criminal conflict of interest.


Durham continues to investigate whether the FBI, Justice Department and Obama administration officials knowingly used the patently false allegations of Trump-Russian collusion to launch an intelligence campaign against the Republican 2016 presidential candidate.

Conducting electronic surveillance under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and deploying federal investigatory resources on false grounds is not only unprecedented (aside from President Richard Nixon in Watergate), but illegal.

Biden is not just considering whether to hire some of the officials who may have started the unfounded Russia investigation. The president-elect himself may have personal involvement.

On January 5, 2017, while the Obama administration was winding down and the Trump administration was preparing to enter office, then-Vice President Biden attended a White House meeting with President Obama where they discussed surveillance of Michael Flynn, Trump’s incoming national security adviser, with Acting Attorney General Sally Yates and Comey.

The officials were worried that Flynn had passed classified information in conversations with the Russian ambassador about economic sanctions. According to FBI notes of the meeting, Biden may have raised the idea that Flynn had violated the Logan Act, a law enacted in 1799 that makes it a crime for a private citizen to interfere with U.S. foreign policy. But the Logan Act has never served as the basis for a successful prosecution because it likely violates the right to free speech.

Critics claim that Biden raised the Logan Act as a pretext to investigate Flynn for political dirt to handicap the incoming Trump administration.

Contrary to claims that the Durham probe represents political score-settling on the part of Barr, several investigations have already shown that Obama intelligence and law enforcement officials abused the government’s broad surveillance powers to investigate the Trump campaign.



How many investigations do Russian assets want if the same thing? Poor Sergei
 

HaShev

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,121
Reaction score
2,567
Points
265
Also if he takes office, any appointment as new AG would be required to recuse themselves from the investigation by law* like how Sessions was forced to.
*(28 CFR Section 45.2 of the law)
 
OP
easyt65

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
67,200
Reaction score
25,345
Points
2,290
Mueller was required to give Rod Rosenstein regular reports on his activities. Rosenstein could have shut it down if he thought it wasn't going anywhere. Should be the same deal with Durham and the new AG.
I couldn't give a damn about your OPINION - Provide any evidence that it is NOT.
 

HaShev

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2009
Messages
12,121
Reaction score
2,567
Points
265
If Biden touches anyone associated with the Dunham investigation, it is obstruction of justice and should lead to Biden impeachment.
Mueller was required to give Rod Rosenstein regular reports on his activities. Rosenstein could have shut it down if he thought it wasn't going anywhere.
Should be the same deal with Durham and the new AG. They keep hoping to manufacture some evidence...and keep coming up with nothing. Kinda amusing actually.
Mueller was required to recuse himself by being a friend of Comey and now we see the Clinton lawyers used in that investigation also broke the law by having conflicts of interest.
*28 CFR Section 45.2 of the law
 
OP
easyt65

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
67,200
Reaction score
25,345
Points
2,290
Mueller was required to recuse himself by being a friend of Comey and now we see the Clinton lawyers used in that investigation also broke the law by having conflicts of interest.
*28 CFR Section 45.2 of the law
The FISA Court itself released evidence that the FBVI has been committing illegal FISA Court crimes for DECADES - Mueller himself was called before the Court as FBI Director to answer for over a dozen crimes...none of which anyone was ever punished for committing. This fact was KNOWN BEFORE Mueller was appointed as Special Counsel. Mueller was Comey's mentor, and the FISA Court proved Comey committed the same FISA Court crimes.

Rosenstein and McCabe both confessed to committing FISA Court crimes under oath testifying before Congress. - why Comey, McCabe, and Rosenstein have not been indicted and charged for those crimes already tells you everything you need to know about how corrupt our entire system is.
 

JackOfNoTrades

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2019
Messages
8,813
Reaction score
7,414
Points
1,940
Location
Granite State
Mueller was required to give Rod Rosenstein regular reports on his activities. Rosenstein could have shut it down if he thought it wasn't going anywhere. Should be the same deal with Durham and the new AG.
I couldn't give a damn about your OPINION - Provide any evidence that it is NOT.
It isn't. If it was, they'd have had that report out and hot off the presses for Election Day. I mean, what's Durham been doing this whole time? :)
The fact that they quietly shelved the "unmasking" investigation told me everything I needed to know.
This is a snipe hunt. The only way anything actionable comes out of it is if they manufacture evidence.
This was Barr's middle finger to his successor.
 

Votto

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2012
Messages
26,723
Reaction score
9,924
Points
900
Democrats are above the law.

Americans are either going to submit to foreign rule, or fight and punish the traitors. We must go through all peaceful options first so the actions we take in war are justified.
Agreed.

Why if it were not for democrats, everyone would be in jail.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top