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

[easyt65]

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.

John Yoo: AG Barr support for special counsel backed by surprise Democratic author of 1987 law review article

In 1987, a prominent Democratic U.S. senator wrote a strong argument in favor of appointing special counsels like the one Attorney General William Barr has appointed to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion probe.

www.foxnews.com

 

[edthecynic]

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.

John Yoo: AG Barr support for special counsel backed by surprise Democratic author of 1987 law review article

In 1987, a prominent Democratic U.S. senator wrote a strong argument in favor of appointing special counsels like the one Attorney General William Barr has appointed to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion probe.

www.foxnews.com

BDS!

 

[TheGreatSatan]

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.

 

[easyt65]

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]

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.

 

[easyt65]

BDS!

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]

If Biden touches anyone associated with the Dunham investigation, it is obstruction of justice and should lead to Biden impeachment.

 

[jknowgood]

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.

 

[ColonelAngus]

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]

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.

John Yoo: AG Barr support for special counsel backed by surprise Democratic author of 1987 law review article

In 1987, a prominent Democratic U.S. senator wrote a strong argument in favor of appointing special counsels like the one Attorney General William Barr has appointed to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion probe.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Christ_on_a_croissant]

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.

So, you admit firing Comey was a stupid move

 

[bodecea]

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.

John Yoo: AG Barr support for special counsel backed by surprise Democratic author of 1987 law review article

In 1987, a prominent Democratic U.S. senator wrote a strong argument in favor of appointing special counsels like the one Attorney General William Barr has appointed to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion probe.

www.foxnews.com

Durham....

 

[JackOfNoTrades]

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]

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.

John Yoo: AG Barr support for special counsel backed by surprise Democratic author of 1987 law review article

In 1987, a prominent Democratic U.S. senator wrote a strong argument in favor of appointing special counsels like the one Attorney General William Barr has appointed to investigate the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion probe.

www.foxnews.com

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

 

[HaShev]

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)

 

[easyt65]

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]

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

 

[easyt65]

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]

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]

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.