On exactly what document? Playing games still.The opinion of the DNI does not override the plain language on the document.
Ratcliffe interview after a secret SCIF was found loaded with classified files.Please provide a source to this claim.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
On exactly what document? Playing games still.The opinion of the DNI does not override the plain language on the document.
Ratcliffe interview after a secret SCIF was found loaded with classified files.Please provide a source to this claim.
This is fantastic watching the entire Democrat Party collapse in front of us. Hillary losing an election, or the thought of Trump winning an election created a mental illness that started when Trump came down the escalator and it continues today. No one is believing you or your talking heads. The Obama Cartel is going down!Taking the first place slot from the likes of John Mitchell, Ed Meese, Mitchell Palmer, and Bill Barr is no easy task. But Pam has sprinted out of the gate. She has presided over the DoJ's weaponization, turned a blind eye to the regime's refusal to comply with court orders, put an end to the anti-corruption task force, given contradictory statements about the Epstein file, tacitly approved violations of constitutional rights possessed by illegally deported immigrants, and now this.
Pam Bondi orders grand jury probe of Obama administration review of 2016 election
Especially since Watergate, it has been vital that the DoJ maintain its independence from the executive branch of government. trump has violated that independence.
For those who believe in a unitary executive, DOJ/FBI independence is a constitutional solecism. On this view, Article II vests the “executive power” in the President alone, and he alone wields it. That means that the President can do what he likes with his Executive branch subordinates—hire them, fire them, ignore them, order them to act in certain ways, and the like. The presidential authority to direct and control an administration is especially clear with respect to law enforcement and national security, the story goes, since the President himself has a constitutional duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” and is the “Commander in Chief.”
This is a nice theory. Sometimes (though not often) I wish that it were so. But the theory has been repudiated in law, and especially in practice, for a long time. There are far too many examples to cover, but here are a few relevant ones. The President can generally fire his political appointees at will, though the Supreme Court has long upheld certain statutory limitations on the President’s removal power (including in the context of the Clinton-era independent counsel statute). The FBI Director’s ten-year term—through which Congress signaled that the Director has independence from electoral politics—raises the political stakes for a President who fires an FBI Director mid-term, as President Trump learned last year. And career civil servants below these senior political appointees (like just-retired FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe) have extensive legal protections against presidential firing.
Those are the main “legal” guarantees of DOJ/FBI independence. They are very few, and they are not the most important. The most important guarantees of DOJ/FBI come not from the Constitution or statutes, but from norms and practices that since Watergate have emerged within the Executive branch.
Independence and Accountability at the Department of Justice
Over the weekend some conservative commentators pushed back on my tweet-claim that President Trump has “threaten[ed] DOJ/FBI over and over in gross violation of independencewww.lawfaremedia.org
Pam has become the enabler of a would be autocrat, which is just what she was chosen for. By both acquiescence and proactive measures she has shown herself to be as incompetent as she is co-opted. She's making Bill Barr's hideous "exonerated" lie look like child's play. And her term has only just begun.
Still waiting for an actual source.Ratcliffe interview after a secret SCIF was found loaded with classified files.
They never claimed it was impossible for them to be wrong.and may I point out the "high confidence" crap is just that... the ICA LITERALLY does not claim these judgements are fact or certainties, and their judgement could very well be wrong...
Pot, meet kettle.You guys are creating a criminal conspiracy out of a difference of opinion which is, to put it plainly, very stupid.
Explain.Pot, meet kettle.
The whole Russiagate Hoax was an attempt to criminalize dissent.Explain.
Explain how “dissent” was criminalized. That sounds outlandish.The whole Russiagate Hoax was an attempt to criminalize dissent.
Democrats have always slammed any Republican president. Trump is not by any means the first "literally Hitler" in the White House.Explain how “dissent” was criminalized. That sounds outlandish.
Have you considered the possibility that Trump actually acted illegally and therefore his prosecution was justified?Democrats have always slammed any Republican president. Trump is not by any means the first "literally Hitler" in the White House.
Maybe it was because Trump was an outsider and the Democrats counted on Never Trump Republicans for cover, or maybe Obama was the first Dem president to use the strategy of stacking the justice system and the intelligence agencies with only the most extreme of democrats and then to order them to and go after the incoming republican.
Either way, the weight of both federal and state justice systems were deployed In ways that would have stopped most presidents in their tracks. Not because they believed that Trump had committed any crimes. They searched for crimes for years, and could only come up with a falsification of business records misdemeanor that they dressed up as a felony and split into multiple count for a show trial.
In short, Trump suffered criminal prosecution, not because of crimes. But because he dared to go against the democrats and the establishment, Republicans.
One thing many Republicans kept saying is that this could happen to any one of us if we let it happen to Trump. True enough, but was that really the point? What happened to Trump was bad enough whether it ever happened to anyone else again or not.
Sadly, for your side, the Trump survived that process and learned a new strategy for going after his own opponents. I will use another old catchphrase that applies here.
Y'all made your bed. Now you must lie in it.
I sure did consider that possibility, thinking 'smoke, fire, right?' I waited for the "more than circumstantial" evidence to come out for these crimes, as promised by Adam Schiff based on his insider knowledge from inrell briefings.Have you considered the possibility that Trump actually acted illegally and therefore his prosecution was justified?
I think the FBI finding dozens and dozens of classified documents when they searched Mar a Lago to be more than just “smoke”.I sure did consider that possibility, thinking 'smoke, fire, right?' I waited for the "more than circumstantial" evidence to come out for these crimes, as promised by Adam Schiff based on his insider knowledge from inrell briefings.
Nope.
The smoke was all there was, generated as if by the 221st Chemical Company.
"Find them?" Seriously?I think the FBI finding dozens and dozens of classified documents when they searched Mar a Lago to be more than just “smoke”.
That doesn’t seem very circumstantial.
But Trump did make a secret of it. He handed over a few documents to the FBI and gave them a statement saying they searched everywhere and they had no more documents at all."Find them?" Seriously?
They knew they were there, as Trump made no secret if it. Every president since G. Washington kept documents after keaving office.
Whats the crime?
You have the story not quite right.But Trump did make a secret of it. He handed over a few documents to the FBI and gave them a statement saying they searched everywhere and they had no more documents at all.
That was obviously untrue as the FBI discovered.
Trump was legally required to turn over every document with classified markings and did not do so.
Did you not know this? Or did you forget? I’m genuinely curious.