Trump’s DOJ ready to hit the war path (4 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
    Dragon said:
    1739556914360.png
    Click to expand...

    I hear Susan Collins is concerned about this.
     
    Dragon said:
    1739556914360.png
    Click to expand...
    Perhaps Rep Raskin could have used former AUSA Scottin's input in drafting that letter! The closing should have read:

    "Under your guidance, the United States Department of Justice has been caught engaging in an illegal deal with Mayor Adams and now attempting to cover it up. You are betraying the very Office that you swore to uphold and by doing so, you are betraying the public's trust in the DoJ. This outrageous sabotage of justice in the interest of naked political corruption will not be tolerated by Congress."
    :9:
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    That "hero" needs to be publicly identified so that their "bravery" may be lauded by the masses!
    Click to expand...

    It will be on the filing - but I personally dont think it’s especially fair to hold it against a career staff attorney for filing it, especially when the threat was to fire them all.

    The judge can still refuse to grant it.
     
    superchuck500 said:
    It will be on the filing - but I personally dont think it’s especially fair to hold it against a career staff attorney for filing it, especially when the threat was to fire them all.
    Click to expand...
    Fair enough. I would withhold my judgment of their actions until they present their argument before the judge. I don't know how an ethical lawyer can ask for a dismissal and maintain their integrity.
    superchuck500 said:
    The judge can still refuse to grant it.
    Click to expand...
    Indeed. The judge could also ruin that lawyers' ability to practice law!
     
    Last edited:
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    Fair enough. I would withhold my judgment of their actions until they present their argument before the judge. I don't know how an ethical lawyer can ask for a dismissal and maintain their integrity.

    Indeed. The judge could also ruin that lawyers' ability to practice law!
    Click to expand...

    As it turns out, none of them actually signed it - Bove had to do it himself.



    1739578566671.png
     
    superchuck500 said:
    From my point of view, I think this is a bit of an oversell to say it is unethical and potentially ruinous for a staff attorney at DOJ to move to dismiss charges based on a settlement reached by the Attorney General. An attorney has a number of key ethical obligations including honesty/candor and diligent representation of the client within the bounds of the law. It gets tricky for prosecutors because their client is the public and the public interest - so even where the chief prosecutor (i.e. the Attorney General or even the President) makes a determination of that interest, if the line attorney may decide that he or she believes that determination is not in the public interest, the obligation is to resign.

    But provided that the determination is lawful, I don't think the line attorney has to resign - and provided that the course of action is lawful, the attorney is not acting unethically or unprofessionally to follow it. Consider that prosecutors often make plea or even immunity deals with some pretty bad criminals in order to get a conviction of another bad criminal. There, a determination of interest has been made and prosecutorial discretion has a pretty broad swath.

    Here, the AG has purportedly made a determination that Adams's assistance with deportation is more valuable to the federal interest than his conviction for a number of white-collar crimes. Clearly its a political quid pro quo and those attorneys are on strong ethical grounds to refuse to participate. But I don't think those that remain are doing so unethically - at least not on these facts.
    Click to expand...
    Perhaps you would've been a better arbiter of their intentions than Bondi & Bove! Had they attempted to frame their reasoning in the manner you just did, then perhaps the backlash wouldn't have been soo intense. Their approach was so sloppy that it reeked of corruption.

    Thanks for that...I'm not paying you though! :hihi:
     
    DJ1BigTymer said:
    Perhaps you would've been a better arbiter of their intentions than Bondi & Bove! Had they attempted to frame their reasoning in the manner you just did, then perhaps the backlash wouldn't have been soo intense. Their approach was so sloppy that it reeked of corruption.

    Thanks for that...I'm not paying you though! :hihi:
    Click to expand...

    lol - I tried to delete it but you had already responded, I realize that it’s Friday night and i shouldn’t be in work mode anymore typing all that. /week

    😁
     
    What a contrast - the GOP response to Nixon’s corruption vs the GOP response today.

    They are all shameful cowards that they voted in these Cabinet picks to begin with and that they refuse to speak up about what Trump is doing.
     
    superchuck500 said:
    As it turns out, none of them actually signed it - Bove had to do it himself.



    1739578566671.png
    Click to expand...

    Today's hearing:

    Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, who sat alone at the prosecution table, argued the case should be dismissed without prejudice, meaning it could be revived, because of “appearances of impropriety and risks of interference with the 2025 elections in New York City” and because continuing the case would “interfere with the defendant’s ability to govern in New York City” and threaten President Donald Trump’s immigration policies.

    “Frankly, I think the fact that Mayor Adams is sitting to my left right now is part of the problem. He’s not able to be out running the city and campaigning, so I think that this motion is actual interference,” Bove said in court on Wednesday.
    www.cnn.com

    Eric Adams case: Judge doesn’t immediately rule on DOJ’s push to drop corruption charges against NYC mayor after hearing | CNN Politics

    Wednesday’s much anticipated hearing on the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams has ended without an immediate ruling from Judge Dale Ho.
    www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

    It is the US argument that any elected official should not be prosecuted for their crimes because any prosecution would impede their ability to govern. He also argues that there is no quid pro quo at the same time he cites that Adams' prosecution would threaten FOTUS' immigration agenda. :freak7:
     
    superchuck500 said:
    Trump's new US Attorney for DC is sending letters to members of Congress notifying them of investigation into their public comments. He's clearly unfamiliar with the First Amendment or the Speech & Debate clause.

    Click to expand...


    So no freedom of speech... That is pure Mafia methods.
     
    So they can open investigations anyway, correct? Costing the subjects a whole lot of time and money?

    There isn’t any way to stop a crusade by the DOJ is there?

    How does this not have the effect of stifling oppositional speech?
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Back
    Top Bottom