/* */

Trump Indictment ( includes NY AG and Fed documents case ) (2 Viewers)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)
    SteveSBrickNJ

    SteveSBrickNJ

    Well-known member
    Joined
    Jan 7, 2022
    Messages
    1,624
    Reaction score
    763
    Age
    62
    Location
    New Jersey
    Offline
    Former President D. Trump has been indicted by a New York Grand Jury. There will be much to talk about on this topic because this is just the first step in a lengthy process.
    Possibly it is worthy of its own thread here rather than posting about Trump's indictment in already existing threads? :unsure:
    *
    This 3/31/23 story might get the ball rolling....
    *
    www.yahoo.com

    Manhattan’s DA wanted a Friday Trump arrest. Trump’s team said no.

    Secret Service needed more time to prepare, according to the ex-president’s legal team.
    www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
     
    Sendai said:
    Yes, If the special counsel was a properly appointed United States Attorney, i.e. a current District Attorney.
    Click to expand...

    Something you continue to say even though there is ZERO law you can point to that says that, and dozens of court rulings saying the exact opposite.

    Sendai said:
    The answer is obvious and the question lacks relevance.
    Click to expand...
    Except that it is 100% relevant, and it points out the extreme absurdity of saying that a special counsel needs to be appointed by the president.

    So, by your rationale, since Donald Trump's campaign was being investigated for potential federal crimes, Donald Trump would be the one to appoint someone to investigate him? You do see how ridiculous that sounds, right?

    And, then, after Trump appointed that individual, it's up to the senate to confirm them? Mitch McConnell left a Supreme Court seat empty for 9 months so that his candidate would have the opportunity to fill that seat, but we are to believe that McConnell would have brought this special counsel in for a confirmation hearing?
     
    Trump violated the Espionage Act by taking, keeping and hiding national security documents that belong only to the US government and obstructed justice to try to hide and perpetuate his crimes. Trump betrayed the trust of we the people of the United States and he put our national security at risk because he's a selfish, thuggish criminal.
    Sendai said:
    Again , nothing is stopping this case from being re-filed.
    Click to expand...
    Again and again, the DOJ doesn't have to re-file, because they will win the appeal and that will get the trial back on track sooner than re-filing will. Why do you so desperately want the DOJ to re-file? The answer is, because that will create a longer delay than waiting to win the appeal. You're transparent, son.

    Sendai said:
    The appeal of a foundational element of the constitution is red meat for the court’s conservatives.
    Click to expand...
    The Heritage Foundation justices ain't swallowing no more of Trump's red meat, cause he done gone full cray cray, you never go full cray cray. The Heritage Foundation justices are gonna run away from Trump like the last shred of credibility they have left depends on it. They will not hear an appeal from Trump.
     
    Sendai said:
    Get Congress to do its job and legislate the Special Counsel
    Click to expand...
    They already did, you just keep falsely saying they haven't. Nothing but untruths and deceptions from you to support and defend Trump who is nothing but crazy and complete untruths. We see you, bro.
     
    Sendai said:
    Get Congress to do its job and legislate the Special Counsel as they did with Independent Counsel Act and it’s solved. Or have an Assistant United States Attorney bring the case.

    Plus he’s the former president, can’t really fire anyone in government.
    Click to expand...

    He tried to have Rober Mueller fired and realized he did not have that authority. You and Aileen Cannon are the only two people in the world who believe this crap, and you are both equally qualified to make that call.

    "Trump’s call from Camp David was the first of two in which McGahn, under oath, said Trump directed him to seek the removal of Mueller. (The report says phone records show a 23-minute call between the two men on the afternoon of June 17, but not a second call. McGahn is certain he got two calls from Trump on this issue, so the first one may have been on June 14.)

    “On the first call, McGahn recalled that the President said something like, ‘You gotta do this. You gotta call Rod,’ ” the report said, citing testimony under oath. “McGahn said he told the President that he would see what he could do. McGahn was perturbed by the call and did not intend to act on the request.”

    The report added: “McGahn considered the President's request to be an inflection point and he wanted to hit the brakes.”

    On the second call, Trump was more direct, “saying something like, ‘Call Rod, tell Rod that Mueller has conflicts and can’t be the Special Counsel.’ McGahn recalled the President telling him ‘Mueller has to go’ and ‘Call me back when you do it.’ ” The report said that “McGahn understood the President to be saying that the Special Counsel had to be removed by Rosenstein.”

    (Note: In these conversations, Trump appears to understand that, contrary to his tweet, he could not directly fire Mueller and that the step had to be taken by Rosenstein.)"

     
    cuddlemonkey said:
    He tried to have Rober Mueller fired and realized he did not have that authority. You and Aileen Cannon are the only two people in the world who believe this crap, and you are both equally qualified to make that call.

    "Trump’s call from Camp David was the first of two in which McGahn, under oath, said Trump directed him to seek the removal of Mueller. (The report says phone records show a 23-minute call between the two men on the afternoon of June 17, but not a second call. McGahn is certain he got two calls from Trump on this issue, so the first one may have been on June 14.)

    “On the first call, McGahn recalled that the President said something like, ‘You gotta do this. You gotta call Rod,’ ” the report said, citing testimony under oath. “McGahn said he told the President that he would see what he could do. McGahn was perturbed by the call and did not intend to act on the request.”

    The report added: “McGahn considered the President's request to be an inflection point and he wanted to hit the brakes.”

    On the second call, Trump was more direct, “saying something like, ‘Call Rod, tell Rod that Mueller has conflicts and can’t be the Special Counsel.’ McGahn recalled the President telling him ‘Mueller has to go’ and ‘Call me back when you do it.’ ” The report said that “McGahn understood the President to be saying that the Special Counsel had to be removed by Rosenstein.”

    (Note: In these conversations, Trump appears to understand that, contrary to his tweet, he could not directly fire Mueller and that the step had to be taken by Rosenstein.)"

    Click to expand...
    All I’m saying is the DOJ lacks the legal authority to appoint someone as a special counsel who has not been presidentially appointed and senate approved.
     
    Sendai said:
    All I’m saying is the DOJ lacks the legal authority to appoint someone as a special counsel who has not been presidentially appointed and senate approved.
    Click to expand...

    And all I am saying is that you ignore all evidence to the contrary and lack the common sense to see how ridiculous your interpretation is.
     
    Sendai said:
    All I’m saying is the DOJ lacks the legal authority to appoint someone as a special counsel who has not been presidentially appointed and senate approved.
    Click to expand...
    Hang on. You've said that the law regarding delegation of authority would apply to someone hired as an assistant US Attorney.

    You've also stated that the AG has the authority to hire someone, and explicitly said Smith could be hired as such:

    Sendai said:
    And the AG has the authority, through legislation, to hire assistant U.S. Attorneys. So hire Smith as an Assistant to work the case.
    Click to expand...

    Hence, according to you, the AG can hire someone and delegate to them the authority necessary to act as a special counsel, without presidential and senate approval.
     
    RobF said:
    Hang on. You've said that the law regarding delegation of authority would apply to someone hired as an assistant US Attorney.

    You've also stated that the AG has the authority to hire someone, and explicitly said Smith could be hired as such:



    Hence, according to you, the AG can hire someone and delegate to them the authority necessary to act as a special counsel, without presidential and senate approval.
    Click to expand...
    No. He’d be an assistant assigned to a properly designated Special Counsel.
     
    RobF said:
    Hang on. You've said that the law regarding delegation of authority would apply to someone hired as an assistant US Attorney.

    You've also stated that the AG has the authority to hire someone, and explicitly said Smith could be hired as such:



    Hence, according to you, the AG can hire someone and delegate to them the authority necessary to act as a special counsel, without presidential and senate approval.
    Click to expand...
    Keep a bullshitter talking and they will eventually expose their bullshirt.
     
    Sendai said:
    All I’m saying is the DOJ lacks the legal authority to appoint someone as a special counsel who has not been presidentially appointed and senate approved.
    Click to expand...
    You keep saying that the president has to appoint a Special Counsel, and a Special Counsel has to be approved by the senate, right?

    Can you explain to us, then, what you think the difference between a US Attorney and a Special Counsel are?
     
    Sendai said:
    Eh, grew wearing ng of typing United States Attorney. And they are the attorneys of their District.
    Click to expand...

    That's fair except "District Attorney" with capitals means something else and that's not what you're referring to. I know you know that but I do think it's important - if you're going to get into the wonky mechanics of distinguishing among the types and qualifications of federal law enforcement officials, you should use the correct terminology.
     

    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