Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

400+ prosecutors sign a letter noting POTUS absent DOJ policy not to indict POTUS

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 400+ prosecutors sign a letter noting POTUS absent DOJ policy not to indict POTUS

    From an op-ed written by one of the signers:

    Source: cnn

    When I was a federal prosecutor, I once indicted and tried a man named Roberto Ortiz for trying to convince his ex-girlfriend to leave town for a few weeks so she could not testify against him at an upcoming trial for illegal firearms possession. Despite Ortiz's efforts, the ex-girlfriend did not leave town, and a trial jury convicted Ortiz on various charges including witness tampering.

    Ortiz's obstructive conduct pales in comparison to President Donald Trump's prolonged campaign to torpedo the investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

    © Copyright Original Source



    https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/06/opini...nig/index.html

    This won't be accepted by the pro-Trump crowd here at TWEB. Nevertheless, the point has been made and needs to be made again.

    This is not just somebodies opinion raging away on the internet (like you or me). These are all current or former federal prosecutors, Republican, Democrat, all walks of life. And THEY are PUBLICLY saying - with the credibility that only a former prosecutor can have on this topic - that IF Donald Trump were not POTUS, there is more than enough in the Mueller report to indict.


    Jim
    My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

    If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

    This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

  • #2
    It is what it is. What's not to accept?
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
      From an op-ed written by one of the signers:

      Source: cnn

      When I was a federal prosecutor, I once indicted and tried a man named Roberto Ortiz for trying to convince his ex-girlfriend to leave town for a few weeks so she could not testify against him at an upcoming trial for illegal firearms possession. Despite Ortiz's efforts, the ex-girlfriend did not leave town, and a trial jury convicted Ortiz on various charges including witness tampering.

      Ortiz's obstructive conduct pales in comparison to President Donald Trump's prolonged campaign to torpedo the investigation by Special Counsel Robert Mueller into Russian interference in the 2016 election.

      © Copyright Original Source



      https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/06/opini...nig/index.html

      This won't be accepted by the pro-Trump crowd here at TWEB. Nevertheless, the point has been made and needs to be made again.

      This is not just somebodies opinion raging away on the internet (like you or me). These are all current or former federal prosecutors, Republican, Democrat, all walks of life. And THEY are PUBLICLY saying - with the credibility that only a former prosecutor can have on this topic - that IF Donald Trump were not POTUS, there is more than enough in the Mueller report to indict.


      Jim
      Too bad for you they aren't the ones making the decision. Now, take a pill so your TrumpOCD will subside for a few minutes...
      That's what
      - She

      Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
      - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

      I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
      - Stephen R. Donaldson

      Comment


      • #4
        And I am sure you could get just as many signers of a letter that says the opposite. Truth isn't a popularity contest.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          This is not just somebodies opinion raging away on the internet...
          Neither are AG Barr, DAG Rosenstein, and the other DOJ officials who had access to the full scope of the investigation and affirmed Mueller's declaration that he could not conclude that the President committed any crimes. And in this case, theirs is the only opinion that matters.
          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
          Than a fool in the eyes of God


          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
            Too bad for you they aren't the ones making the decision. Now, take a pill so your TrumpOCD will subside for a few minutes...
            Yes - of course. 400+ prosecutors noting that what Trump did should have resulted in an indictment means nothing ... because he got away with it!

            The point, of course, is that the lack of indictment is provably NOT an indication of innocence. As we can see, under almost any other circumstance what Trump has done would have earned him a felony indictment.

            The secondary point meaning that he really should then be impeached - given these would be felony indictments - except for the DOJ policy not to indict a sitting president. And that is why impeachment exists. To hold the president accountable should he commit high crimes or misdemeanors.


            Jim
            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Sparko View Post
              And I am sure you could get just as many signers of a letter that says the opposite. Truth isn't a popularity contest.
              Clearly because obstruction is in many ways a subjective crime, one that does not have a clear objective definition, there will be the possibility of disagreement over whether or not a given action in a given context constitutes obstruction.

              What the letter shows, especially since it is not a partisan letter but rather involve input from a large cross section with federal prosecutorial experience is that the claims there is evidence of obstruction are legitimate, have merit, should not be blindly dismissed.

              Jim
              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                Yes - of course. 400+ prosecutors noting that what Trump did should have resulted in an indictment means nothing ... because he got away with it!

                The point, of course, is that the lack of indictment is provably NOT an indication of innocence. As we can see, under almost any other circumstance what Trump has done would have earned him a felony indictment.

                The secondary point meaning that he really should then be impeached - given these would be felony indictments - except for the DOJ policy not to indict a sitting president. And that is why impeachment exists. To hold the president accountable should he commit high crimes or misdemeanors.


                Jim
                You know Jim if you collected all of those tears you're crying, you to have enough liquid to take that trump OCD pill with
                That's what
                - She

                Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                - Stephen R. Donaldson

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  Clearly because obstruction is in many ways a subjective crime, one that does not have a clear objective definition, there will be the possibility of disagreement over whether or not a given action in a given context constitutes obstruction.

                  What the letter shows, especially since it is not a partisan letter but rather involve input from a large cross section with federal prosecutorial experience is that the claims there is evidence of obstruction are legitimate, have merit, should not be blindly dismissed.

                  Jim
                  I agree.

                  But it wasn't blindly dismissed. It was carefully investigated and considered, by Mueller and Barr. Who decided there was no obstruction. How many do-overs do you expect? Until someone agrees with you? That seems to be the democrats thinking, just keep rehashing the same thing over and over till they get the answer they want, or Trump isn't President anymore. I bet if Trump loses the election next year this whole controversy will disappear as fast as Hillary's did. Because the purpose isn't about the truth, it is all about making Trump as ineffective as possible and cause as much disruption and distraction as they can until he is replaced. And you feed right into that mindset.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                    Yes - of course. 400+ prosecutors noting that what Trump did should have resulted in an indictment means nothing ... because he got away with it!
                    Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                      Neither are AG Barr, DAG Rosenstein, and the other DOJ officials who had access to the full scope of the investigation and affirmed Mueller's declaration that he could not conclude that the President committed any crimes. And in this case, theirs is the only opinion that matters.
                      Unfortunately that isn't true. Mueller's declaration has two elements, not one. There is not sufficient evidence to charge with a crime, nor can he be cleared of wrongdoing. One can't separate the two declarations, they both define Mueller's summary of the situation as regards obstruction. In this case, the letter written by these prosecutors sheds light on the real meaning of that second phrase. What it says is that Mueller was mostly likely forced by DOJ policy not to indict, not by the evidence.

                      Of course, if Mueller testifies, we should get greater clarity on how much his decision not to recommend indictment was based on DOJ policy, and how much was based on the evidence itself. This may well be the driving force of Trumps current attempts to prevent Mueller from testifying. He doesn't want the issue clarified.




                      Jim
                      My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                      If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                      This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                        Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.”
                        That is an odd reply CP. I honestly have no idea how you intend to apply it here. The comment you pulled out and replied to refers to a stance by BTC that is fundamentally immoral - essentially 'might makes right'.

                        Jim
                        My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                        If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                        This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          That is an odd reply CP. I honestly have no idea how you intend to apply it here. The comment you pulled out and replied to refers to a stance by BTC that is fundamentally immoral - essentially 'might makes right'.

                          Jim
                          Your war on Trump is an odd war, Jim. But fight on! It has become who you are.
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                            I agree.

                            But it wasn't blindly dismissed. It was carefully investigated and considered, by Mueller and Barr. Who decided there was no obstruction. How many do-overs do you expect? Until someone agrees with you? That seems to be the democrats thinking, just keep rehashing the same thing over and over till they get the answer they want, or Trump isn't President anymore. I bet if Trump loses the election next year this whole controversy will disappear as fast as Hillary's did. Because the purpose isn't about the truth, it is all about making Trump as ineffective as possible and cause as much disruption and distraction as they can until he is replaced. And you feed right into that mindset.
                            'Do over' is Trumps nomenclature attempting to obfuscate the fact that Mueller left us with two seemingly contradictory claims about obstruction. Further, it is obvious to nearly everyone reading the report that there were an large number of actions by Trump that certainly look like they are obstruction. And this letter shows that appearance is not merely an artifact of our general lack of legal expertise in evaluating the evidence. It is real. The fact that the evidence presented in the report in fact defines actions that should have resulted in an indictment as viewed by 400+ federal prosecutors means that Mueller's two pronged comment about obstruction also has real meaning. One can't separate them. That these prosecutors hail from many different backgrounds points to this letter not being a partisan opinion but rather a legal one, and the light it sheds on Muellers comments is that: (1) most likely the 'no crime' comment is a technicality driven by DOJ policy, and (2) the 'does not exonerate' is in fact an appeal to those that do have the power to act - congress.


                            Jim
                            Last edited by oxmixmudd; 05-07-2019, 11:52 AM.
                            My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                            If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                            This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              Your war on Trump is an odd war, Jim. But fight on! It has become who you are.
                              On the contrary, your willingness to characterize real issues as unimportant if they involve Trump (and/or if I am the one to point them out) is the truly odd thing here CP.
                              My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                              If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                              This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                              16 responses
                              142 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post One Bad Pig  
                              Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                              53 responses
                              391 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Mountain Man  
                              Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                              25 responses
                              113 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                              33 responses
                              197 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Roy
                              by Roy
                               
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                              84 responses
                              365 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post JimL
                              by JimL
                               
                              Working...
                              X