General Trump Administration F**kery Thread

[Blackfyre]

@mkraju
Nadler and Judiciary Dems request inspector general probe of Barr “into a pattern of conduct that includes improper political interference, ignoring standards for recusal, and abrogating Attorney General guidelines, among other improper considerations.” https://judiciary.house.gov/uploade...itical_interference.pdf?utm_campaign=2735-519 …
14:55 - 8 May 2020

 

[Regular_P]

Kamala was entirely exasperated with the hand on the bible nonsense Barr was spinning. Love Kamala Harris as politician. She's exactly what I want to see in office.

For the record, I don't think he's corrupt, but he's something of a zealot and is bent on his own agenda. I think he really believes the FBI gravely overreached with the case, (which they probably did in some aspects) he's also a devout social conservative, and sees the AG office as a means of carrying it out. Siding with churches against states, in the middle of the pandemic? That is nowhere near good use of DOJ prosecutors. This is why the position should be entirely non political, and strictly about law enforcement. Only career law enforcement should even be considered.

Not relics like Sessions, or religious devotees like Barr.

You must be out of your fukking mind.

 

[re'up]

I think we are defining corruption differently. Barr isn't interested in money or fame, he just wants power to carry out an idealogical agenda. It's been a problem with the AG position for a long time. Look at Alberto Gonzales during the Bush years. I truly think he believes the FBI overreached in that case.

 

[Pressure]

I think we are defining corruption differently. Barr isn't interested in money or fame, he just wants power to carry out an idealogical agenda. It's been a problem with the AG position for a long time. Look at Alberto Gonzales during the Bush years. I truly think he believes the FBI overreached in that case.

He's corrupt.

 

[Hood Critic]

I think we are defining corruption differently. Barr isn't interested in money or fame, he just wants power to carry out an idealogical agenda. It's been a problem with the AG position for a long time. Look at Alberto Gonzales during the Bush years. I truly think he believes the FBI overreached in that case.

That's the very definition of corruption. It does not have to involve anything monetary.

 

[re'up]

That's the very definition of corruption. It does not have to involve anything monetary.

Yeah, that was clumsy way to phrase it, on my part. I think it's a problem with the AG being a political appointee position. Again, look at what Gonzales did under Bush, I don't even know what Clinton's AG did in the 90's. It's long been a problem. But, how do we define corruption here? It certainly wouldn't meet a legal standard, not anymore under the Supreme Court's recent rulings.

And, the law is able to be interpreted, that's what our entire system is based upon, so when you have a Barr (not a career law enforcement official) you get this kind of interpretation. They didn't just drop the case, they made a motion, in court, in a brief, that the charges lacked merit due to a complicated issue involving "materiallity" of the "lies" told by Flynn. Barr's essentially just a lawyer, interpreting the law as he sees fit, to back mostly his ideological agenda. I really don't think he is against the rule of law, this is just his interpretation.

 

[88m3]

@re'up can you think of any cases where someone has pled guilty and never been sentenced and then the charges were dropped?

I can't remember having read anything similar before after a guilty plea

 

[re'up]

@re'up can you think of any cases where someone has pled guilty and never been sentenced and then the charges were dropped?

I can't remember having read anything similar before after a guilty plea

I read the Times article that seemed to say that it was without precedent, quoting legal scholars and former AUSA's. I suspect there are some, that just got so mired in bullshyt and legal red tape where similar things happen. This is partly defense attorney strategy, to push the case back as far as possible, to wait for a sea change in leadership at the DOJ or US Attorney's Office, that may be less interested or more sympathetic with the case. Same with state court cases. In the Flynn case, what was going to happen? They secured two guilty pleas, and than the prosectors including Brandon Grack, asked for probation. He probably would have gotten it. The whole thing was a disaster, when he wasn't sentenced after his first guilty plea. His counsel really played the game well. Total scumbag, Flynn, but that's a "master class" in legal maneuvering.

Look at AG Michael Mukasey and Alberto Gonzales, they did similar things.

 

[Blackfyre]

 

[Blackfyre]

Exclusive: Obama says in private call that 'rule of law is at risk' in Michael Flynn case

“The news over the last 24 hours I think has been somewhat downplayed — about the Justice Department dropping charges against Michael Flynn,” Obama said in a web talk with members of the Obama Alumni Association.

“And the fact that there is no precedent that anybody can find for someone who has been charged with perjury just getting off scot-free. That’s the kind of stuff where you begin to get worried that basic — not just institutional norms — but our basic understanding of rule of law is at risk. And when you start moving in those directions, it can accelerate pretty quickly as we’ve seen in other places.”

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

ETHER

 

[Formerly Black Trash]

I think we are defining corruption differently. Barr isn't interested in money or fame, he just wants power to carry out an idealogical agenda. It's been a problem with the AG position for a long time. Look at Alberto Gonzales during the Bush years. I truly think he believes the FBI overreached in that case.

How about saying things that are blatantly not true like during the Muellwr investigation ​

 

[Blackfyre]

 

[Blackfyre]

 

[Blackfyre]