So, McCabe’s claim that Trump pressured the DOJ to indict McCabe does not make sense to me.
Posted on 09/12/2019 7:29:30 PM PDT by KTM rider
McCabe has indicated that, if charged, he would claim the Justice Department was under pressure from the White House. Federal prosecutors in Washington have recommended that criminal charges be filed against Andrew McCabe, the FBI’s former deputy director, and the Justice Department has rejected a last-ditch appeal by McCabe’s lawyers, according to a report on Thursday by Fox News. This clears the way for what appears to be McCabe’s imminent indictment.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Justice alludes all that make their living in the swamp. The corruption is rampant in DC
Seditious conspiracy? I’m completely on board.
What they did does not meet the definition of treason, and if they were to be indicted for that they would be acquitted if the charges were not dismissed out of hand by the first court they saw.
The sticky part of that is that criminal sedition has violence (either using or advocating) as the means to overthrow.
I like using the word sedition though, because it fits. The risk of disappointment is that most people take "sedition" to mean "criminal sedition."
And that charge is not going to be filed.
“...under pressure from the White House.” Anyone who has been even half-way following the Russia Collusion Hoax knows that all paths lead back to Obama and Hillary.
Not sure I understand your Comment.
McCabe was fired by Trump.
Trump's DOJ investigated McCabe and apparently wants to indict McCabe.
However, McCabe’s perjury involves the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton - not the investigation of Donald Trump.
So, McCabe’s claim that Trump pressured the DOJ to indict McCabe does not make sense to me.
The charge will be ‘making false statements’ per the IG report. Fine and max 5 years, but he’ll get token punishment, if even found guilty.
Within that scheme was misleading a FISA court (probably no crime), lying to the public (certainly no crime), leaking to the press (mostly no crime), abuse of legal process (appointment of Mueller - unethical but not a crime), and a few other things not as serious as undermining the political will of the public on a presidential election.
On the penalty for false statements, of course McCabe will get "token punishment," if he's indicted at all. Prosecution will be messy and very public.
The date of his indictment is the 12th of never.
Just wait. There will be tons of legal crap thrown in front of this to hold it off until after the election. If a dem gets voted in it will ALL go away just like nothing ever happened.
Moreover, according to the IG, McCabe at one point dressed down the FBI’s chiefs in New York and Washington, as if their field offices were responsible for the leak. That is, he knew that he himself was the culprit, yet he tried to shift suspicion and blame to innocent agents. If proved, that is the kind of fact that would not endear McCabe to a jury. It would also make it hard for him to portray himself as a fundamentally honest guy who would never deceive other FBI agents.
It doesn't matter who you are this is the kind of stuff that any jury will vote guilty for. CNN really wants to defend that? LOL
The Fox report indicates that Liu signaled to McCabe’s lawyers that she was persuaded to file charges. McCabe’s lawyers then appealed that decision to Jeffrey Rosen, the deputy attorney general (DAG).
How many criminals get the benefit of an appeal before charges are even filed?
Different rules for different “statuses”.
.......................
I want to see doj rules on such procedure..
5 years per count what is at issue,1, 3 or four counts?
doj on counts
https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-919-multiplicity-duplicity-single-document-policy
“A defendant violates 18 U.S.C. § 1001 each time a false statement is made. If a document contains numerous false statements, the government need only prove one of the statements was false to obtain conviction. Warszower v. United States, 312 U.S. 342 (1941); United States v. UCO Oil Company, 546 F.2d 833, 838 (9th Cir. 1976), cert. denied, 430 U.S. 966 (1977); United States v. Edmondson, 410 F.2d 670, 673 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 966 (1969). If the false statements are contained in one document, however, it is preferable to indict only one count for the entire document. This preferred course of action is in response to expressed judicial displeasure on multi-count indictments based on one document. United States v. Fisher, 231 F.2d 99, 103 (9th Cir. 1956). Further, little is to be gained by multi-count charges in such cases, because in most cases the United States Sentencing Guidelines will embrace and punish all relevant conduct. This limitation does not apply to false testimonial statements or perjury before a grand jury but only in those cases in which the false statements are contained in one document. If the same or different false statements appear in more than one document, multiple counts are warranted. Further, separate but similar false applications are punishable as separate offenses.”
.............
also 4 fisa apps signed by different people, how will that work did comey sign all 4?
FISA is irrelevant to Jessie Liu’s action. This is just concerning leaking to the press in 2016, from the IG report.
A further IG report is coming on FISA.
The beginning of the Fall of the Leftist/Dem House of Cards?
Hope so.
So, McCabe’s claim that Trump pressured the DOJ to indict McCabe does not make sense to me.
when fisa is up to bat that is another thing they will look at, fraud on the court, perjury, defrauding the government violation of civil rights under color of law etc. prosecutors will look at the evidence and making charging decisions.
Any trial needs to be moved out of Washington DC.
Say what? He robbed a bank while awaiting trial on a murder charge?
You are clueless my friend.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.