100% and then Trump can pardon him if need be
Posted on 10/21/2017 9:02:40 AM PDT by yoe
Oct. 19, 2017 - 6:13 - Victoria Toensing wants DOJ to release client from non-disclosure agreement so he can testify on Obama-era Russian nuclear deal.
Video
(Excerpt) Read more at video.foxnews.com ...
100% and then Trump can pardon him if need be
That’s bullcrap and that’s a mere theory has been posted a few times as “proof”.
Dershowitz is no friend of Trump and utterly destroyed this. Swing and a miss. There is nothing in the law or constitution that the DOJ is independent of the control of the president. What you posted is a progressive fantasy.
Even Comey at his own hearing admitted that Trump has that power.
He can start, stop, or direct any investigation. He can fire Mueller or anyone at the DOJ.
And the ramblings of a judge are meaningless. I notice you pointed to nothing in the law or constitution that limits the power of the president over the DOJ.
It doesn’t exist.
So, Sessions is defying Trump’s orders here? And the evidence of this is ????????
No matter what that judge said, he was in the sophistry zone.
The president has the power to shut down the entire investigation, fire the special counsel, (notice the word independent wasn’t used), Fire the FBI director, and pardon the person being investigated. And yet, moronic sophists in the legal field pretend he can “obstruct” these same people. Laughable.
Its an ongoing fiction designed to try to make the DOJ independent of their constitutional supervisor, the President. But it has zero basis in law or constitution. They don’t like that they are merely a fully subordinate executive agency, but that is what they are.
For a recent review, ask Comey how “independent” he was. He advanced your theory and got bit@h slapped.
Rip is definitely a captive (willing, apparently) of the DoJ bureaucracy as developed most recently by H0lder and Cankles Lynch.
Appointing and supporting Deep Stater RosenKrantz keeps change at bay.
>
Imagine Trump fires Sessions and nominates someone. Senate let’s him know that they refuse to confirm anyone he nominates. So his only logical recourse is to just work harder.... therefore, he decides the he will serve the country as acting AG and President, until the Senate decides to confirm a nominee.
>
I’d love to see him fire on down-the-line ‘til he finds one he can count on\trust...’acting’ head.
Then, sic ‘em on D.C. and watch the fun
Trump has taught me how powerless people are who make threats like not confirming a replacement. they rely on a line not being crossed and usually have not thought through the ramifications of there threat. my guess is that if trump were to fire sessions that congress would blink first especially if Trump then goes on to remove other troubled individuals that through seniority would take his place as acting director.
For the record, no, I do not believe you know more about the limitations of the POTUS when it comes to ordering the AG around than does former AG Mukasey. I do believe that YOU are convinced that between you and Mukasey, you know more.
Trump has asked Sessions repeatedly why Hillary isn’t being investigated. How, per your singular insight into the law, can Trump ***force*** Sessions to open that investigation?
See post 28.
Thanks for proving my point. Trump could not order Comey around; all he could do was fire him. Which is EXACTLY what I had already posted.
That would work.
Good point.
Toensing will get to it I bet.
The ship is turning still, even with the violent currents. I’m looking forward to experiencing the dam breaking. I suspect one Tuesday night in November of next year it’ll bust.
Lol just hire a Justice Czar.
Damned Good Point. There’s probably some bogus NATSEC override( though.
She called it unconstitutional and also pointed out that violating an NDA is a civil, not a criminal, matter.
>>I’d be fine with having Jeff Sessions arrested for aiding and abetting treason at this point.
**********************************************************
Yes, but who (or what entity) would be the one to actually do it?
Keep in mind that the whole purpose of a special counsel isn’t to operate independently to prevent meddling by the President or AG for political purposes, but to avoid compromising the integrity of an investigation. Having the president direct an investigation — even if he’s well within his authority to do so — is a sure-fire way to let a potential criminal defendant skate.
I don’t want this person testifying to congress, why, for what purpose?
Fast & Furious : people died.... Investigated by congress
IRS scandal : laws broken ... Investigated by congress
Benghazi : Laws broken, people died... Investigated by congress
I want a secret Grand Jury impaneled , and charges brought forward for prosecution. What is testifying to congress going to accomplish? Its not going to accomplish anything, as usual.
Congress can also pass a law protecting the whistleblower from prosecution or retaliation, and provide for punishing anyone personally who attempts to do so. That can be done by simple majority vote should Congress choose to make it happen.
True, but these committees have no consequences to issue, except for being allowed to make referrals to the sleepy Just Us Department.
Grassley at least keeps shining the light on those who thought they had skated.
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.