Posted on 04/01/2018 6:53:27 PM PDT by Hojczyk
Moreover, Sessions was, in fact, using Justice Department lawyers with prosecutorial power in connections with potential FISA and related abuses. Since November, John Huber, the U.S. Attorney for Utah, has been on the case. Trump apparently didn’t know this, but he should have. Sometimes it’s better to talk to the Attorney General than mindlessly to blast him on Twitter.
Huber was appointed by President Obama, but his name was submitted by Senators Hatch and Lee of Utah. Thus, his selection by Sessions seems like a shrewd move. As Obama’s nominee it will be difficult for critics plausibly to paint him as anti-Democrat. But as the favorite of Hatch and Lee, Republicans should be confident that he’s not in the Democrats’ pocket. Moreover, because Huber works out of Utah, it’s unlikely that he’s connected in any way with D.C. insiders such as James Comey and Andrew McCabe.
What about the decision to use a U.S. attorney rather than appoint a special counsel? This decision also seems sound, and not just because I don’t like special counsels. The combination of the IG and the USA should be able to accomplish as much as a special counsel would — and accomplish it faster and with less fanfare.
The absence of fanfare is an advantage because it makes it more difficult for Democrats and their media partners to push the idea that anyone is being persecuted. A Justice Department investigation headed by two Obama appointees is harder to shoot at than a special counsel. And, of course, nothing prevents Sessions from appointing a special counsel if changed circumstances militate in favor of doing so.
In sum, Sessions has handled this matter well, Trump’s foolish tweets notwithstanding.
BS
Mirengoff is an anti-Trumper.
-
There’s just no reason to avoid a Special Counsel.
A lot of sites trying to justify this convoluted mix and inferring imaginary motives that don’t explain why they refuse a Special Counsel.
They want absolute control. Protect the JusticeFBI, that’s priority one.
‘
You may be right and I have leaned towards another SC. However, to play devils advocate - you put all your marbles in one basket with a SC who has wide latitude to act or not act as he/she sees fit. Who would be the SC? Would another SC not appear as partisan (through his own fault) as the one we currently have?
At the outset, it appears having two “Obama appointees: (yes, the US Atty is usually pushed by the states senators) makes them appear far less partisan. There are still good men and women in DOJ who want to do the right thing. Sadly, within the swamp of DC it appears there was a select group who tainted the process with politics.
At this point, all we can do is wait and see and hope justice is served. A small part of me respects that a good investigation is not one that suffers continuous leaks to the media. It is done quietly and competently with little fanfare. That is my hope and I wonder if we are not perhaps too used to the leaking partisan mess that our nations capital has become that the absence of such a public mess convinces us that nothing is being done.
It sure seems like that, doesn't it?
The obvious double standard is absolutely breathtaking, and the Ministry of Propaganda (a.k.a. the "Mainstream Media") simply pretends it doesn't exist, with all participants expecting the viewing audience to dutifully acquiesce to the fake reality they have declared.
We all know that the authoritarian Socialist/Marxist/anti-American/whatever-the-fu(k-you-want-to-call-it bias has always been there in the Media. But what has happened since Donald Trump arrived on the political scene has transformed the U.S. mainstream media into something far worse than the Nazis or Soviets could have ever dreamed of.
In those old collectivist authoritarian regimes that had no formal Freedom of the Press, the proletariat expected their news to be sodden with heavy-handed propaganda—which tended to dilute its effect somewhat. In America, the opposite is true—which makes it magnitudes more effective.
As Noam Chomsky (Lefty loon) has accurately observed, spreading Establishment propaganda under the auspices of a free press makes it far more effective, as long as enough of the people swallow it—and apparently they do.
Ronald Reagan said: "Don't be afraid to see what you see."
Therefore, due to these clearly observable facts, if the President is unable to drain the Swamp—and therefore the Swamp "drains" the President and succeeds in its coup attempt—it is my sober-minded opinion that we will have to engage in a formal, armed revolution—all other options having been tried.
We the People are currently facing a choice between to fundamentally incompatible—and mutually exclusive—worldviews: 1) the rule of law under the Constitutional Republic that was established over 240 years ago, and 2) a totalitarian system run by the Democrat Party, Uniparty Swamp, Mainstream Media, Deep State, and Activist Federal Judiciary (and the "democratic" mob, whenever it's convenient)—which tramples Constitutional Rights at will.
I don't really even know what to call the Globalist, anti-American Establishment which composes worldview #2— I only know that it's completely incompatible with a limited Republic government of the People, by the People, and for the People.
If these brazen, lawless criminals ever take power again—by whatever means—it's all over. Expect full disarmament of the People, "re-education" camps for those who resist, total control of the children by the state (we're already almost there with that one), and every other totalitarian abomination you can imagine.
That's where we are. The lawlessness and total lack of accountability of the Swamp and Deep State has never been this profound and apparent. This administration is our last chance for a peaceful restoration of the Republic, IMHO...
-
Many here were convinced Comey was going to deal a blow to Hillary and all her co-conspirators.
I submit that just like Lying to the FBI is a crime and their primary way to flip witnesses, none of that was used with Hillary and her co-conspirators. In a similar vein, why did this same Justice Dept decide a Special Prosecutor was the answer for a Trump rumor?
The difference in behavior is because Sessions found that the issue wasn’t going away and doing nothing was creating a stream of requests to Investigate. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. The JusticeFBI has been so very good to Hillary and her co-conspirators. Friendly little chats, and, hey, when you get around to it, delete that Classified data, will ya?
Sessions first answer was the IG. When some stout Republicans mentioned the obvious, the IG can’t prosecute, Sessions laughed up his sleeve (these people really think we would prosecute, hehe). Enter the Utah arrangement. He’s asking career Obama Appointees, do you think this is something that people like you can’t handle?
How does Huber Investigate Lorreta Lynch, his former boss that signed every award on his office wall?
Rosenstein went to Paul Ryan’s office asking Ryan to have Devin Nunes stand down, and the reputation of the JusticeFBI was cited.
Who is going to believe that Rosenstein communicated to Huber that it was his decision, or that he didn’t convey his opinion on the matter to his subordinate?
.
Paul Mirengoff cock-in-mouth, It’s appropriate for Jeff Sessions to let his President know what he’s up to versus leaving him guessing.
Yep. I have a feeling Trump does not really want to go after Hillary but get a world leader resume for his life’s accomplishment. As a billionaire it was the only thing a man could dream of ever having. Btching about Session is just a cover
Excellent graphic. If a Democrat selected an Obama-appointee to ‘investigate,’ his own, provably corrupt boss, the Sessions-cheerleaders would suddenly spot the problem. When Rosenstein’s Deputy AG does the exact same thing, they think it’s a stroke of stealthy genius.
Who knew they made Kool-aid that strong?
Doesn't matter what Mueller can pull out of a DC grand jury (DC went for Hillary 90.9%; DC jurors shouldn't matter). The President can laugh a Mueller indictment off or pardon himself or both.
The only grand jury that matters is the House. And the only jury that matters is the Senate.
The President is safe as long as his base turns out in November! And, probably, even if they wuss out!
‘The President can laugh a Mueller indictment off or pardon himself or both.’
It’s as if you never heard of Richard Nixon.
Name one senator that supports Trump. Then link to that senator’s comments when Trump raised the possibility of firing Sessions.
I’ll wait.
The senators close ranks against Trump at the first hint of action—even the so-called conservatives.
Sen. [Mike] Lee: Lindsey Graham Is Right That ‘There Would Be Hell to Pay’ If Trump Fires Mueller
Tricky Dick was a RINO's RINO. I mean price controls ... sheesh!
And Tricky fled Washington before they could impeach him!
Name one senator that supports Trump.
The task to impeach is to find 67 senators to vote to remove.
The last time it was tried (against an obviously guilty Democrat president), it failed miserably despite incontrovertible evidence.
” Since November, John Huber, the U.S. Attorney for Utah, has been on the case.”?
6 months and No indictments?
Howdy freaking Doodie could have indicted a whole passel in the same amount of time.
Is the cover up continuing? You betcha.
6 months and No indictments?
It's called the "Department of Justice"—not the "Department of Impatient FReepers Seeking Instant Gratification".
These things take time—especially considering the fact that the ostensible targets are entitled elites who are being protected at every opportunity by the denizens of the corrupt Swamp itself. Whoever is trying to nail such crooks must be absolutely meticulous from start to finish, top to bottom. After all, the ultimate goal is to secure convictions—not mere indictments.
So these cases will be made thoroughly, at their own methodical pace—and conforming the time frame to the patently unrealistic expectations of armchair quarterbacks simply isn't a priority.
“More Gov’t employees should have resigned rather than follow 0bama.”
I couldn’t disagree more.
They needed to stay in the position to try and stem the tide, at least to some extent. Also, it’s always possible a president will only be in office one term so it’s best they stay and hope to undo the damage.
Case in point: Look at all the damage the Obama holdovers have done.
Sick.
“Can any Sessions fan here explain how having him (Huber) decide Obama admin abuses is NOT a conflict of interest?”
Because Huber was re-appointed by Trump and endorsed by Utah’s two Republican senators.
BINGO!!
“Nothing in your response contradicts what I said. Sessions in the letter doesn’t assign a prosecution task.
I actually read the letter. Did you?”
A US Attorney is appointed to review evidence and determine if prosecution is warranted. That is how the Justice Department operates. This is a process similar to that of a local District Attorney’s office, wherein an ADA reviews the investigative material gathered by police, then determines whether there is enough evidence to proceed.
Perfectly normal procedure.
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.