Replies to post #329722 on Tornado Alley (PROG)

[arizona1]

Justice will prevail.

So what do you think? If trump killed someone in broad daylight on 5th Ave, should he be arrested?

Trump’s lawyers: Pres can’t be investigated, even if he shoots someone

t was one of the more memorable lines of the 2016 presidential campaign. In January 2016, Donald Trump, marveling at the loyalty of his followers, boasted, “I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, okay, and I wouldn’t lose any voters, okay? It’s, like, incredible.”

Nearly four years later, the Republican’s lawyers have suggested a similar tack while fighting to keep Trump’s tax returns hidden. The president’s legal team, hired specifically to shield his secret financial documents, have effectively argued that Trump could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, there would be no way to hold him accountable so long as the president is in office.

This morning, Team Trump didn’t just hint at this argument; as NBC News’ Pete Williams reported, the president’s lawyers were quite explicit on this point during court proceedings.

A panel of three federal appeals court judges appeared to be unreceptive Wednesday to President Donald Trump’s claim that local prosecutors cannot get his financial records as long as he’s in office — and heard an extreme hypothetical from the president’s lawyers making the case.

The long-standing view of the Justice Department is that a president cannot be indicted while in office. William Consovoy, Trump’s lawyer, told the Second Circuit Court of Appeals that the immunity extends to the entire criminal justice process, including grand jury subpoenas for documents.

Judge Denny Chin on the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals specifically asked William Consovoy, Trump’s lawyer about the “Fifth Avenue” argument.

“I’m talking about while in office. Nothing could be done? That’s your position?” Chin asked. Consovoy replied, “That is correct.”

Just so we’re all clear, this is an argument rooted in the idea that the sitting president isn’t just immune from prosecution; he’s also immune from scrutiny. As Rachel noted on Twitter, as far as Team Trump is concerned, the president can’t even be investigated while in office.

Because there are multiple ongoing lawsuits surrounding the president’s hidden tax returns, it’s easy to get confused about the various cases. This morning’s appellate court argument stems from an investigation launched by a New York district attorney’s office, which is investigating Trump’s hush-money scandal.

The DA’s office subpoenaed the president’s accounting firm, Mazars USA, for several years’ worth of personal and business tax returns.

At the lower court, Trump’s legal team argued in that case that a sitting American president cannot be investigated by anyone for any reason, no matter how serious the underlying accusation. The district court judge disagreed and ruled in prosecutors’ favor.

The matter is now before the 2nd Circuit, and the issue may very well end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/trumps-lawyers-pres-cant-be-investigated-even-if-he-shoots-someone

[blackhawks]

The fuck he was. He's been a bag man for the GOP going way back. Read his shit lately, another wannabe theocrat.

Investigations of Dems? You forgot your Benghaziazims and Fast & Furious? NO indictments.

How about that birth certificate bullshit. ALL GOPERS ever have are conspiracy theory fueled wet dreams. Barr's having another one.

As for Barr? WOW, he was great before he became attorney general with the Trump Administration.

William Barr Supported Pardons In An Earlier D.C. 'Witch Hunt': Iran-Contra


January 14, 2019·5:01 AM ET

Heard on Morning Edition

This won't be the first time that William Barr, President Trump's nominee to become attorney general, will be involved with what's been called a "witch hunt."

Barr, who is scheduled to go before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday for his confirmation hearings, ran the Justice Department once before, under President George H.W. Bush.

Back then, the all-consuming, years-long scandal was called Iran-Contra. On Dec. 24, 1992, it ended when Bush pardoned six people who had been caught up in it.

"The Constitution is quite clear on the powers of the president and sometimes the president has to make a very difficult call," Bush said then. "That's what I've done."

Lawrence Walsh, Who Investigated Iran-Contra Scandal, Dies At 102

Then-Attorney General Barr supported the president's decision in the Iran-Contra case, which gave clemency to people who had been officials in the administration of President Ronald Reagan, including former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger. He had been set to go on trial to face charges about lying to Congress.

To the man who led the Iran-Contra investigation, however, the pardons represented a miscarriage of justice.

"It demonstrates that powerful people with powerful allies can commit serious crimes in high office, deliberately abusing the public trust without consequences," said Lawrence Walsh, the independent prosecutor in the case, at the time of the pardons.

Barr said later that he believed Bush had made the right decision and that he felt people in the case had been treated unfairly.

"The big ones — obviously, the Iran-Contra ones — I certainly did not oppose any of them," Barr said as part of the Presidential Oral History Program of the Miller Center at the University of Virginia.


"I favored the broadest pardon authority," Barr said. "There were some people just arguing just for Weinberger. I said, 'No — in for a penny, in for a pound.' "

As Washington prepares for Barr's confirmation hearings on Tuesday, this controversy from 1992 has begun to feel very familiar.

Today's Justice Department also is running a high-stakes investigation into the current administration: Whether Trump or his campaign coordinated with the Russian attack on the 2016 election. The president's onetime aides also have been caught up in it.

Trump, meanwhile, calls the investigation a "hoax" and a "witch hunt."

And there also has been talk about whether Trump might pardon some of those people — or even, potentially, himself.

Would Barr support pardons again?

https://www.npr.org/2019/01/14/684553791/william-barr-supported-pardons-in-an-earlier-d-c-witch-hunt-iran-contra

[fuagf]

Justice Dept. Is Said to Open Criminal Inquiry Into Its Own Russia Investigation

[...]

Mr. Barr is closely managing the Durham investigation, even traveling to Italy to seek help from officials there to run down an unfounded conspiracy that is at the heart of conservatives’ attacks on the Russia investigation — that the Italian government helped set up the Trump campaign adviser who was told in 2016 that the Russians had damaging information that could hurt Clinton’s campaign.

But Italy’s intelligence services told Mr. Barr that they played no such role in the events leading to the Russia investigation, Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte of Italy said in a news conference on Wednesday. Mr. Barr has also contacted government officials in Britain and Australia about their roles in the early stages of the Russia investigation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/24/us/politics/john-durham-criminal-investigation.html

Barr struck out in Italy, eh. Trying to tie conspiracy theories together into something real is tough.

I think that may be the article you posted. Not sure as i didn't open yours.