Comey the Criminal Commie - You're Fired

[kybkh]

What a joke this whole Russia thing has been. Now Trump is cornered in to starting a Thermonuclear War or else have more memes of himself made riding a bear, bare back, with Putin in Montana!!

[C-Mag]

Well, it looks like that kind of fizzled anyway.

Now it seems to be about whether Rosenstein should take a knee with Sessions, but I still don't think Trump can straight up fire Mueller. Maybe the Assistant Assistant Whoever The Fug that takes up after Rod'll do it though.

I think getting rid of Mueller would be a mistake though. If I've said it once, I've said it a hundred times: if Trump n' CO are totally clean, best thing to do is let his enemies discover it and be forced to present it against their self interest. If Trump n' CO are compromised, I want to know.

Trump should not have to get rid of Mueller. Mueller should show some integrity and recuse himself, don't you agree ?

Not really. Reshuffling the deck over and over again is just going to undermine the integrity of any conclusions drawn. Nobody is going to be perfectly non-partisan and perfectly unbiased. I guess it doesn't much matter though, since it would appear at least a portion of the public isn't going to trust Mueller's conclusions unless Trump and his team are totally exonerated. (And to be totally fair, I am sure there are plenty of libs who will never accept a total exoneration either.)

Well, that all sounds very nice..... but unfortunately, it's not the law. The law is very clear on when someone needs to recuse themselves, and it applies to Mueller. But if you don't care about the law that's fine.

[SuburbanFarmer]

What a joke this whole Russia thing has been. Now Trump is cornered in to starting a Thermonuclear War or else have more memes of himself made riding a bear, bare back, with Putin in Montana!!

It's almost as if this was the reason for an Emoluments Clause in the first place....

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Trump should not have to get rid of Mueller. Mueller should show some integrity and recuse himself, don't you agree ?

Not really. Reshuffling the deck over and over again is just going to undermine the integrity of any conclusions drawn. Nobody is going to be perfectly non-partisan and perfectly unbiased. I guess it doesn't much matter though, since it would appear at least a portion of the public isn't going to trust Mueller's conclusions unless Trump and his team are totally exonerated. (And to be totally fair, I am sure there are plenty of libs who will never accept a total exoneration either.)

Well, that all sounds very nice..... but unfortunately, it's not the law. The law is very clear on when someone needs to recuse themselves, and it applies to Mueller. But if you don't care about the law that's fine.

I really didn't get the impression that the legal necessity was that clear at all.

[Okeefenokee]

Donald J. Trump‏ @realDonaldTrump https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump

With all of the recently reported electronic surveillance, intercepts, unmasking and illegal leaking of information, I have no idea...
...whether there are "tapes" or recordings of my conversations with James Comey, but I did not make, and do not have, any such recordings.

sessions seizes comey's files.

trump tweets about possible tapes.

trump says he didn't make any tapes.

im not the only one seeing the subtle word choice, right?

trump never said he made tapes. he mentioned that tapes might exist. then he said HE didn't make any tapes.

pretty easy to bait people if you can't see the simple possibility right in front of you.

[Okeefenokee]

Not really. Reshuffling the deck over and over again is just going to undermine the integrity of any conclusions drawn. Nobody is going to be perfectly non-partisan and perfectly unbiased. I guess it doesn't much matter though, since it would appear at least a portion of the public isn't going to trust Mueller's conclusions unless Trump and his team are totally exonerated. (And to be totally fair, I am sure there are plenty of libs who will never accept a total exoneration either.)

Well, that all sounds very nice..... but unfortunately, it's not the law. The law is very clear on when someone needs to recuse themselves, and it applies to Mueller. But if you don't care about the law that's fine.

I really didn't get the impression that the legal necessity was that clear at all.

legal necessity. legally necessary. legal requirement.

sound similar. mean different things.

Subjectively, it's a legal necessity that a biased judge recuse himself from a case. Objectively, in many cases, it's not a legal requirement.

The judge presiding over a case involving a trump business belonged to a group of attorneys that publicly stated their immediate goal was to block him from the presidency, because of their opposition to his position on immigration, and that the way they would do so was to attack his businesses in court.

You could say that said judge was clearly compromised in his ability to objectively reside over said case, and that it was a legal necessity for him to recuse himself, but he didn't.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Well, that all sounds very nice..... but unfortunately, it's not the law. The law is very clear on when someone needs to recuse themselves, and it applies to Mueller. But if you don't care about the law that's fine.

I really didn't get the impression that the legal necessity was that clear at all.

legal necessity. legally necessary. legal requirement.

sound similar. mean different things.

Subjectively, it's a legal necessity that a biased judge recuse himself from a case. Objectively, in many cases, it's not a legal requirement.

The judge presiding over a case involving a trump business belonged to a group of attorneys that publicly stated their immediate goal was to block him from the presidency, because of their opposition to his position on immigration, and that the way they would do so was to attack his businesses in court.

You could say that said judge was clearly compromised in his ability to objectively reside over said case, and that it was a legal necessity for him to recuse himself, but he didn't.

I am not at all familiar enough with the expectations placed on an investigator in Mueller's position, and if they are different than those placed on a judge. Mueller doesn't seem extraordinarily compromised in his role to me, but that might be my bias.

[Okeefenokee]

I am not at all familiar enough with the expectations placed on an investigator in Mueller's position, and if they are different than those placed on a judge. Mueller doesn't seem extraordinarily compromised in his role to me, but that might be my bias.

First, to clear up your ignorance on the expectations,

The Attorney General shall promulgate rules and regulations which require the disqualification of any officer or employee of the Department of Justice, including a United States attorney or a member of such attorney's staff, from participation in a particular investigation or prosecution if such participation may result in a personal, financial, or political conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof. Such rules and regulations may provide that a willful violation of any provision thereof shall result in removal from office.

Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.
(a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:
(1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or
(2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution ...

(c) For the purposes of this section:
(2) Personal relationship means a close and substantial connection of the type normally viewed as likely to induce partiality. ... Whether relationships (including friendships) of an employee to other persons (outside his or her family) or organizations are "personal" must be judged on an individual basis with due regard given to the subjective opinion of the employee.

Second, the obvious reason referenced federal law applies,

Comey and Mueller have been friends for nearly 15 years. They were partners in the episode that defined Comey's professional persona more than any other in his public service. It would be surprising if it had not also forged a permanent bond with Mueller.

It was Comey, as deputy attorney general, and Mueller, then head of the FBI, who together confronted White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales in the hospital room of then-seriously ill Attorney General John Ashcroft in a successful attempt to block the White House from implementing a surveillance protocol that Gonzales and, tentatively, President George W. Bush favored.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

Yeah, I get it.

Just seems kind of thin to me. And I am certain there are folks around here that would be hard pressed to find anyone pure enough to investigate Trump.

Although, personally, I would rather have Sessions in charge of the whole damn thing, because I thought the reasons for his recusal were pretty thin, and I would rather the investigator have to assert evidence against self interest if something on the Trump team turns up. Fact remains, constantly reshuffling the deck on flimsy pretense just doesn't smell right.

[Okeefenokee]

Yeah, I get it.

Just seems kind of thin to me. And I am certain there are folks around here that would be hard pressed to find anyone pure enough to investigate Trump.

Although, personally, I would rather have Sessions in charge of the whole damn thing, because I thought the reasons for his recusal were pretty thin, and I would rather the investigator have to assert evidence against self interest if something on the Trump team turns up. Fact remains, constantly reshuffling the deck on flimsy pretense just doesn't smell right.

/facepalm

Seems kind of thin?

It's federal fucking law, and it's crystal clear.

28 U.S. Code § 528 - Disqualification of officers and employees of the Department of Justice

The Attorney General shall promulgate rules and regulations which require the disqualification of any officer or employee of the Department of Justice, including a United States attorney or a member of such attorney’s staff, from participation in a particular investigation or prosecution if such participation may result in a personal, financial, or political conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof. Such rules and regulations may provide that a willful violation of any provision thereof shall result in removal from office.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/528

28 CFR 45.2 - Disqualification arising from personal or political relationship.

(a) Unless authorized under paragraph (b) of this section, no employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with:

(1) Any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution; or

(2) Any person or organization which he knows has a specific and substantial interest that would be directly affected by the outcome of the investigation or prosecution.

(b) An employee assigned to or otherwise participating in a criminal investigation or prosecution who believes that his participation may be prohibited by paragraph (a) of this section shall report the matter and all attendant facts and circumstances to his supervisor at the level of section chief or the equivalent or higher. If the supervisor determines that a personal or political relationship exists between the employee and a person or organization described in paragraph (a) of this section, he shall relieve the employee from participation unless he determines further, in writing, after full consideration of all the facts and circumstances, that:

(1) The relationship will not have the effect of rendering the employee's service less than fully impartial and professional; and

(2) The employee's participation would not create an appearance of a conflict of interest likely to affect the public perception of the integrity of the investigation or prosecution.

(c) For the purposes of this section:

(1)Political relationship means a close identification with an elected official, a candidate (whether or not successful) for elective, public office, a political party, or a campaign organization, arising from service as a principal adviser thereto or a principal official thereof; and

(2)Personal relationship means a close and substantial connection of the type normally viewed as likely to induce partiality. An employee is presumed to have a personal relationship with his father, mother, brother, sister, child and spouse. Whether relationships (including friendships) of an employee to other persons or organizations are “personal” must be judged on an individual basis with due regard given to the subjective opinion of the employee.

(d) This section pertains to agency management and is not intended to create rights enforceable by private individuals or organizations.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/28/45.2

No employee shall participate in a criminal investigation or prosecution if he has a personal or political relationship with any person or organization substantially involved in the conduct that is the subject of the investigation or prosecution

That's why Sessions recused himself, and that's why people are calling for Mueller to recuse himself as well. Fucking hacks pretending like this is a gray area. They've been friends for a decade and a half, and their work history together goes back at least two presidents. Federal law says you can't be part of an investigation if you have a personal relationship with someone involved in the investigation, and you think it's a thin argument to point out that an investigator has had a personal relationship with a key member of an investigation for the past fifteen years.

You know what. Fuck it. Keep it up. Ignore everything I said. Keep showing everyone how completely bankrupt of awareness the left is. You're doing our work for us.