- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:07 pm to Jjdoc
quote:I mean there is nothing prohibiting it, but it seems unnecessary since there is joining prohibiting the DOJ to do it. At least ask the DOJ, and if they feel that the political environment is too toxic (couldn't disagree), then ask for a special counsel.
I think its perfectly fine to have a special investigator for this.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:09 pm to Strannix
quote:Someday I hope you could give me your definition and parameters of a "melt."
Melt
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:09 pm to ChexMix
quote:Huh? Which 2 groups are you referring to?
Just like the two separate groups investigating Russia interference
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:10 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
I think its perfectly fine to have a special investigator for this.
Right. Mueller's scope is Russia.
This new SC can focus on the 14 points outlined by the HJC and Sessions can continue with "normal" work.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:11 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
mean there is nothing prohibiting it, but it seems unnecessary since there is joining prohibiting the DOJ to do it. At least ask the DOJ, and if they feel that the political environment is too toxic (couldn't disagree), then ask for a special counsel.
I THINK this Justice Departnment could investigate this mater succesfully, BUT certainly the facts outlined in that letter could justify a special counsel.
Here's the regulation
28 CFR 600.1 - Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
eCFR
Authorities (U.S. Code)
prev | next
§ 600.1 Grounds for appointing a Special Counsel.
The Attorney General, or in cases in which the Attorney General is recused, the Acting Attorney General, will appoint a Special Counsel when he or she determines that criminal investigation of a person or matter is warranted and -
(a) That investigation or prosecution of that person or matter by a United States Attorney's Office or litigating Division of the Department of Justice would present a conflict of interest for the Department or other extraordinary circumstances; and
(b) That under the circumstances, it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside Special Counsel to assume responsibility for the matter.
LINK
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:14 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Correct. It's warranted. Objectively, there is really no other choice. Unless on its face there is nothing there.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:14 pm to Jake88
From the Wapo article.
Now lets see how they vote.
quote:
But the amendment passed, and the altered resolution passed on a 16-13 partisan vote, giving it a chance to be approved by the House.
Now lets see how they vote.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:16 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
You can probably make a pretty damn good case for conflict of interest given the fact that many current DOJ employees would be investigating their former boss without a SC.
This post was edited on 7/27/17 at 10:20 pm
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:18 pm to GumboPot
quote:
You can probably make a pretty damn good case for conflict of interest given the fact that many current DOJ employees would be investating their former boss without a SC.
As I said, it's clear that a special counsel COULD be appointed.
However, I still believe that Mueller will be relooking into all that anyway.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:18 pm to Gusoline
quote:
Now lets see how they vote.
Someone needs to slip some testosterone into the House drinking water the day before the vote to approve a new SC.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:26 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:And I don't think it would be a bad decision; I just don't think it's the first decision to make.
I THINK this Justice Departnment could investigate this mater succesfully, BUT certainly the facts outlined in that letter could justify a special counsel.
I think they would need to establish whether it's worth investigating, and if so then consider whether they think a special counsel is optimal and/or necessary.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:30 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
I think they would need to establish whether it's worth investigating, and if so then consider whether they think a special counsel is optimal and/or necessary.
I was ready to let the e-mail stuff go, but some of Comey's comments really bother me.
A lot of people have had their lives wrecked for carelessness with classified information. That aspect still doesn't sit well with me.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:30 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
However, I still believe that Mueller will be relooking into all that anyway.
Nah.. He has enough on his plate with the Russians working with the Dems and Fusion to wreck our process!
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:31 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
I think they would need to establish whether it's worth investigating,
They have. It's why they voted.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:33 pm to joshnorris14
Wasn't this announced way earlier today?
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:37 pm to MButterfly
quote:I'm not referring to the same "they." I'm referring to the people whose job is to investigate crimes, who are under the purview of Trump, Sessions, RR, etc.
They have. It's why they voted.
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:37 pm to joshnorris14
Legggggoooooooooo mates 
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:44 pm to Tiguar
quote:
This reads like some conservative blog fanfiction
and we have a winner
Posted on 7/27/17 at 10:44 pm to Tiguar
quote:
This reads like some conservative blog fanfiction
The most amazing part of it is....
There is real evidence to back up most of these things.
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News