Started By
Message
locked post

This is why Nadler is a dumbass

Posted on 5/8/19 at 3:58 pm
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
51586 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 3:58 pm
For those wanting the law in question:

Title III, Rule 6 of the FRCP

Specifically:

quote:

(2) Secrecy.

(A) No obligation of secrecy may be imposed on any person except in accordance with Rule 6(e)(2)(B).

(B) Unless these rules provide otherwise, the following persons must not disclose a matter occurring before the grand jury:

(i) a grand juror;

(ii) an interpreter;

(iii) a court reporter;

(iv) an operator of a recording device;

(v) a person who transcribes recorded testimony;

(vi) an attorney for the government; or

(vii) a person to whom disclosure is made under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) or (iii).


(3) lists the Exceptions and not a single one allows for a member of Congress, even if they are on a judiciary committee.

This means Nadler is saying Barr is being charged with Contempt for not breaking the law. I won't hold my breath waiting for the news outlets to report that fact.
Posted by 31TIGERS
Mike’s habitat
Member since Dec 2004
7219 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 3:59 pm to
quote:

This is why ALL liberals are dumbasses......
Posted by timdonaghyswhistle
Member since Jul 2018
16285 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:01 pm to
He's a dumbass because his brain is very low energy. This is just the product.
Posted by pennypacker3
Charleston
Member since Aug 2014
2737 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:03 pm to
That somabitch fickin to eat...
Posted by FlySaint
FL Panhandle
Member since May 2018
1798 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:06 pm to
I’d like to see Barr send federal Marshall’s to arrest all 24 Dems that voted for the contempt measure for suborning a felony.
Posted by EZE Tiger Fan
Member since Jul 2004
50285 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:07 pm to
I cannot stress this enough:

The "problem" you, along with many others here have, is the fact that you use logic and common sense.

Nadler, along with many of his cohorts, were literally elected by idiots. You are watching Idiocracy come to life. Crap like this is the result of an continued dumbing down of our populace.

No amount of conversation, facts, or otherwise will convince the brainwashed window lickers of anything.

These pols know this. Having the MSM on their side makes them feel invincible.

They will continue to lower the bar, so be prepared to have your mind twisted.
Posted by SOKAL
Member since May 2018
4124 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:11 pm to
To me it's pretty simple.

It's illegal for Barr to disclose grand jury information. Nadlee half assed responded to that issue, by saying that they wanted Barr to join in their petition to the court. But, Barr refused.


So, when you get down to it, this finding of contempt is really based on a refusal to join in a petition to the court.

What the frick? That's ridiculous. No one should be compelled to ask the court to do something.

If the Democrats believe their position is sound, file the petition and the AG will take whatever position before the court that he deems proper.

Posted by bbrownso
Member since Mar 2008
8985 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:14 pm to
quote:

This is why Nadler is a dumbass

I would point more to his blatant ignoring of what the special counsel regulations were designed to do; it's even more reprehensible because he was present when they passed discussed and passed them in 1999!

Wednesday, September 15, 1999
quote:

Mr. Chairman, Representative Nadler, and Members of the Committee:

We appreciate your invitation to appear before this committee as it considers the special counsel regulations that were issued by the Attorney General on June 30 to replace procedures which expired with the sunset that day of the Independent Counsel Act.

quote:

The rule making order notes (64 Fed. Reg. 37040-41) the concerns about final reports under the Act, both with respect to the incentive they had created to “over-investigate” a matter and the fact that they could “do harm to legitimate privacy interests” if it became public. But the order also states (64 Fed. Reg. 37041) that “it is appropriate for any federal official to provide a written record upon completion of an assignment, both for historical purposes and to enhance accountability—particularly a federal official who has functioned with substantial independence and little supervision.” It observed (id.) that a concluding report from special counsel would not be unique: “In major cases, federal prosecutors commonly document their decisions not to pursue a case, explaining the factual and legal reasons for the conclusions they have reached.”

quote:

The regulation cannot govern, of course, whether the Judiciary Committees will release the reports from the Attorney General to them. As for the Attorney General’s own release of a report, the regulation provides (section 600.9(c)) that “[t]he Attorney General may determine that public release of these reports would be in the public interest, to the extent that release would comply with applicable legal restrictions.” Presumably, the major but not exclusive constraint on public release would be the restriction in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure on release of grand jury information. Under section 600.9(c) of the regulations, the special counsel is not authorized to release information apart from “generally applicable Departmental guidelines concerning public comment with respect to any criminal investigation, and relevant law.”
Posted by westide
Bamala
Member since Sep 2014
2882 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:14 pm to
Trump should take away his security clearance.
Posted by RCDfan1950
United States
Member since Feb 2007
34908 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:22 pm to
quote:

I cannot stress this enough: The "problem" you, along with many others here have, is the fact that you use logic and common sense. Nadler, along with many of his cohorts, were literally elected by idiots. You are watching Idiocracy come to life. Crap like this is the result of an continued dumbing down of our populace. No amount of conversation, facts, or otherwise will convince the brainwashed window lickers of anything. These pols know this. Having the MSM on their side makes them feel invincible. They will continue to lower the bar, so be prepared to have your mind twisted.


True assessment. And the reason why neither words or votes have power to mitigate our current political/ideological disagreement.

"Behold, I will send them great delusion that they WILL BELIEVE a lie" (Bible verse). Talk and politics/votes are like the tits on a boar hog...there, but useless, until something big sobers up the delusional citizenry.
Posted by Vacherie Saint
Member since Aug 2015
39452 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:28 pm to
Don’t like the law anymore? Petition the court to change it for you. Can’t get the AG to join your fishing expedition? Hold him in contempt.

That’s what this is.
Posted by McChowder
Hammond
Member since Dec 2006
5222 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:28 pm to
quote:

So, when you get down to it, this finding of contempt is really based on a refusal to join in a petition to the court. 

What the frick? That's ridiculous. No one should be compelled to ask the court to do something. 

If the Democrats believe their position is sound, file the petition and the AG will take whatever position before the court that he deems proper. 

Can you imagine a system of Government where the seperate so called "co-equal" branch of Government, Congress, had the authority to force members of the Executive to petition the judiciary on its behalf?

Its like the world has gone fricking mad!

The only way Barr can release a fully redacted report that satisfies this congressional subpoena is by breaking federal law.
Posted by ApexTiger
cary nc
Member since Oct 2003
53771 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:31 pm to
(3) Exceptions.

(A) Disclosure of a grand-jury matter—other than the grand jury's deliberations or any grand juror's vote—may be made to:

(i) an attorney for the government for use in performing that attorney's duty;

(ii) any government personnel—including those of a state, state subdivision, Indian tribe, or foreign government—that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist in performing that attorney's duty to enforce federal criminal law; or

(iii) a person authorized by 18 U.S.C. §3322.

(B) A person to whom information is disclosed under Rule 6(e)(3)(A)(ii) may use that information only to assist an attorney for the government in performing that attorney's duty to enforce federal criminal law. An attorney for the government must promptly provide the court that impaneled the grand jury with the names of all persons to whom a disclosure has been made, and must certify that the attorney has advised those persons of their obligation of secrecy under this rule.

(C) An attorney for the government may disclose any grand-jury matter to another federal grand jury.

(D) An attorney for the government may disclose any grand-jury matter involving foreign intelligence, counterintelligence (as defined in 50 U.S.C. §401a3003), or foreign intelligence information (as defined in Rule 6(e)(3)(D)(iii)) to any federal law enforcement, intelligence, protective, immigration, national defense, or national security official to assist the official receiving the information in the performance of that official's duties. An attorney for the government may also disclose any grand-jury matter involving, within the United States or elsewhere, a threat of attack or other grave hostile acts of a foreign power or its agent, a threat of domestic or international sabotage or terrorism, or clandestine intelligence gathering activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power or by its agent, to any appropriate federal, state, state subdivision, Indian tribal, or foreign government official, for the purpose of preventing or responding to such threat or activities.

(i) Any official who receives information under Rule 6(e)(3)(D) may use the information only as necessary in the conduct of that person's official duties subject to any limitations on the unauthorized disclosure of such information. Any state, state subdivision, Indian tribal, or foreign government official who receives information under Rule 6(e)(3)(D) may use the information only in a manner consistent with any guidelines issued by the Attorney General and the Director of National Intelligence.

(ii) Within a reasonable time after disclosure is made underRule 6(e)(3)(D), an attorney for the government must file, under seal, a notice with the court in the district where the grand jury convened stating that such information was disclosed and the departments, agencies, or entities to which the disclosure was made.

(iii) As used in Rule 6(e)(3)(D), the term “foreign intelligence information” means:

(a) information, whether or not it concerns a United States person, that relates to the ability of the United States to protect against—

• actual or potential attack or other grave hostile acts of a foreign power or its agent;

• sabotage or international terrorism by a foreign power or its agent; or

• clandestine intelligence activities by an intelligence service or network of a foreign power or by its agent; or

(b) information, whether or not it concerns a United States person, with respect to a foreign power or foreign territory that relates to—

• the national defense or the security of the United States; or

• the conduct of the foreign affairs of the United States.

(E) The court may authorize disclosure—at a time, in a manner, and subject to any other conditions that it directs—of a grand-jury matter:

(i) preliminarily to or in connection with a judicial proceeding;

(ii) at the request of a defendant who shows that a ground may exist to dismiss the indictment because of a matter that occurred before the grand jury;

(iii) at the request of the government, when sought by a foreign court or prosecutor for use in an official criminal investigation;

(iv) at the request of the government if it shows that the matter may disclose a violation of State, Indian tribal, or foreign criminal law, as long as the disclosure is to an appropriate state, state-subdivision, Indian tribal, or foreign government official for the purpose of enforcing that law; or

(v) at the request of the government if it shows that the matter may disclose a violation of military criminal law under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as long as the disclosure is to an appropriate military official for the purpose of enforcing that law.

(F) A petition to disclose a grand-jury matter under Rule 6(e)(3)(E)(i) must be filed in the district where the grand jury convened. Unless the hearing is ex parte—as it may be when the government is the petitioner—the petitioner must serve the petition on, and the court must afford a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard to:

(i) an attorney for the government;

(ii) the parties to the judicial proceeding; and

(iii) any other person whom the court may designate.

(G) If the petition to disclose arises out of a judicial proceeding in another district, the petitioned court must transfer the petition to the other court unless the petitioned court can reasonably determine whether disclosure is proper. If the petitioned court decides to transfer, it must send to the transferee court the material sought to be disclosed, if feasible, and a written evaluation of the need for continued grand-jury secrecy. The transferee court must afford those persons identified in Rule 6(e)(3)(F) a reasonable opportunity to appear and be heard.

Would B be considered "Congress" ?
Posted by Bard
Definitely NOT an admin
Member since Oct 2008
51586 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:37 pm to
quote:

Would B be considered "Congress" ?


Congress is not the branch of government that enforces criminal law. Also, they would need the attorney (in this case Barr, possibly Mueller) to consider Congress "necessary" in assisting the attorney in enforcing federal criminal law.

I simply can't see such a scenario ever existing.
Posted by Godfather1
What WAS St George, Louisiana
Member since Oct 2006
79677 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:43 pm to
quote:

I’d like to see Barr send federal Marshall’s to arrest all 24 Dems that voted for the contempt measure for suborning a felony.


It would be fricking glorious.
Posted by McChowder
Hammond
Member since Dec 2006
5222 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:43 pm to
quote:

any government personnel—including those of a state, state subdivision, Indian tribe, or foreign government—that an attorney for the government considers necessary to assist in performing that attorney's duty to enforce federal criminal law; or


Congress does not have the power to enforce criminal law.

They have not established that a crime has even been committed.

No legal justification has been made for the need of these documents beyond oversight.......which does not meet the exception, not even close.
Posted by JackieTreehorn
Malibu
Member since Sep 2013
29079 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:44 pm to
He also might have the world's longest zipper.
Posted by SCLibertarian
Conway, South Carolina
Member since Aug 2013
36023 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:52 pm to
That is disgusting.
Posted by hsfolk
Member since Sep 2009
18538 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 4:57 pm to
Just joined the #walkout of the House chamber to protest the shameful, politically-motivated GOP vote holding AG Holder in contempt

2:06 PM - 28 Jun 2012

LINK
Posted by RockyMtnTigerWDE
War Damn Eagle Dad!
Member since Oct 2010
105407 posts
Posted on 5/8/19 at 6:12 pm to
quote:

I’d like to see Barr send federal Marshall’s to arrest all 24 Dems that voted for the contempt measure for suborning a felony.



I would also add maybe looking at obstruction, asking an AG to release info tied to some ongoing investigations, and compromise the case.

Based on the dems very own definition they use against Trump of course.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 2Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram