Poll: Can Trump do whatever he wants with the Justice Department?

[Moonbeam]

Introspection and self questioning are the same thing and are redundant redundancies.

I considered that point at some length considering they were redundant and then reversing the order in how I originally put them because for me what I was hoping to emphasize saying is both looking within and then questioning what one sees.

 

[Younigue]

You poor thing. So oppressed. Such delicate sensibilities. Clutch your pearls. Your fainting couch is thataway & the smelling salts are on the table next to it.

Is it a case of the vapors or just victims all-a-flutter?

 

[Younigue]

POTUS does not tell the Justice Department who to prosecute. AG's job is not to protect the President. Trump thinks otherwise.

Yes he does. Because he thinks wearing his stupidity and his sense of entitlement out in the open is a gift to his base and they receive it as such.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Just get ready for the duhflection to another topic. Tajbot is always in duhflection mode.

It's my opinion that it's illegal to leak FBI notes without authorization. The fact he hasn't been prosecuted for it is irrelevant and the other posts didn't earn a rebuttal by sparking my interest. Comey deserved to be fired and he was and as he stated himself that President Trump had the power to do so.

You all may agree with Bannon, but I don't.

 

[Younigue]

It's my opinion that it's illegal to leak FBI notes without authorization. The fact he hasn't been prosecuted for it is irrelevant and the other posts didn't earn a rebuttal by sparking my interest. Comey deserved to be fired and he was and as he stated himself that President Trump had the power to do so.

You all may agree with Bannon, but I don't.

If only he were fired for the reasons he "deserved" to be fired for. That matters, correct?

 

[Alpha One Seven]

So he does not have the power to tell the DOJ not to prosecute her?

That was not said.

 

[Alpha One Seven]

Oh darling. Your inferiority complex is showing. You know why? Because Dems/progressives are far superior to Trumpublicans/Conservatives/Regressives. That's nature little buddy. There's no fighting it but as your side has proven with verve and misplaced pride you can try to deny it through imagination and out right lies like champions of your cause.

The change I've experienced since all this Trump shit... My openness to Conservatives no longer exists. Conservatism is just an excuse to avoid positive change, fear of the unknown, and a venue for the truly uptight pricks of the world to puff out their chests for no good reason (those kind of people deserve to be made fun of). Conservatives are assholes with a platform with which to spew their idiocy and control issues all over people who won't be controlled by fear and insecurity.

Did I mention this "cute" progressive thinks you're a moron. Too bad the truth hurts you so much rather than motivate you to be a decent person amirite? Awe *pat pat the top of your head* little buddy, you're a failure... Even in your successes. That's the Trumpublican way.

You really must be a yougie, a very youngie at that. Perhaps one day you will begin to mature.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

If only he were fired for the reasons he "deserved" to be fired for. That matters, correct?

Yes, however i'm not privy to all the information and either are you. We can only go by what we think we know.

 

[Cozarkian]

If his daughter murdered someone in cold blood on the White House lawn and Trump told the DOJ not to prosecute her would that be within his authority?

He has the power to do so, and the DOJ would be obligated to comply. As others have said, the check on his power to do this is Congress' ability to impeach and convict him for such an abuse of power.

After removal from office, the new President could then reverse the order. Which is why Trump would probably just pardon her, which would prevent any future prosecution even after he was removed from office for abuse of power.

Pardons don't have to be post-convicton. See, e.g., Nixon.

 

[interchange]

It's my opinion that it's illegal to leak FBI notes without authorization. The fact he hasn't been prosecuted for it is irrelevant and the other posts didn't earn a rebuttal by sparking my interest. Comey deserved to be fired and he was and as he stated himself that President Trump had the power to do so.

You all may agree with Bannon, but I don't.

Comey testified he leaked these documents after being fired so that a special prosecutor would be appointed. The leaked memos were published the day after he was fired.

So, whether or not memos of his personal meetings constituted official FBI notes and were illegal to leak, this cannot be why Trump fired him since the actions took place not just after he was fired but because he was fired.

 

[Alpha One Seven]

He has the power to do so, and the DOJ would be obligated to comply. As others have said, the check on his power to do this is Congress' ability to impeach and convict him for such an abuse of power.

It's a moot point though as the power to pardon is not one that is able to be overturned by the congress.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Comey testified he leaked these documents after being fired so that a special prosecutor would be appointed. The leaked memos were published the day after he was fired.

So, whether or not memos of his personal meetings constituted official FBI notes and were illegal to leak, this cannot be why Trump fired him since the actions took place not just after he was fired but because he was fired.

Ok.

 

[Younigue]

Yes, however i'm not privy to all the information and either are you. We can only go by what we think we know.

We know that Trump said he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation. Then he reassured the Russians. Bad tajjy for choosing stupidity over common sense! Ooo, if I had a rolled up newspaper and access to your nose, I'd swat it (enough to bring your smarter self to the surface, not cause you pain. Though if being smart causes you pain, that's on you!)!

 

[Cozarkian]

It's a moot point though as the power to pardon is not one that is able to be overturned by the congress.

Pretty much. I just finished editing my post on that issue. Instructing the DOJ not to investigate or prosecute is different than a formal pardon, but doing the former would be stupid in the situation described, as the former could be reversed by the new President, the latter couldn't.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

We know that Trump said he fired Comey because of the Russia investigation. Then he reassured the Russians. Bad tajjy for choosing stupidity over common sense! Ooo, if I had a rolled up newspaper and access to your nose, I'd swat it (enough to bring your smarter self to the surface, not cause you pain. Though if being smart causes you pain, that's on you!)!

So you think you know. Congratulations.

 

[fskimospy]

He has the power to do so, and the DOJ would be obligated to comply. As others have said, the check on his power to do this is Congress' ability to impeach and convict him for such an abuse of power.

So in other words you are saying that it is a lawful exercise of the president's power to commit felony obstruction of justice. You have not thought the consequences of this through. If he can commit felony obstruction of justice can he have the FBI and/or administration members go over and secretly intimidate witnesses not to testify? Can he go through and purge all the records of his criminal activity? If so, how would Congress or anyone else ever know that Trump and/or his associates were committing crimes or abusing power? Hell, what if Trump had his friend go over and literally murder every member of Congress and then told the FBI to drop the investigation? Can't impeach him if you're dead. (I know that's an extreme example but I see no limiting principle in your argument that would prevent it)

Congress simply does not have the technical capability or experience to properly investigate large swaths of federal crimes. Particularly relevant to this case is that Congress has no capacity to investigate money laundering, counterintelligence investigations for conspiracy with hostile foreign powers, or other financial crimes Trump, his family, or his associates have engaged in. When Congress investigates that stuff these days they do so by... you guessed it... asking the executive agencies like the FBI for help. If the FBI just said no and refused to investigate it Congress would be stuck either impeaching the President based on functionally no evidence or letting it go.

This is basically a recipe for unlimited criminal behavior by the president and his associates.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

What he said isn't hard to comprehend. What you are trying to twist it into beggars belief.

 

[Moonbeam]

Not really. I'm not trying to render an opinion necessarily on the basic human conflict you speak of. I'm saying that its extension to culture, laws, religion, values, etc. is a product of someone's upbringing. It may be possible to disentangle society from this inner conflict without progress on the conflict itself.

I seem to not understand what you are saying then. As others may well understand your point I will let it rest as I am also, I think, unclear what you are saying here. My problem is that I can't translate or extrapolate out what you call the basic human conflict you say I speak of into exactly what the conflict is. Thus I don't know how to extend it to culture etc or what to disentangle as possibly fixable without regard to it. Sorry, but I consistently seem to have this kind of trouble and I am not even sure how to describe it clearly.

 

[fskimospy]

Pretty much. I just finished editing my post on that issue. Instructing the DOJ not to investigate or prosecute is different than a formal pardon, but doing the former would be stupid in the situation described, as the former could be reversed by the new President, the latter couldn't.

Yes but obstructing investigations has the potential for a lot less blowback. Imagine if Trump had been successful in obstructing justice by convincing Comey to drop the Flynn investigation. If he had it's fairly likely no one ever would have known the amount of criminal behavior the national security adviser had been engaged in. Sure Trump could pardon Flynn, but that creates a ton of other problems for him.

Obstruction of justice is a particularly powerful tool for a president to abuse precisely because if he's successful no one will ever know. As for the next president doing something about it, that's what ordering the FBI and everyone else to destroy all records of your criminal activity is for. Now what's the next guy going to do?

 

[Cozarkian]

So in other words you are saying that it is a lawful exercise of the president's power to commit felony obstruction of justice. You have not thought the consequences of this through. If he can commit felony obstruction of justice can he have the FBI and/or administration members go over and secretly intimidate witnesses not to testify? Can he go through and purge all the records of his criminal activity? If so, how would Congress or anyone else ever know that Trump and/or his associates were committing crimes or abusing power? Hell, what if Trump had his friend go over and literally murder every member of Congress and then told the FBI to drop the investigation? Can't impeach him if you're dead. (I know that's an extreme example but I see no limiting principle in your argument that would prevent it)

Congress simply does not have the technical capability or experience to properly investigate large swaths of federal crimes. Particularly relevant to this case is that Congress has no capacity to investigate money laundering, counterintelligence investigations for conspiracy with hostile foreign powers, or other financial crimes Trump, his family, or his associates have engaged in. When Congress investigates that stuff these days they do so by... you guessed it... asking the executive agencies like the FBI for help. If the FBI just said no and refused to investigate it Congress would be stuck either impeaching the President based on functionally no evidence or letting it go.

This is basically a recipe for unlimited criminal behavior by the president and his associates.

Well, first, if you murder every member of Congress, their replacements will be able to remove the President and the new President will be able to direct the DOJ to prosecute the former President for conspiracy to commit mass murder.

The President can't just stop Congress from obtaining the information needed. Congress can subpoena the information. If the President refuses to permit compliance with the subpoena, that refusal will be a sufficient abuse of power to remove the President, after which the new President can direct compliance with the subpoena.

 

[fskimospy]

Well, first, if you murder every member of Congress, their replacements will be able to remove the President and the new President will be able to direct the DOJ to prosecute the former President for conspiracy to commit mass murder.

Pretty easy answer to that, kill anyone who enters the Capitol building. You can kill an unlimited number of Congressmen, really. Or hell, don't kill them at all, just arrest them all so they can't meet and impeach you. Regardless, it's the idea that's important. If the DOJ has to do whatever the president says, even if the president is committing a crime while doing it, we no longer have a nation of laws. The president is required to make sure the laws are faithfully executed and obstructing justice does exactly the opposite of that.

The President can't just stop Congress from obtaining the information needed. Congress can subpoena the information. If the President refuses to permit compliance with the subpoena, that refusal will be a sufficient abuse of power to remove the President, after which the new President can direct compliance with the subpoena.

Congress can only subpoena information that exists. If the DOJ never investigates a crime there's nothing for Congress to subpoena. There's literally no way for them to ever find out what crimes, if any, were committed.

 

[dyna]

So in other words you are saying that it is a lawful exercise of the president's power to commit felony obstruction of justice. You have not thought the consequences of this through. If he can commit felony obstruction of justice can he have the FBI and/or administration members go over and secretly intimidate witnesses not to testify? Can he go through and purge all the records of his criminal activity? If so, how would Congress or anyone else ever know that Trump and/or his associates were committing crimes or abusing power? Hell, what if Trump had his friend go over and literally murder every member of Congress and then told the FBI to drop the investigation? Can't impeach him if you're dead. (I know that's an extreme example but I see no limiting principle in your argument that would prevent it)

Congress simply does not have the technical capability or experience to properly investigate large swaths of federal crimes. Particularly relevant to this case is that Congress has no capacity to investigate money laundering, counterintelligence investigations for conspiracy with hostile foreign powers, or other financial crimes Trump, his family, or his associates have engaged in. When Congress investigates that stuff these days they do so by... you guessed it... asking the executive agencies like the FBI for help. If the FBI just said no and refused to investigate it Congress would be stuck either impeaching the President based on functionally no evidence or letting it go.

This is basically a recipe for unlimited criminal behavior by the president and his associates.

If the justice department is actually using the excuse of "does not have the capability or experience to properly investigate large swaths of federal crimes," they definitely have issues that need to be corrected.

 

[fskimospy]

If the justice department is actually using the excuse of "does not have the capability or experience to properly investigate large swaths of federal crimes," they definitely have issues that need to be corrected.

No, Congress does not have that capability or experience. Hence, they rely on the Justice Department. If the Justice Department won't investigate any crimes that implicate the president or his associates Congress has no way to know if anything impeachable occurred.

 

[Younigue]

So you think you know. Congratulations.

He admitted it.

Tajjy? Will you Please do me a favor and self-punish? Use my rolled up newspaper idea.

 

[dyna]

No, Congress does not have that capability or experience. Hence, they rely on the Justice Department. If the Justice Department won't investigate any crimes that implicate the president or his associates Congress has no way to know if anything impeachable occurred.

.... and if the justice department cannot do their job, they have major issues that need to be addressed.