So... Durham and Barr repeated the same mistake as the FBI in allowing avowed NeverTrumpers to control an investigation that is inherently tied to Trump, even though that mistake by the FBI is also central to why they're running an investigation in the first place.
This isn't true. "Political affiliation" is not a protected classification at the federal level. And only a handful of states have any protections against discrimination based on political affiliation.
Moreover, conflicts of interest and biases have always been central considerations in administration of justice.
It's not a "you're dumb" reply. It's a "you don't know what you're talking about" reply. Maybe don't make declarative replies with assumptions of authoritativeness prior to informing yourself on the subject.
People get fired all the time for espousing and pursuing political beliefs and agendas that do not align with the administration's. 1A doesn't protect them from being fired. It protects them from the state criminalizing their speech. Getting fired is not going to jail.
But I wasn't even necessarily referring to termination of employment, anyway. I honestly don't even know why you're talking about termination of employment at all, as it has absolutely nothing to do with my post here.
I was simply criticizing the fact that Barr and Durham (according to this tweet) obviously should not have someone with avowed biases against a central subject of an investigation in a position of control of said investigation, especially when said investigation also has within its purview a previous investigation wherein political biases clearly played a central role in the corruption of that investigation.
What a super controversial suggestion! I guess common sense is exceedingly scarce.
I'm sorry you find a few small paragraphs of words so overwhelming.
You didn't offer a third, more logical option, as your third option was offered in ignorance, and was ultimately erroneous.
And none of this explains why you introduced termination into the equation when termination was never necessarily implied. One with potential biases or conflicts of interests needn't be terminated from their position to preserve the integrity of an investigation--they can be reassigned, or given alternative responsibilities that do not allow them sufficient influence/control with which to undermine or call into question the integrity of the investigation, as is being suggested by this tweet.
Then again you still can't even seem to concede the point about the obvious problem with conflicts of interest in an investigation that is necessarily tied to the corruption that emerged from conflict of interests in a related investigation.
And spare me your infantile butthurt if you insist on proceeding with this exercise in futility.
He definently needs to after 2020...GEOTUS needs to tweet the names of all the people he wants to be in his Republican party, and he needs to tweet the names of all the RINOS that. Need to be removed...WATCHING US DUMP THE TRAITOR SESSIONS AND END HIS WORTHLESS CAREER GAVE ME A FUCKING 3 DAY LONG FREEDOM BONER
Trump needs to establish a separate Diego Garcia Circuit Court and DOJ facility staffed by all the damn hagfish that keep turning up in the bureaucracy.
the career bureaucracy is one of the main pools of people that consider themselves the true rulers of the slave class. Just as there are no term limits on Congress, there are also lifers in the judiciary and lifers in the executive branch as careerists.
The only ones on a leash are the elected executives. Just in case a rogue happens to make it past the rigged elections (like Trump did), the permanent aristocracy just has to ignore them for 4 (or at worst) 8 years.
And THIS is why the presidential two term amendment was a mistake, and term limits in general are a mistake. It gives too much power to the bureaucracy, and makes a president's second term a lame duck session.
It makes it easy to see that the other 2 branches have intentionally neutered the executive over time, to create exactly this situation where the elected office is a powerless figurehead, a ceremonial position.
Im not sure if we should have term limits or not, there are good reasons to consider either. BUT one thing that is obvious is that WHATEVER system have in that regard, you cannot create an imbalance between branches like we have had for decades now, because the other branches who arent disadvantaged then just wait out the ones with the anchor on them. IOW the rules have to be uniform or at least close enough to uniform as to not allow for any real imbalance.
I understand where you are coming from, but the biggest deal is voters having less power by having term limits. Even if a president stays with the traditional two terms, the threat of a third or fourth is on the table. (if the amendment didn't exist)
I hold that the post war Republicans, and obviously the majority of the country, over reacted by passing the two term amendment. FDR could have been voted out at any time, but the electorate obviously thought he should be our leader.
Power needs to be in the elected officials, NOT unelected bureaucrats. Everyone talks about swamp creatures, and many elected officials fall in this category, but the real swamp exists in the cadre of employees paid for by you and I that can not be voted out of their positions of power.
Barr and Durham are dragging their feet on this because they know if Trump loses, the Democrats will crucify them so they are trying to run out the clock until the election has been decided.
IBullshit. What the fuck does it matter. If Durham and Barr wanted this shit done faster they could have grabbed the bull by the horns and got it fucking done.
Now they are trying to take the "high road" and not look political. Fuck that. They are just as bad as the rest of them. GEOTUS should be demanding Barrs resignation letter immediately.
So... Durham and Barr repeated the same mistake as the FBI in allowing avowed NeverTrumpers to control an investigation that is inherently tied to Trump, even though that mistake by the FBI is also central to why they're running an investigation in the first place.
Are they retarded, or just corrupt?
Corrupt
The hard truth everyone seems to ignore
Yes
This isn't true. "Political affiliation" is not a protected classification at the federal level. And only a handful of states have any protections against discrimination based on political affiliation.
Moreover, conflicts of interest and biases have always been central considerations in administration of justice.
You don't know what you're talking about.
It's not a "you're dumb" reply. It's a "you don't know what you're talking about" reply. Maybe don't make declarative replies with assumptions of authoritativeness prior to informing yourself on the subject.
People get fired all the time for espousing and pursuing political beliefs and agendas that do not align with the administration's. 1A doesn't protect them from being fired. It protects them from the state criminalizing their speech. Getting fired is not going to jail.
But I wasn't even necessarily referring to termination of employment, anyway. I honestly don't even know why you're talking about termination of employment at all, as it has absolutely nothing to do with my post here.
I was simply criticizing the fact that Barr and Durham (according to this tweet) obviously should not have someone with avowed biases against a central subject of an investigation in a position of control of said investigation, especially when said investigation also has within its purview a previous investigation wherein political biases clearly played a central role in the corruption of that investigation.
What a super controversial suggestion! I guess common sense is exceedingly scarce.
I'm sorry you find a few small paragraphs of words so overwhelming.
You didn't offer a third, more logical option, as your third option was offered in ignorance, and was ultimately erroneous.
And none of this explains why you introduced termination into the equation when termination was never necessarily implied. One with potential biases or conflicts of interests needn't be terminated from their position to preserve the integrity of an investigation--they can be reassigned, or given alternative responsibilities that do not allow them sufficient influence/control with which to undermine or call into question the integrity of the investigation, as is being suggested by this tweet.
Then again you still can't even seem to concede the point about the obvious problem with conflicts of interest in an investigation that is necessarily tied to the corruption that emerged from conflict of interests in a related investigation.
And spare me your infantile butthurt if you insist on proceeding with this exercise in futility.
¿Porque no los dos?
I said it from the very beginning. President Trump should of fired EVERYONE and started over.
He definently needs to after 2020...GEOTUS needs to tweet the names of all the people he wants to be in his Republican party, and he needs to tweet the names of all the RINOS that. Need to be removed...WATCHING US DUMP THE TRAITOR SESSIONS AND END HIS WORTHLESS CAREER GAVE ME A FUCKING 3 DAY LONG FREEDOM BONER
Civil service law prevents Trump from just sacking entire departments. Career officials are PROTECTED.
We no longer have the spoils system, where a President could sack the entire Executive branch.
Trump needs to establish a separate Diego Garcia Circuit Court and DOJ facility staffed by all the damn hagfish that keep turning up in the bureaucracy.
Paul Ryan could have fixed that during Trump’s first two years.
this is part of the problem.
the career bureaucracy is one of the main pools of people that consider themselves the true rulers of the slave class. Just as there are no term limits on Congress, there are also lifers in the judiciary and lifers in the executive branch as careerists.
The only ones on a leash are the elected executives. Just in case a rogue happens to make it past the rigged elections (like Trump did), the permanent aristocracy just has to ignore them for 4 (or at worst) 8 years.
And THIS is why the presidential two term amendment was a mistake, and term limits in general are a mistake. It gives too much power to the bureaucracy, and makes a president's second term a lame duck session.
agree, BUT:
It makes it easy to see that the other 2 branches have intentionally neutered the executive over time, to create exactly this situation where the elected office is a powerless figurehead, a ceremonial position.
Im not sure if we should have term limits or not, there are good reasons to consider either. BUT one thing that is obvious is that WHATEVER system have in that regard, you cannot create an imbalance between branches like we have had for decades now, because the other branches who arent disadvantaged then just wait out the ones with the anchor on them. IOW the rules have to be uniform or at least close enough to uniform as to not allow for any real imbalance.
I understand where you are coming from, but the biggest deal is voters having less power by having term limits. Even if a president stays with the traditional two terms, the threat of a third or fourth is on the table. (if the amendment didn't exist)
I hold that the post war Republicans, and obviously the majority of the country, over reacted by passing the two term amendment. FDR could have been voted out at any time, but the electorate obviously thought he should be our leader.
Power needs to be in the elected officials, NOT unelected bureaucrats. Everyone talks about swamp creatures, and many elected officials fall in this category, but the real swamp exists in the cadre of employees paid for by you and I that can not be voted out of their positions of power.
totally agree.
From day 1
Barr and Durham are dragging their feet on this because they know if Trump loses, the Democrats will crucify them so they are trying to run out the clock until the election has been decided.
true, except that if Trump loses, they are crucified no matter what.
If Trump loses they deserve crucifixion
This, they had the chance to save the American people from a corrupted system, if Trump losses they will feel the full power of it.
windbag barr and durham know what they are doing..exactly how they wanted it
its comin.....its comin..super cereal...super for realsies this time....its comin....its comin.....awe.schucks.....
it would be surprising to me if any member of either office were not democrat/nevertrumpers
And they have been fired, right? Right??
FBI isn't in the constitution... sack the whole department and use the US Marshalls
Why does this guy never cite his sources?
Who is he and why does everyone here believe everything he says?
IBullshit. What the fuck does it matter. If Durham and Barr wanted this shit done faster they could have grabbed the bull by the horns and got it fucking done.
Now they are trying to take the "high road" and not look political. Fuck that. They are just as bad as the rest of them. GEOTUS should be demanding Barrs resignation letter immediately.
I don't see how this could happen without Barr and Durham being complicit.
Maybe they are on something bigger. Maybe Trump doesn’t need this before the election to win, then they really can’t say it was political.
This is the infinity swamp.
At thins point I never expect to see justice. Best I can hope for is 4 more years and a few people get fired
So...shitty leadership. No actually this seems willful if true.
Of course.
Hey, clue, they are all deep stators.Barr and the works. They are all against us. F them all.
I do not buy this at all. Durham has known how his investigation was going. This is an attempt to lay blame
"It wasn't me! It was her!"
BS
Haman’s Gallows awaits.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/est/7/10/
Wood chipper. Wood chipper.
Names Please...
Bye bye Barr
Oppsie. We didn't even realize.
Bullshit, this has been the plan all along