Current Affairs Donald Trump POS: Judgement cometh and that right soon

[RAFUH]

Senate bill would allow Mueller to challenge firing in court

http://thehill.com/policy/national-...ld-allow-mueller-to-challenge-firing-in-court

A pair of senators are working on a backup plan to protect Robert Mueller and the investigation into ties between President Trump's campaign and Russia after the president floated the possibility of firing the special counsel.

GOP Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.) and Democratic Sen. Chris Coons (Del.) introduced the Special Counsel Integrity Act on Thursday, which would let Mueller or any special counsel challenge their firing in court.

The challenge would be heard by a three-judge panel within 14 days. If they aren't able to find "good cause" for the firing, the special counsel would be reinstated.

“A back-end judicial review process to prevent unmerited removals of special counsels not only helps to ensure their investigatory independence, but also reaffirms our nation’s system of check and balances," Tillis said in a statement.

The bill would be retroactive back to May 17, when Mueller was named as special counsel for the investigation into Russia's election interference, but would also apply to any special counsel named after that date.

Coons added that "ensuring that the special counsel cannot be removed improperly is critical to the integrity of his investigation."

Under the legislation, only the attorney general, or — in such cases as Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who has recused himself in the investigation — the most senior Justice Department official, could discipline or fire a special counsel.

It would also codify existing Justice Department rules that the special counsel can only be removed for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause, like a violation of departmental policies."

Such a clause would prevent Trump from firing Mueller.

The legislation comes as Trump has repeatedly lashed out against Mueller's investigation. Allies of the administration have also accused the former FBI director, who is widely respected in Washington, of being too biased to lead the probe.

Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are working on separate legislation that would limit Trump's ability to fire Mueller.

 

[ilikecheese]

Senate bill would allow Mueller to challenge firing in court

http://thehill.com/policy/national-...ld-allow-mueller-to-challenge-firing-in-court

A pair of senators are working on a backup plan to protect Robert Mueller and the investigation into ties between President Trump's campaign and Russia after the president floated the possibility of firing the special counsel.

GOP Sen. Thom Tillis (N.C.) and Democratic Sen. Chris Coons (Del.) introduced the Special Counsel Integrity Act on Thursday, which would let Mueller or any special counsel challenge their firing in court.

The challenge would be heard by a three-judge panel within 14 days. If they aren't able to find "good cause" for the firing, the special counsel would be reinstated.

“A back-end judicial review process to prevent unmerited removals of special counsels not only helps to ensure their investigatory independence, but also reaffirms our nation’s system of check and balances," Tillis said in a statement.

The bill would be retroactive back to May 17, when Mueller was named as special counsel for the investigation into Russia's election interference, but would also apply to any special counsel named after that date.

Coons added that "ensuring that the special counsel cannot be removed improperly is critical to the integrity of his investigation."

Under the legislation, only the attorney general, or — in such cases as Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who has recused himself in the investigation — the most senior Justice Department official, could discipline or fire a special counsel.

It would also codify existing Justice Department rules that the special counsel can only be removed for "misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity, conflict of interest, or other good cause, like a violation of departmental policies."

Such a clause would prevent Trump from firing Mueller.

The legislation comes as Trump has repeatedly lashed out against Mueller's investigation. Allies of the administration have also accused the former FBI director, who is widely respected in Washington, of being too biased to lead the probe.

Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) are working on separate legislation that would limit Trump's ability to fire Mueller.

It's pretty telling that Congress have so easily come together in a bipartisan way on this bill and the sanctions bill. Everyone agrees that Trump is a danger.

 

[RAFUH]

It's pretty telling that Congress have so easily come together in a bipartisan way on this bill and the sanctions bill. Everyone agrees that Trump is a danger.

It hasn't been passed yet and will need a veto proof number

 

[ilikecheese]

It hasn't been passed yet and will need a veto proof number

Yeah that sanctions bill got overwhelming support from both sides of the aisle. I would bet this will too.

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[Gouldy]

Whilst it's an interesting development, don't forget that a lesser burden of proof is required for evidence in these type of proceedings to hand indictments..

And to an extent these proceedings are geared towards the Prosecution


(Not defending Trump - just clearing up the legal tidbits)

 

[ilikecheese]

Apparently some big announcement at a West Virginia rally tonight.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Whilst it's an interesting development, don't forget that a lesser burden of proof is required for evidence in these type of proceedings to hand indictments..

And to an extent they're geared towards the Prosecution


(Not defending Trump - just clearing up the legal tidbits)

Aye, this thread by a lawyer points out that tendency of "prosecutors are gonna prosecute" so shouldn't automatically assume anything.


But as it also describes it raises the stakes for people testifying and there is significant danger of being charged for "the coverup rather than the crime", lying to a grand jury is ultimately what got Clinton impeached and telling the truth doesn't seem a strong feature of this admin.

 

[LinekersLegs]

Apparently some big announcement at a West Virginia rally tonight.

He has in the past registered as an R and Indy so not like a lifelong Dem switching but still indicative of WV political leanings.

 

[ilikecheese]

He has in the past registered as an R and Indy so not like a lifelong Dem switching but still indicative of WV political leanings.

I see. Meh.

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[Gouldy]

I've got the popcorn ready for this. This years summer blockbuster is nearing release! ...

 

[Alan Whittle]

He has in the past registered as an R and Indy so not like a lifelong Dem switching but still indicative of WV political leanings.

Will play well with Trump supporters though. They still think they're "winning".

 

[tsubaki]

Will play well with Trump supporters though. They still think they're "winning".

The worrying thing is that they are winning.

The "fight against Trump" is legitimizing so much genuinely terrible behaviour (leaking those Manchester crime scene photos, today's leak of phone transcripts of his calls, widespread press collusion with the "opposition" etc) that it will probably wreck US democracy for at least a generation; the people doing this sort of thing now are not going to stop doing it once Trump is gone.

The Democrats (and the wider US Political Establishment) should have looked at that defeat and learned from it; instead they've shut the bunker door and no longer give a [Poor language removed] about what happens outside. This will probably mean someone far worse than Trump, with far more motivation to actually clean house when he wins, is much more likely.

 

[abelard]

The worrying thing is that they are winning.

The "fight against Trump" is legitimizing so much genuinely terrible behaviour (leaking those Manchester crime scene photos, today's leak of phone transcripts of his calls, widespread press collusion with the "opposition" etc) that it will probably wreck US democracy for at least a generation; the people doing this sort of thing now are not going to stop doing it once Trump is gone.

The Democrats (and the wider US Political Establishment) should have looked at that defeat and learned from it; instead they've shut the bunker door and no longer give a [Poor language removed] about what happens outside. This will probably mean someone far worse than Trump, with far more motivation to actually clean house when he wins, is much more likely.

Contrarianism can seem clever, but I think you take the "enemy of my enemy is my friend" a touch too far. The Manchester leaks are nothing new - the same thing happened immediately after 7/7. That particular aspect of US bureaucratic culture is longstanding and mostly bipartisan. The Canadian legal system, for example, is forever up in arms because US media routinely defies Canadian-jurisdiction publication bans. Though there have been anti-Trump leaks of conscience, a la Daniel Ellsberg, from people like Reality Winner (the kind of name you get when Ayn Rand readers put aside their enlightened self-interest just long enough to breed), the main reason for the huge spike is because Trump's own appointees and inner circle can't stop leaking on each other as a means of waging their histrionic school-yard vendettas. It's much more a symptom of Trump than a reaction against him.

But yes, the Democrats are useless and have learned nothing, and there's a latent fascism in American society, which a demagogue blessed with more than a child's awareness and attention span will no doubt eventually exploit.