Brought to you by Susan Collins
Another Unteachable Moment
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
I don’t know what you are getting at. It is becoming clear that in their quest to “get” Trump, members of the justice resorted to numerous unethical and unlawful measures, and it is well past time that gets addressed.
In some cases, the prosecutors should be held personally responsible for the financial abuses they inflicted on witnesses they sought to pressure to ‘flip’ on Trump.
LikeLike
You mean they should change the way they have been doing things for a lot longer than Trump has been President? If it were a Democratically led Executive, I don’t think you wold by singing the same tune. But tis what tis.
LikeLiked by 3 people
I don’t remember a time when innocent people were bankrupted to try to coerce false testimony against a sitting President.
For example, Gen Flynn’s son, who has been charged with no crime, lost his home and life savings defending himself against baseless allegations pushed solely to place pressure on his father.
When government brings its bottomless resources to bear on a citizen, an innocent man can easily be ruined and there should be consequences that bear DIRECTLY on those who are responsible. Flynn’s son, and others similarly treated, should be made whole from the personal assets of those abusive prosecutors and not by the taxpayer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Susan McDougal? Diesel Therapy. Ah, but she got the last laugh, money AND a Presidential Pardon. And yet, Clinton never saw fit to interject his office into the DoJ.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Good example, of many, I was going to comment on Mr. Tabor’s short memory…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yet Flynn is NOT innocent. Now he wants to change his plea and get a trial. And how many times did his story change.
What happened to his son, while disgusting, is . what federal prosecutors have been doing for decades. It is not because of Trump. It is the way business has been done. Should it change? Yes. Is the Trump DOJ the one to change it? I wouldn’t trust them to change a diaper on the house monkey.
LikeLiked by 4 people
“I wouldn’t trust them to change a diaper on the house monkey.”
And for good reason. If they could do that, we’d call it a “pull up”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “I don’t know what you are getting at.”
I don’t know, either. Unteachable moment for whom; what is unteachable?
ZeroHedge today reports, “In addition to a review of the Flynn case, Barr has hired a handful of outside prosecutors to broadly review several other politically sensitive national-security cases in the US attorney’s office in Washington, according to the [New York] Times sources.”
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/barr-assigns-outside-prosecutor-review-case-against-flynn
This is exactly what we should want the DOJ to do in light of how the department’s reputation has suffered in recent years.
Ms. Naive?
LikeLike
While the story is true as reported by every news outlet I looked at, why do you insist on using a website who’s primary “reporter” uses a pseudonym? If he’s such a great reporter, why does he use the name from a movie? Shame? Fear? Or just conspiracy loosely based in fact?
Politically charged investigations are dangerous things. There is an Inspector General in the DOJ. Why not have that office investigate? Why bring in a prosecutor from the hinterlands? Could it be because Barr can order him to find anything, true or not, or lose his position within the DOJ?
Why would I ask that? Because the veracity of the Trump administration is, shall we say, lacking. Yes, investigate. But what happens if the results aren’t what Trump and Barr want? Do the findings get buried with no report to the public? Yeah, that will help restore faith in the DOJ.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “why do you insist on using a website who’s primary ‘reporter’ uses a pseudonym?”
I find that many reveal themselves to be preoccupied with superficialitie by making an issue of such things. It saves work on my part.
Similarly with the IG question. There are all kinds of good management reasons to bring in staff help rather than engage the departmental watchdog. Assuming Barr is a good manager, as his job performance suggests, there’s no compelling reason to second guess the decision.
LikeLike
I see him as a chickenshut who doesn’t want anyone to know who he is because he fears the retribution. Real man indeed from Fight Club.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Tabor
Baloney. Pressuring co-conspirators to turn on higher ups is SOP in all RICO type cases. And innocent people with nothing to hide do not need to lawyer up with small armies of the highest priced eagle beagles in DC. Just answer any questions truthfully and then go home. Or plead the Fifth. Any Mom and Pop law firm could tell them that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “SOP in all RICO type cases.”
Maybe so, but no RICO type case has been demonstrated under which Flynn, Stone, Manafort or others deserve to the pressured. The Mueller investigation exonerated the president and his campaign of “collusion.”
LikeLike
@Roberts
“The Mueller investigation exonerated the president and his campaign of “collusion.” ”
That is a complete falsehood. They were unable to find a smoking gun which is not too surprising when those with direct knowledge refused to talk in hopes of help from Trump later. That is NOT exoneration. That is a successful cover up.
LikeLike
Political witch hunts are not RICO, they are crimes in themselves.
LikeLike
@Tabor
“Political witch hunts are not RICO, they are crimes in themselves.”
Indeed. That is so true.
You should keep that in mind next time you spin up some nonsense about the legitimacy of investigating Joe Biden.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think the problem that you will have is in finding any other case in which the defendant in a FEDERAL case made no proffer, took no plea offer, showed no remorse, was found guilty, and was then given a sentence recommendation of less than that in the guidelines.
You can’t because it doesn’t happen.
There is solid reason for this.
Whatever you may think of the justice system, it depends entirely on the defendant KNOWING what he can expect if he maintains the position of defiance.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The ignorant kid in the Oval Office must be quite alluring to the GOP’s gals in the Senate. How lacking in mental marbles do you need to be to hope that kid has learned jack-doodle, as Ms. Collins suggested?
LikeLiked by 3 people